Former GFA president, Kwesi Nyantakyi has strongly criticized the Confederation of African Football over its decision to overturn the result of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations final, describing the ruling as a “dangerous precedent” that threatens the integrity of the game.
Reacting to the CAF Appeal Board’s verdict, which stripped Senegal national football team of the title and awarded a 3-0 victory to Morocco national football team, Nyantakyi questioned both the legal reasoning behind the decision and its wider implications for African football governance.
“We woke up to a decision that has rippled across the continent, igniting debate and raising eyebrows,” he said, warning that the ruling could set a problematic benchmark for how future disputes are resolved.
Nyantakyi argued that CAF’s decision was flawed on multiple fronts, beginning with what he described as a “misconception, misinterpretation and misapplication” of Articles 82 and 83 of the CAF Disciplinary Code. He explained that those provisions are general in nature and should only apply in situations where no specific rules exist.
According to him, the governing body failed to properly consider more detailed provisions contained in Articles 88 to 106, which outline specific offences and their corresponding sanctions. He maintained that these sections would have provided clearer guidance on how the incident should have been handled.
He also stressed that temporary player protests or walkouts—particularly in high-stakes matches—do not automatically constitute serious offences unless they result in the abandonment of a match.
“In highly charged matches, players may protest decisions or even stage brief walkouts,” Nyantakyi noted. “Such reactions, in themselves, do not constitute a serious offence unless they lead to the abandonment of a match.”
Referencing the AFCON final, he pointed out that although Senegal national football team briefly walked off in protest following a late penalty decision, the team returned, play resumed, and the match was completed—making a forfeiture ruling, in his view, unjustified.
Nyantakyi further questioned the role of the match referee, citing Law 5 of the Laws of the Game, which grants the referee final authority over decisions during a match.
“The referee is the judge of facts,” he said. “It was clear the match was brought to an end by the referee. Any contrary finding has no basis in the laws of the game.”
Beyond the legal arguments, Nyantakyi warned that the decision could have damaging consequences for the reputation of African football. He described the overturning of a completed match result as “an assault on the integrity of the game,” cautioning that such rulings could erode public trust in CAF’s leadership.
He added that football’s global visibility means decisions are closely scrutinized, and inconsistencies could undermine confidence among stakeholders.
“Football is played in the open and watched by millions. If results can be changed in boardrooms without clear justification, serious credibility issues will arise,” he stated.
Nyantakyi also cautioned that sponsors and partners may begin to reconsider their involvement if governance decisions are perceived as opaque or inconsistent.
The ruling by CAF’s Appeals Board has already triggered widespread debate across the continent, and Nyantakyi’s intervention adds to the growing chorus of concern surrounding one of the most controversial decisions in the history of African football.
