The Confederation of African Football (CAF), Disciplinary Board met last week to deliberate on two matters thus rendering key decisions.
The cases included the eligibility criteria of Ahmed Refaat, a player of Future FC from Egypt in the TotalEnergies CAF Confederation Cup matches and the protest of Al Merrikh Club on the substitutions made by Esperance de Tunis during the match between both teams.
On the case of Future FC and Ahmed Refaat the board decided and declare player Ahmed Refaat as ineligible and consider the matches in which he took part as forfeited by Future FC, while the case of Al Merrikh SC was dismiss.
A CAF release said, “CAF received complaints from Pyramids FC, ASFAR and ASKO de Kara Clubs in relation to the participation of Future FC player Ahmed Refaat after he returned from a loan in UAE in January 2023.”
According to the complaint, the Player has participated in three CAF Confederation Cup matches with Future FC in the season 2022-2023: Future FC vs ASFAR played in Cairo on 8th March 2023, Future FC vs ASKO Kara played in Cairo on 19th March 2023, and Pyramids FC vs Future FC played in Cairo on 02 April 2023
The Disciplinary Board concluded that since the player was not re-registered on the CMS system, neither have any correspondence been sent to CAF asking for the re-registration of the player after his return from the loan in accordance with the Interclubs Regulations meaning that the player was ineligible to take part in any match after his return from loan to Future FC.
“After having discussed the matter and deliberated, CAF Disciplinary Board decided to declare the player Ahmed Refaat as ineligible and consider the matches in which he took part as forfeited by Future FC and impose upon Future FC a financial sanction of US$10, 000,” the confederations added.
The board disclosed that Al Merrikh SC submitted a formal protest indicating that Esperance used four substitutions opportunities instead of three.
The Disciplinary Board was of the view that that the decision of the fourth official to effect and allow the substitutions for Esperance removes the burden of liability of requesting/affecting an additional substitution opportunity from the team.
Additionally, the Board found the fact that both teams were allowed the same number of substitutes constitutes as proof that there has been no unfair treatment by the fourth official, as both teams had the exact same number of substituted players.
The Disciplinary Board decided to dismiss Al Merrikh SC protest after having discussion on the matter.
