CAF moved quickly to address the controversy. In a strongly worded statement, the governing body condemned what it described as “unacceptable behaviour” by some players and officials during the final. It singled out actions directed at the refereeing team and match organisers as particularly serious, stressing that such conduct undermines the integrity of the competition and the safety of those involved.

CAF confirmed that it is reviewing all available footage from the match, including the incidents on the pitch, the touchline confrontations and the disturbances in the stands. The organisation said the material will be handed to its disciplinary bodies, which are empowered to recommend sanctions against individuals, teams or associations found to have breached regulations.

The statement underlined CAF’s intention to take “appropriate action” once the review is complete. That could range from fines and suspensions for players and officials to broader measures aimed at improving matchday security and the management of high-pressure situations involving VAR and refereeing decisions.

The fallout did not end with the final whistle. In the media area, Senegal’s post-match press conference descended into further discord. Journalists clashed verbally, with arguments breaking out over the events of the match and the behaviour of those involved. The situation deteriorated to the point that the press conference was abandoned altogether, depriving reporters and fans of the usual post-match analysis from the newly crowned champions.

The scenes in Rabat have raised uncomfortable questions for CAF at a time when the organisation has been eager to project an image of professionalism and progress. The expanded global audience for African football, the presence of high-profile stars from Europe’s top leagues and the growing commercial value of the tournament have all increased scrutiny on how the competition is run and how crises are handled.

Disputes over refereeing decisions are hardly unique to African football, and the introduction of VAR was intended to reduce controversy rather than inflame it. Yet the final demonstrated how technology can become a flashpoint when trust in officiating is fragile and emotions are running high. The long delay, the visible confusion among players and the lack of clear communication to those in the stadium all contributed to the sense of chaos.

CAF’s promised review is likely to focus not only on individual misconduct but also on structural issues: the training and protection of referees, the protocols for VAR intervention, the responsibilities of team officials in calming their players, and the coordination between security forces and match organisers when tensions escalate.

For Senegal, the night will be remembered both for Gueye’s decisive goal and for the extraordinary moment when their players appeared ready to walk away from the biggest match in African football. For Morocco, the disappointment of defeat on home soil was compounded by the controversy surrounding the penalty incident and the wider disorder.

For CAF, the final has become a test of its disciplinary resolve and its capacity to learn from a crisis. The governing body’s condemnation of the scenes in Rabat is only the first step. The real measure will be the transparency of its investigation, the firmness of any sanctions, and the reforms it is willing to pursue to ensure that future finals are remembered for football, not chaos.