Yes, Senegal won the Africa Cup of Nations, but it lost on everything else
- Algeria's defeat and the search for culprits
- The Egyptian episode: when comfort becomes controversy
- The Senegalese case: when pressure becomes strategy
- During the final: crossing the line
- Winning a trophy, losing a reputation
- CAF and the teams face up to their responsibilities
In terms of organization, the 2025 AFCON will remain one of the most successful in the history of African football. Morocco pulled out all the stops to deliver an exceptional competition: top-notch infrastructure, modern and efficient transportation, impeccable security, and hospitality that was widely praised by delegations, the media, and fans.
Nothing was left to chance: team logistics, working conditions for journalists from across Africa and the rest of the world, fan hospitality, a festive atmosphere, and cultural expression that transformed each match into a popular celebration of African football. The images broadcast internationally showed packed stadiums, exceptional quality turf capable of absorbing torrential rain, and organization worthy of the world's biggest competitions.
Morocco thus projected a positive image of the country and, beyond that, of Africa as a whole. An Africa capable of organizing, innovating, and shining through sport. This success was widely recognized by the international media, with the notable exception of certain hostile circles, particularly in Algeria, where a permanent machine of disinformation and denigration was activated, faithful to a now well-known rhetoric.
However, despite this remarkable organizational success, the end of the tournament was marred by a series of largely artificial controversies, fueled by certain coaches and federations who preferred to seek external culprits rather than take responsibility for sporting failures. The culmination of this unease occurred during the final, through the behavior of the players, the technical staff, and some Senegalese supporters.
But this unease did not begin with the final.
Algeria's defeat and the search for culprits
A victimization mentality accompanied the match between Nigeria and Algeria. Eliminated from the competition, the Algerian team was unable to accept a defeat that was nevertheless clear in sporting terms. Nigeria dominated the match, imposing its rhythm and collective superiority, making the outcome of the match largely predictable.
Instead of accepting this sporting reality, some Algerian players revealed themselves to be sore losers, presenting a regrettable image of the values of soccer, which are based as much on respect for the opponent as on the ability to accept defeat with dignity. Sport requires not only knowing how to win, but also knowing how to lose.
In the stands, the situation was hardly more reassuring. Excited by a climate of tension maintained for weeks by certain media outlets and political figures, Algerian supporters attempted to invade the pitch. Without the deterrent presence of security forces and stewards, much more serious incidents could have occurred.
However, on the field, the sporting verdict was clear. Algeria's elimination was not unfair. But this did not prevent part of the Algerian public, echoed by media outlets close to the government, from resorting to conspiracy theories and baseless accusations, targeting the referees, the organization, and the host country.
Even more seriously, these arguments were sometimes accompanied by racist and xenophobic remarks targeting Morocco and, more broadly, other African peoples. These excesses greatly tarnished the festive and fraternal atmosphere that had prevailed until then, both in the stadiums and on social media.
When you lose on the field, you blame the context. But this headlong rush only serves to undermine the very spirit of sport.
The Egyptian episode: when comfort becomes controversy
The Egyptian episode illustrates the extent to which some criticism can descend into absurdity when it comes to masking a sporting defeat. After Egypt's elimination by a stronger, more lucid and better-organized Senegalese team, coach Hossam Hassan chose to focus the debate not on his team's shortcomings, but on... the conditions of their stay.
He denounced a brand-new five-star hotel on the seafront in Tangier, as well as the high-speed train journey in first class, which he presented as a form of penance. In other words, what most African teams consider ideal competition conditions were transformed, by a surprising reversal of logic, into factors of disadvantage.
When questioned by journalists, the coach was unable to explain how an international-standard hotel and fast, comfortable, and secure transport could have justified his team's defeat. This attempt to shift the debate was widely criticized, including in the Egyptian media, as a clumsy way of diverting attention from the real sporting causes of the elimination.
For a major soccer nation like Egypt, this stance seemed unworthy of its sporting history. Turning logistical professionalism into injustice is less about analysis than it is about running away from the problem.
The Senegalese case: when pressure becomes strategy
The Senegalese case marks a turning point, as the controversy was not limited to isolated statements, but translated into a real strategy of institutional pressure even before the final.
The Senegalese Football Federation officially deplored an alleged security deficit upon its team's arrival in Rabat. However, this climate of excitement seems to have been directly encouraged by the Federation's own communications. By broadcasting the precise details of the team's itinerary and schedule on its official channels, it provoked a massive gathering of supporters at Rabat-Agdal station — sensitive information that, as a precaution, is usually kept confidential.
Despite this, law enforcement officers were present in large numbers, no serious incidents were reported, and the team's arrival took place without any harm to the players. The controversy was therefore more a matter of staging than a real security issue.
A second complaint then concerned the training site allocated to the Senegalese team. The refusal of the Maâmora Center, one of the most renowned complexes on the continent, led the CAF to propose an alternative, which was immediately accepted.
Despite these adjustments, the Senegalese Federation continued to raise these issues, even though the CAF issued a statement reminding them that the complaints had been dealt with in accordance with the regulations. Even more revealingly, the Senegalese Ministry of Foreign Affairs intervened to highlight the quality of the welcome and the strength of the fraternal relations between the two countries.
This discrepancy between soothing diplomatic rhetoric and confrontational sporting communication raises questions about the real purpose of these controversies.
During the final: crossing the line
The penalty awarded to Morocco following the foul on Brahim Diaz is, on reviewing the footage, perfectly legitimate. The decision certainly angered the Senegalese players and fans, but it remains in accordance with the rules of the game.
The Senegalese team's reaction, on the other hand, crossed a red line. The players left the field, causing a prolonged stoppage in the match. Such behavior seriously undermines the normal course of a continental final and directly challenges the authority of the referee.
This interruption had an immediate effect in the stands. Some fans resorted to behavior that clearly constituted hooliganism: throwing objects, clashing with stewards and security forces, and injuring at least one officer in the process. These scenes of violence were in stark contrast to the festive spirit that had characterized the tournament up to that point.
Symbolically, the “walk-off” constitutes a serious breach of CAF and FIFA regulations, but also of the very mission of soccer as a space for fair competition. Leaving the field to protest a referee's decision is tantamount to unacceptable pressure on the game.
However, it must be acknowledged that Senegal is a great team. Well-organized and mentally strong, it has shown real sporting qualities, and its victory is not illegitimate in terms of play. But football is not just about technical performance. Ethics, respect for the rules, and exemplary behavior are an integral part of it.
Winning a trophy, losing a reputation
Senegal won the cup, but it lost a battle of image. What image of African soccer do we want to project? That of an exemplary, modern, and professional organization, or that of artificial controversies, match interruptions, and violence in the stands?
The choices made by certain sports officials and players weighed much more heavily than the final result. At a time when Africa is seeking to strengthen its sporting and institutional credibility on the world stage, such behavior sends a deeply counterproductive message.
CAF and the teams face up to their responsibilities
Strict compliance with the rules is not an option. It is an obligation. CAF, like FIFA, must fully assume its role as guarantor of the integrity of competitions. Without rigorous enforcement of the rules, no credible sporting project can last.
National federations also bear a heavy responsibility. You can win a cup, but lose something much more precious: the moral credibility of the game.
It is essential to remember that Senegal is a great football nation and a country linked to Morocco by historical ties of brotherhood. The Senegalese communities in Morocco and the Moroccan communities in Senegal are numerous, integrated, and proud of this human closeness. Criticizing sporting behavior in no way means questioning a people.
African soccer is a vehicle for unity, hope, and self-improvement. It carries the dreams of millions of young people across the continent. These dreams must remain our collective compass, reminding us that the greatness of a sport is not measured solely by trophies, but also, and above all, by the exemplary behavior of those who represent it.
Article published on Le360