Sudanese side Al-Hilal Omdurman have submitted an official complaint to the Confederation of African Football, alleging refereeing bias during their African Champions League quarter-final second-leg defeat to Morocco’s RS Berkane.
The protest follows Al-Hilal’s elimination from the competition after a 1-0 loss in the return leg, combined with a 1-1 draw in the first leg. The result saw RS Berkane progress to the semi-finals, but the Sudanese club has strongly contested the officiating decisions that influenced the outcome.
In a sharply worded statement, Al-Hilal accused both the match referee and the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) team of directly contributing to their exit. The club described the officiating as biased in favour of their Moroccan opponents and questioned the competence of the officials assigned to the fixture.
According to the club, concerns had already been raised following the first leg, with Al-Hilal urging CAF to appoint referees with sufficient experience and credibility for a match of such importance. However, they claim those warnings were not heeded.
Al-Hilal’s complaint highlights several incidents from the second leg, including what the club described as a decisive and controversial penalty decision. The referee awarded a spot-kick against an Al-Hilal defender, a call the club disputes, arguing that the opposing striker had raised his foot dangerously, leading to injury for the defender, who was subsequently forced off the pitch.
The Sudanese side maintains that the decision bore “no relation to reality” and formed part of a broader pattern of what it termed “catastrophic” refereeing errors. To support their claims, the club submitted video evidence alongside its complaint, aiming to demonstrate the alleged mistakes and their impact on the match.
Criticism was also directed at the use of VAR technology. Al-Hilal argued that its application contravened established protocols, particularly Article Five, which governs when VAR can be used. The club claims the technology was employed improperly after play had already resumed, further undermining confidence in the decision-making process.
Additional concerns were raised regarding stoppage time, with Al-Hilal asserting that the amount added by the referee did not accurately reflect the interruptions during the match. The club views this as part of a series of decisions that collectively disadvantaged their team.
In its statement, Al-Hilal expressed frustration at what it described as CAF’s failure to respond adequately to earlier complaints, suggesting that such inaction effectively allows refereeing errors to persist without accountability.
The club has called for an immediate and thorough investigation into the match, stressing the importance of safeguarding fairness and integrity in African football competitions. It also urged CAF to ensure that all teams are treated equally and that officiating standards are upheld at the highest level.
The governing body has yet to issue a formal response to the allegations. However, the dispute adds to ongoing scrutiny of refereeing and VAR implementation in continental tournaments, particularly as competitions approach their decisive stages.
