These articles look straightforward for a decision. However, I thought CAF had already imposed find the financial sanctions against Senegal shortly after presenting the trophy to them?
Did somebody fail to read and apply ... read full comment
These articles look straightforward for a decision. However, I thought CAF had already imposed find the financial sanctions against Senegal shortly after presenting the trophy to them?
Did somebody fail to read and apply this law before those early sanctions?
Why didn't the referee end the match when Senegalese players walked off during the match without his authorization; they he know about these articles?
Once again, Africa has come under the spotlight in a demeaning fashion because of indecision during the final.
Kweku Tsin 2 months ago
If it was straight forward why continue with the match. They should have just discontinued the match and declared Morocco winners. Senegal has already been sanctioned. How can you punish them twice for the same offense.
If it was straight forward why continue with the match. They should have just discontinued the match and declared Morocco winners. Senegal has already been sanctioned. How can you punish them twice for the same offense.
Boss 2 months ago
These articles look straightforward for a decision. However, I thought CAF had already imposed financial sanctions against Senegal shortly after presenting the trophy to them?
Did somebody fail to read and apply this law ... read full comment
These articles look straightforward for a decision. However, I thought CAF had already imposed financial sanctions against Senegal shortly after presenting the trophy to them?
Did somebody fail to read and apply this law before those early sanctions?
Why didn't the referee end the match when Senegalese players walked off during the match without his authorization; they he know about these articles?
Once again, Africa has come under the spotlight in a demeaning fashion because of indecision during the final.
TG 2 months ago
Travesty
Travesty
KK 2 months ago
Sad for Africa. Seems they have their own rules but do not know the interpretation of it.
To apply Article 82 in this matter, it clearly look like half a cup was depended on than full cup. Yes, Senegal left the field of pla ... read full comment
Sad for Africa. Seems they have their own rules but do not know the interpretation of it.
To apply Article 82 in this matter, it clearly look like half a cup was depended on than full cup. Yes, Senegal left the field of play in violation but did they leave 1) for good? of which Article 82 would have been justly applied any time 2) Was the referee still in charge of the game to bring it to an end immediately Senegal left the pitch of which Article 82 would have fully been applied. If the referee failed to bring the game to an end immediately to deem Senegalese abandoning the game of which Morocco would have rightly been awarded the winner but to let Senegal back on the field to continue play and to have won it, then CAF cannot rely of Article 82 to make a decision as they did. Article 82 can only be applied decisively and would have ended proceeding of the game but not when it is allowed to be continue.
Gerald 2 months ago
The decision by the Confederation of African Football (CAF) Appeal Board based on CAF’s Article 84 is rather unfortunate. Some comments by various individuals and institutions describing the decision have been intemperate a ... read full comment
The decision by the Confederation of African Football (CAF) Appeal Board based on CAF’s Article 84 is rather unfortunate. Some comments by various individuals and institutions describing the decision have been intemperate and at times abusive. This is unnecessary and should stop.
The Senegalese FA has every right to appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
It will be instructive for AFCON to clarify the following pointers:
a. The relevant portion of the regulation stares ‘… any team that withdraws, refuses to play, or leaves the pitch before the end of a match without the referee's authorization is considered the loser and is eliminated from the competition ’. It is noteworthy that several CAF sponsored matches have taken place in the past, many of which have been recorded. The usual practice has been for players suffering trauma (TRAUMA IS DEFINED AS: 1. ‘ANY PHYSICAL DAMAGE TO THE BODY CAUSED BY VIOLENCE OR ACCIDENT OR FRACTURE, ETC.’ note that football is a contact sport so one should expect this type of trauma to occur during football matches. Referees often deal with such situations. 2. TRAUMA COULD ALSO MEAN ‘AN EMOTIONAL WOUND OR SHOCK’). If this happens, the injured player leaves the pitch field of play for treatment with the permission of the player. Has this always been the case, or have injured players left the field for treatment WITHOUT ANY VISIBLE signal from the referee to do so but presumably with the tacit approval of the referee? If there is evidence that this has occurred without CAF taking any action what makes the case relate to the Senegalese-Morocco match different?
b. Has CAF defined what constitutes TRAUMA?
c. It is not impossible for more than one footballer to suffer PHYSICAL injury (TRAUMA) during a match, which would require treatment off the field of play. Has CAF put a cap on the number of players who would require treatment off the field of play after an incident?
d. When a match is in progress the sole authority to put a stop to proceedings, rest with the referred. Did the referee make such a declaration?
e. If a player(s) suffer EMOTIONAL TRAUMA in the course of play, does CAF have the right to deny access to recovery? There is no evidence that after some minutes off the pitch the Senegalese players had not recovered from the EMOTIONAL TRAUMA to enable them return to the pitch to resume play? At least the referee did not think so.
We await the response from CAS.
These are interesting times!
I N I E S T E R 1 month ago
This is simply a misapplication of the Law (article 84). Once the game was allowed to continue, CAF has no business going back to apply article 84. Especially when sanctions have already been imposed on Senegal shortly after ... read full comment
This is simply a misapplication of the Law (article 84). Once the game was allowed to continue, CAF has no business going back to apply article 84. Especially when sanctions have already been imposed on Senegal shortly after the game. Why punish them twice for the same offence?
Unless CAF itself doesn't know what it is doing.
This is a "football injustice." And it proves how CAF is corrupt.
mwenya samiselo 1 month ago
All meaningful African countries need to boycott CAF and let them be....
All meaningful African countries need to boycott CAF and let them be....
These articles look straightforward for a decision. However, I thought CAF had already imposed find the financial sanctions against Senegal shortly after presenting the trophy to them?
Did somebody fail to read and apply ...
read full comment
If it was straight forward why continue with the match. They should have just discontinued the match and declared Morocco winners. Senegal has already been sanctioned. How can you punish them twice for the same offense.
These articles look straightforward for a decision. However, I thought CAF had already imposed financial sanctions against Senegal shortly after presenting the trophy to them?
Did somebody fail to read and apply this law ...
read full comment
Travesty
Sad for Africa. Seems they have their own rules but do not know the interpretation of it.
To apply Article 82 in this matter, it clearly look like half a cup was depended on than full cup. Yes, Senegal left the field of pla ...
read full comment
The decision by the Confederation of African Football (CAF) Appeal Board based on CAF’s Article 84 is rather unfortunate. Some comments by various individuals and institutions describing the decision have been intemperate a ...
read full comment
This is simply a misapplication of the Law (article 84). Once the game was allowed to continue, CAF has no business going back to apply article 84. Especially when sanctions have already been imposed on Senegal shortly after ...
read full comment
All meaningful African countries need to boycott CAF and let them be....