Refereeing expert Jamal Al Sharif rejected claims that Morocco benefited from any kind of favoritism, stressing that the controversial decisions in question were correct under the Laws of the Game.
Al Sharif addressed the debate that followed the match, where some observers raised a “favoritism” allegation linked to key refereeing calls. He said the footage shows the referee applied the rules properly and that the decisions should not be treated as gifts to the Moroccan side.
According to Al Sharif, the incident that sparked the most discussion was judged in line with the wording of the law, and the referee’s interpretation matched what is required in similar situations. He added that the reactions after the final whistle were driven more by emotion than by a clear reading of the laws.
Al Sharif also underlined that blaming the referee without solid evidence feeds unnecessary tension, noting that such accusations often appear after big games, especially when the result is painful for one side.
He concluded that there was no basis to label the calls as “courtesy” decisions, insisting that Morocco should not be dragged into a narrative that is not supported by the match evidence.
