CAF Accused of Favoritism: Controversy Over Weak Sanctions Against Egyptian Club Al Ahly
The decision surrounding the sanction imposed on Egyptian club Al Ahly SC by the Disciplinary Committee of the Confederation of African Football has sparked significant controversy and reignited debate over the impartiality of Africa’s football governing body.
According to multiple sources, the CAF Disciplinary Committee had initially decided to impose a one-match stadium ban (while the Egyptian club deserved at least a five-match suspension) on the Cairo-based club following the incidents that occurred during its clash with the Moroccan team AS FAR (also known as the Royal Army club). Critics argue that the Egyptian side deserved at least a five-match suspension given the seriousness of the incidents.
The sanction was expected to be applied in the name of fairness, particularly since the Moroccan club had already been punished after events that took place during the first leg of the match played in Rabat.
The complaint filed by AS FAR, supported by official reports documenting the disturbances recorded during the match, formed the basis of the disciplinary decision. The stated objective was to strictly enforce CAF regulations in order to safeguard the integrity of continental competitions.
However, in a surprising turn of events, the official announcement of the sanction was suspended by the CAF General Secretariat. The verdict, which was expected to be made public on February 28, was reportedly blocked following internal interventions within the organization, according to the same sources. No official explanation has been provided for this reversal, further fueling suspicion and controversy.
This development has intensified longstanding criticism regarding CAF’s governance. For many observers of African football, the case once again illustrates what they see as preferential treatment and favoritism toward certain influential clubs, particularly those from the Egyptian league. The unexplained suspension of a disciplinary decision already adopted by the competent committee raises serious questions about transparency and equal application of the rules.
The controversy is even more pronounced given that AS FAR had previously been more severely punished in similar circumstances, receiving several matches behind closed doors. This apparent disparity in treatment has reinforced a sense of injustice and has revived concerns about the credibility of CAF’s disciplinary system.
Across sporting circles in both Morocco and Egypt, attention is now focused on what may happen in the coming hours. Observers are waiting to see whether the initial decision will ultimately be confirmed, modified, or completely withdrawn. Regardless of the outcome, the affair could have significant consequences—not only on the sporting level but also on the trust that clubs and supporters place in African football’s governing institutions.
Abderrazzak Boussaid – Le7tv
