STEINSIEK.CH
Oct 10, 2026 04:51-05:00
Translated by
Press reports confirm it while Motsepe denies it
Less than a year after hailing its switch to a four-year cycle as historic, CAF are now weighing up a return to staging the Africa Cup of Nations every two years. The U-turn has raised obvious questions. Why would they backtrack on a reform they trumpeted so loudly?
Patrice Motsepe, the CAF president, confirmed on Friday that a return to the old system is under study. Well-known French journalist Romain Molina offered his own explanation for the shift, pinning it on the political and financial war between FIFA and UEFA. The interests of African football, he argues, are nowhere near the top of the agenda.
CAF announced in December 2025 that AFCON would move to a four-year cycle rather than every two years. The decision sparked criticism across the continent, with fears over its impact on the tournament’s revenues and on the chances to develop African football.
Did the decision to change the Africa Cup of Nations schedule come to please the Europeans?
Molina believes last December’s decision to cut the number of editions had little to do with organising the international calendar. In his reading, it was an attempt to serve the interests of the major European clubs and UEFA.
Posting a video on his YouTube channel, the French journalist explained that FIFA were trying to defuse the anger of European clubs, who have to release their African players every two years for the tournament.
Staging AFCON once every four years amounted to a concession, on this reading. It cuts how often African players vanish from their clubs and hands European sides more stability across the season.
That view chimes with the criticism that followed the announcement. Figures within African football objected to the lack of proper consultation with local federations, while others warned that fewer editions would hit revenues and development opportunities on the continent.
CAF defended the reform as a crucial step towards reorganising national team competitions, launching the African Nations League in parallel to make up for the drop in AFCON editions.
The FIFA and UEFA conflict changes the calculations
Molina reckons the balance of power between FIFA and UEFA has shifted in recent months. That change, he suggests, may explain why the decision is back on the table.
Containing the Europeans was one plausible motive for altering the schedule. Now, the journalist argues, the escalating feud between the two bodies could leave FIFA far less willing to hand UEFA and its clubs any favours.
African football, in Molina’s view, once again finds itself caught in the political calculations and power struggles between global institutions. The continent’s own interests, he says, are not the deciding factor in shaping the future of its competitions.
This is about more than administrative squabbles, the journalist stressed. Huge financial interests are at stake too, with some African officials preferring the two-year cycle for the money it brings in.
Molina was scathing about how these decisions get made: “We note once again that there is something common to all these decisions: the interests of African football are not present at any stage. It is just political calculations and huge financial interests.”
Motsepe rejects accusations of submitting to FIFA and UEFA
Motsepe hit back at the suggestion that CAF take their orders from FIFA or UEFA. Protecting African football, he insisted, remains his priority.
The confederation president confirmed that a return to a two-year cycle is genuinely under review. He stopped short, though, of announcing any final decision to scrap the four-year system.
CAF now face a possible review of a decision announced less than a year ago, having defended it as part of a plan to reorganise African national team competitions.
Nothing has been settled yet. Reopening the file, though, revives the debate over the motives behind changing AFCON’s schedule and over how far CAF can really make their own calls in the interests of African football, free from the clash of international agendas.
