AFCON: backtracking, U-turns… CAF gives the impression of navigating by sight

The Confederation of African Football (CAF) is already considering reversing its decision to hold the Africa Cup of Nations every four years, announced in December 2025. This possible change of direction, less than a year after the reform, has revived questions about the consistency of the choices made by African football’s governing body and its ability to pursue its decisions within a sustainable strategy.

The AFCON could ultimately retain its traditional schedule. Meeting in Cape Verde on Friday, October 9, 2026, CAF President Patrice Motsepe announced that the organisation was reviewing the competition’s frequency.

“We have discussed several issues in recent days and we are considering all options, including returning to an AFCON every two years,” he said, according to Reuters.

At this stage, no return to a biennial cycle has been officially approved.

The announcement comes less than ten months after the December 2025 decision. At the time, CAF justified the move to a four-year AFCON cycle by its desire to reorganise the international calendar and launch an African Nations League. The continental competition was scheduled to take place in 2027, then in 2028, before switching to a four-year cycle from the following edition, planned for 2032.

That schedule is now being reconsidered. The issue goes beyond the tournament’s frequency alone: it concerns the way CAF designs, announces and defends its major reforms.

A reform announced and already being questioned

Since its creation in 1957, the AFCON has established itself as the main gathering of African national teams. Since 1968, it had generally been held every two years. Changing that schedule could therefore not be an insignificant decision. It affected the competition’s identity, supporters’ habits and the economic interests of many federations.

The four-year project also had tangible consequences for broadcasters, sponsors and organisers. Held four years apart, the AFCON would have changed its place in the sporting calendar and in the commercial strategies of its partners. The African Nations League was notably expected to occupy part of the space left open.

Yet, even before this new organisation has been implemented, CAF is considering returning to its historic model. This potential U-turn raises a simple question: were the consequences of the reform sufficiently assessed before it was announced?

Reversing a decision is not necessarily a mistake. An institution must be able to correct its choices when circumstances or consultations reveal limitations. But such a far-reaching reform should be based on clearly defined objectives, an assessment of its effects and sufficient consultation with the stakeholders concerned.

Failing that, successive changes give the impression that the strategy is being built in response to reactions rather than from a settled vision.

Frequency, calendar, organisation: a difficult line to decipher

The debate over the competition’s frequency is part of a series of changes that have profoundly altered the organisation of the AFCON. The increase from 16 to 24 teams, in effect since 2019, expanded the competition. Calendar shifts and changes to host countries have also contributed to making its organisation more complex.

The precedents involving host countries are particularly revealing of the planning difficulties. Cameroon lost the hosting rights for the 2019 edition in November 2018, before hosting the 2021 tournament, which was actually played in 2022. Côte d’Ivoire, initially designated to host in 2023, ultimately staged the tournament in 2024. Guinea, which was due to organise the 2025 AFCON, was stripped of the hosting rights in September 2022; Morocco subsequently secured that edition, while Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda were designated to host in 2027.

These decisions responded to distinct situations, notably delays in the preparations of certain countries. They therefore cannot all be regarded as unjustified U-turns. Nevertheless, they illustrate the consequences of calendar changes for host nations, infrastructure, investment and competition preparations.

Considering another change to the AFCON’s frequency adds further uncertainty to an environment already subject to the constraints of the international calendar. For federations, broadcasters and commercial partners, predictability is essential for planning.

What role for the national federations?

The method used by CAF also deserves scrutiny. A reform affecting the 54 member associations should be based on clearly identifiable consultation, with sporting, economic and organisational arguments made public.

If the federations were not sufficiently consulted before the announcement of the move to a four-year cycle, the issue is no longer limited to a choice between two frequencies. It concerns the role given to national associations in decisions affecting African football as a whole.

The review announced in Cape Verde could provide an opportunity to clarify the objectives being pursued. Why should the AFCON be held every four years? What benefits was the Nations League supposed to deliver? What impact would the change in frequency have on federations’ revenues, the exposure of national teams and public interest? And, if the biennial cycle is ultimately maintained, what assessments will this choice be based on?

These questions call for precise answers. Simply invoking the harmonisation of the international calendar is not enough to demonstrate that a reform is the best option for African football.

CAF facing the demand for consistency

The AFCON is a sporting competition, but also a major economic and popular event. Its evolution affects far more than the governing bodies: it concerns national teams, players, supporters, broadcasters, sponsors and the countries that invest in hosting it.

CAF is not condemned to retain the same model forever. It can expand the tournament, reorganise its calendar or rethink its commercial strategy. However, these changes must be prepared, explained and stable enough to allow African football stakeholders to adapt to them.

The possible return to an AFCON every two years therefore raises a fundamental question. Less than a year after announcing a break with the historic model, the governing body must already review its decision. This is not automatic proof that the initial decision was wrong, but it does require questions to be asked about the method that led to its adoption.

By repeatedly announcing reforms and then reconsidering them, CAF risks obscuring the clarity of its own strategy. The real challenge now is to set a course, explain the reasons behind it and stick to it unless circumstances justify changing it. African football needs an institution capable of evolving, but also of explaining its decisions and ensuring their consistency over time.

Nouya M'toama

Editorfr, en

Versatile journalist specializing in sports and political news, with extensive experience across radio, print and digital media platforms.

Related teams and leagues

AFCON - Africa Cup of Nations