October 20, (THEWILL) – The AFCON 2025 qualifier between Libya and Nigeria has rapidly developed into one of the most controversial events in African football this year, shedding light on the logistical and diplomatic challenges faced by teams travelling across the continent. This incident is more than just a football story—it reveals deeper issues about the treatment of visiting teams, international relations and the responsibility of host nations under the African football regulatory body, the Confederation of African Football (CAF).
The controversy started long before the Libyan team met the Super Eagles on the pitch. The first signs emerged when the Mediterranean Knights was en route to Nigeria for their AFCON fixture. According to reports, instead of heading to Uyo, where the game was scheduled to take place, the Libyan squad informed the Nigerian delegation waiting to receive them that they were heading to Port Harcourt after their flight had left Libya.
The team, tired and needing rest after a long flight, needed to be transported to Uyo by bus, a journey of about three hours, 30 minutes. While this may seem like a minor inconvenience, it added to the stress and fatigue of the players. It also raised questions about logistics communication that took place between the Libyan football authorities and the Nigerian Football Federation (NFF) that led to booking a flight to Port Harcourt in the first place.
The question of using a bus, instead of another flight to Uyo, was blamed on Libya not wanting to incur excessive extra costs. Yet, it was not long before online debates flared up, with Libyan fans accusing Nigerian authorities of mistreatment.
Many saw the Nigerian team’s experience in Libya as a mirror of what had happened to the Libyans in Nigeria, but on a larger scale.
Just before their arrival in Benghazi for their October 15 match, the Super Eagles’ plane was rerouted to Al Abaq, an airport two hours away from Benghazi, under unclear circumstances. What followed was a nightmare. The Super Eagles and officials from the NFF were stranded at the airport for over 15 hours, without necessities such as food, water, or internet access. Their situation worsened as they had to spend the night in uncomfortable conditions—some players even resorting to sleeping on mats on the cold floor or reception chairs.
A sense of outrage grew within the Nigerian camp, not just because of the discomfort, but also due to safety concerns. In addition to these, the ValueJet pilot of the Super Eagles later revealed that if he had not been familiar with Al Abaq airport, landing could have been significantly more dangerous.
Nigerian football fans, government officials and the media quickly responded, painting the incident as a deliberate attempt by Libya to destabilise the Super Eagles ahead of the crucial fixture. I do agree with this logic after carefully following the incident.
The situation escalated into a diplomatic issue, with the Nigerian Sports Minister, the Nigeria Diaspora Commission (NIDCOM), and even the Nigerian Foreign Ministry stepping in to address the crisis. The Libyan charge d’affaires was summoned to Abuja and became involved in attempts to mediate the growing tension.
As the news broke, many Nigerian commentators argued that the Libyan authorities were engaging in retaliatory actions. Supporters on both sides began drawing comparisons between Libya’s ordeal in Nigeria and Nigeria’s current struggles. In various online forums, Libyan fans alleged that their players were deliberately sent to Port Harcourt as a form of sabotage, while Nigerian fans claimed that their team was being treated even worse in Libya.
The tensions did not go unnoticed by CAF, which quickly demanded answers from both the Libyan and Nigerian football federations. CAF gave both parties until October 20 to submit all relevant documents related to the incident. The Libyan Football Federation denied any wrongdoing, stating that the diversion of Nigeria’s flight was not within their control and drew comparison with their experience in Port Harcourt. However, many saw this as an inadequate excuse, given the importance of ensuring that visiting teams are treated fairly and provided with proper facilities. Nasser Al-Suwaie, Secretary-General of the Libyan Football Federation, emphasised that the situation was unfortunate but not deliberate.
While CAF investigates, the future of both teams in the AFCON qualifiers remains uncertain. The Nigerian team decided to boycott the match, citing the dangerous conditions they faced in Libya and potential safety concerns given the increasingly bellicose stance of Libyans around the incident.
CAF will now determine what happens next and several outcomes are possible. Nigeria could face sanctions for refusing to play, including forfeiting the match, points deductions or even fines. On the other hand, Libya, which is still plagued by armed conflicts and terrorism, may face repercussions if CAF finds that their authorities failed to provide adequate facilities for the Nigerian team. Sanctions against Libya could include fines, points deductions or the requirement to play future games in empty stadiums or neutral venues.
CAF’s decision in this case will be critical, not just for the teams involved, but for African football as a whole. Incidents like this tarnish the reputation of AFCON and damage the spirit of sportsmanship that should be at the heart of every international fixture.
The onus is now on CAF to send a clear message to host nations that logistical and diplomatic mismanagement will not be tolerated. Allowing this issue to slide without consequences would set a dangerous precedent, potentially encouraging other nations to engage in retaliatory actions or neglect their responsibilities as hosts.
For Nigerian football administrators, this incident should serve as a wake-up call. Regardless of whether the Libyans arrival in Port Harcourt instead of Uyo was intentional, the NFF must ensure that visiting teams are treated with respect and extended all courtesies, including good accommodation and necessary facilities.
Amid all the chaos, one must admire how the Nigerian team handled themselves throughout this ordeal. Despite being subjected to harsh conditions and overwhelming fatigue, the Super Eagles and the rest of the delegation conducted themselves with professionalism and dignity. Their decision to boycott the match was not made lightly, but out of genuine concern for their safety and well-being. The Nigerian football community can be thankful that the team returned home safely after being re-routed to Kano and then continuing to Abuja and Lagos.
The onus now lies on CAF to take decisive action. This incident must be treated with the seriousness it deserves, not only for the sake of fair play but for the future of African football. If no strong measures are taken, it could lead to a breakdown in trust between nations and discourage teams from participating in future international fixtures. CAF must therefore ensure fairness in its investigation and hold any party accountable when found to have erred to prevent such incidents from happening again.
While the Nigeria-Libya incident may seem like an isolated event, it carries significant implications for the broader football community. Both teams, as well as their respective football federations, have lessons to learn and CAF must step up to enforce those lessons. The game, after all, is bigger than any single nation or match—it is a platform for unity and that unity must be preserved at all costs.
