Abdellatif el
20K posts
Abdellatif el
@ToleranceSpirit
تكلم حتى أراك، ولايهمني إن كنت تقرأ القرآن أو تتلو الثوراة أو تحمل الصلبان أو تعبد الأوتان فهذا بينك وبين ربك، ما يهمني أن تعاملني كإنسان
Whatever Senegal does at CAS, its appeal is unlikely to succeed Senegal’s decision to lodge an appeal before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) comes as no surprise. It is, in fact, a predictable procedural step, and it would have been far more surprising had the Senegalese Football Federation chosen not to pursue this avenue. However, regardless of the number of lawyers retained to argue its case, the facts remain stubborn. The conduct of the Senegalese team is likely to be characterized by CAS, as it was by the CAF Appeals Committee, not as a mere protest, but as a clear withdrawal from the field of play without the referee’s authorization, amounting to a refusal to continue the match. As previously outlined in my earlier analyses, such a withdrawal automatically triggers the sanctions provided for under Article 82 of the AFCON regulatory framework. These sanctions are triggered the moment the act of withdrawal occurs, irrespective of whether the match is subsequently resumed. What significantly weakens Senegal’s position is the convergence of the reports submitted by the referee, the match commissioner, the general coordinator, and the CAF security officer. All four reports consistently establish that the Senegalese team, players, substitutes, and technical staff alike, left the field of play and returned to the dressing room. More critically, they confirm that this withdrawal was carried out on the explicit instructions of head coach Pape Thiaw, thereby removing any ambiguity as to the intentional nature of the act. In other words, the case does not revolve around a legitimate protest against the referee’s decision to award a penalty to Morocco. Rather, it concerns a drastic and unprecedented decision to walk off the pitch. The referee’s report is unequivocal, noting that “the Senegalese coach, along with other members of the technical staff, instructed the players to leave the field and return to the dressing room, thereby abandoning the match.” The reference to “abandoning the match,” corroborated by the match commissioner’s report, is likely to carry considerable weight in CAS proceedings, as it leaves little room for reinterpretation or mitigation. An additional aggravating factor further undermines Senegal’s case. The CAF security report indicates that the match was further disrupted by the conduct of Senegalese supporters, who attempted to invade the pitch, threw objects, and engaged in violent acts against stadium personnel and security forces, causing injuries and material damage. The duration and intensity of these incidents, lasting several minutes, confirm that the match environment had deteriorated beyond normal sporting conditions. Moreover, the report highlights that pre-match statements made by coach Pape Thiaw were “not reassuring,” suggesting a broader context of tension that may have contributed to the escalation. Taken together, these elements demonstrate that the case falls well outside the scope of “field-of-play decisions” governed by Article 5 of the Laws of the Game. Rather, it squarely concerns regulatory violations, namely, the withdrawal of a team and the disruption of match integrity, which fall within the jurisdiction of CAF’s judicial bodies and are fully reviewable by CAS. No matter how Senegal’s legal team seeks to frame its arguments, the facts point to a deliberate and organized withdrawal that warrants the automatic application of Articles 82 and 84 of the AFCON regulations. These findings are further compounded by additional irregularities, including the external interference by the head of CAF’s Referees Committee, who instructed the referee not to end the match and not to sanction Senegalese players who had left the pitch, as well as the unexplained presence of French coach Claude Le Roy on the field of play during the incident. Taken as a whole, these factors significantly reduce the likelihood that CAS would overturn the CAF Appeals Committee’s decision awarding the title to Morocco. At the same time, Senegal’s appeal is directed not only against CAF, but also against the Royal Moroccan Football Federation. This creates an additional legal risk for Senegal: Morocco may request that CAS not only uphold the CAF ruling, but also impose the full range of sanctions provided for under the AFCON regulations, including potential disciplinary measures affecting Senegal’s future participation in the competition. Furthermore, given the seriousness of coach Pape Thiaw’s conduct, particularly his role in ordering the withdrawal, and the potentially dangerous consequences it entailed for players, officials, and spectators, as well as the Moroccan diaspora in Senegal, Morocco could also seek individual sanctions against him, including a suspension from coaching activities and exclusion from future international competitions, including the World Cup. Finally, considering that national federations bear responsibility for the conduct of their supporters, and in light of the documented acts of violence as well as the absence of a clear acknowledgment of responsibility, Morocco may also argue for disciplinary measures targeting the Senegalese federation, including restrictions on fan attendance at future matches. @Lahcenhaddad @a_boucetta @AzizDaouda @Pirana_dusahara
حسن حاجة هي التواضع 🙌 وخا يكون حسابك فيه مليون ولا جوج، دير المتابعة لخوّك وخْتّك المغاربة 🇲🇦 راه الدعم بيناتنا ماشي غير فالأرقام، ولكن فالقيمة والنية 🤝 وخا تكبر وتوصل، ما تنساش منين بديتي 👣 #دعم_الحسابات_المغربية