Ugandan development coach Paul Mujuni has voiced strong concerns over the Confederation of African Football’s (CAF) scheduling practices, accusing the organization of undermining the integrity of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) qualification process. His comments come after South Sudan’s 3-2 victory over Congo Brazzaville on November 14, 2024, secured Bafana Bafana’s qualification for the tournament, a day before their crucial clash with Uganda on November 15, which was initially set to determine who would secure the final spot in Group K.
The twist in the tale came when South Sudan’s surprise win meant that the South African national team had already booked their place in the tournament, regardless of the outcome of their match against Uganda. This unexpected development led to frustrations from Mujuni, who was looking forward to an intense showdown between the two sides for qualification.
In a tweet following the news, Mujuni voiced his displeasure with CAF’s decision to schedule the two pivotal matches—Bafana Bafana’s game against Uganda and South Sudan’s victory over Congo—separately. According to the Ugandan coach, the scheduling allowed for one match to become irrelevant, diminishing the competitive edge of their match against South Africa.
Mujuni went further, suggesting that the lack of synchronicity in scheduling was symptomatic of broader issues within African football. He claimed, “The corruption in Africa is harming the sport. In Africa, we often look for shortcuts, which are the loopholes that must be addressed. It is great for both Uganda and South Africa, but we wanted our match against Bafana Bafana to come with pressure for both countries. That would have been ideal.”
Mujuni’s comments were a clear critique of CAF’s handling of AFCON qualification, with the coach arguing that the scheduling failure deprived both teams and the fans of a thrilling and high-stakes encounter. Instead of an all-or-nothing battle for qualification, the match was reduced to a mere formality for South Africa, a situation which Mujuni felt was unfair.
Mujuni’s claims have divided opinions within the football community, with some fans agreeing that the game’s stakes were diminished by the scheduling. Many Ugandan fans took to social media to express their disappointment, with some noting that the match had been eagerly anticipated and sold out in Uganda, only for it to lose much of its allure due to the unexpected qualification outcome.
Vhutshilo Shautendie Mukwena, a fan on Twitter, resonated with Mujuni’s frustration, stating, “That’s true, now the game between South Africa and Uganda is less interesting.” The sentiment was echoed by others who lamented the lost drama of a do-or-die encounter that was originally set to be the final decider in Group K.
However, other football followers defended the scheduling, arguing that South Sudan’s victory over Congo was a legitimate outcome and should not be tainted by accusations of corruption. Zakes Ka Zakade, another fan, pointed out, “South Sudan beating Congo yesterday was a good sign that African football isn’t bad in terms of corruption because Sudan is out. They could have sold that game, but they won.”
Some fans went as far as to dismiss Mujuni’s claims of corruption. Insta T Bathong argued, “I understand his point; however, the games he is mentioning are penultimate games. If there were a last game for all the groups, then that would be corruption.” This response highlights the complexity of the situation, with some viewing the scheduling issue as a minor oversight rather than a corrupt practice.
