Suspension Controversy: Will Pyramids Fosseed Ramadan Sobhi’s Contract, or Not?

Background and CAS Decision

Ramadan Sobhi, the star of Pyramids FC, sits at the center of a legal storm after the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne accepted a challenge by the World Anti-Doping Agency against an earlier Egyptian panel outcome that had cleared him of wrongdoing. The sanction is a four year ban, one of the harshest penalties in modern anti-doping rules.

A club source told Koora that Pyramids supports Sobhi and that talk of terminating the contract is not true. The source stressed that rushing to judgments before all appeals are exhausted would be inappropriate since the process is not finished.

The same source added that it would be disreputable to use this situation to smear the player merely because of a sporting rivalry. They closed with a hope that Sobhi would come through this difficult moment in good shape, both personally and professionally.

Sobhi, now 28, joined Pyramids in 2020 in a high‑profile move after ending his loan spell with Al Ahly.

The player helped Pyramids win the CAF Champions League for the first time and also claimed the Egypt Cup; his career in Europe included stints with Stoke City and Huddersfield Town, in addition to his time at Al Ahly.

He now faces a severe challenge due to an allegation involving forgery linked to someone taking an exam on his behalf at a study institute.

Legal Moves

Lawyer Hani Zahran outlined the CAS decision from Lausanne, which suspended the player for four years after accepting WADA’s appeal against the NADO’s acquittal, which had cleared him of any doping violation.

In statements to Koora, Sobhi’s lawyer said the CAS ruling is a new step in a very complex file, but not final. The legal team has already begun drafting an appeal with the Swiss Federal Court, a supreme body that can review CAS decisions under certain conditions related to procedure and impartiality.

Zahran explained that the defense holds documents and procedural arguments that could influence the ruling’s integrity, emphasizing that the Swiss Federal Court does not re‑examine technical facts but reviews fairness and neutrality in the proceedings.

Details of the ruling and the case path

The case dates back to 2021 when Sobhi underwent a doping test that raised suspicions of sample manipulation. The subsequent NADO hearing cleared him, a decision viewed as a partial legal victory for the player.

WADA did not accept that ruling and filed an official appeal with CAS, seeking a conviction and the maximum penalty in such cases.

After lengthy hearings, CAS issued the final verdict canceling the NADO decision and imposing a four‑year ban, among the strictest sanctions in global anti‑doping rules.

Zahran notes that the ruling rests on technical interpretations that are contested and that the defense will rely on precedents where penalties were reduced or overturned for other players.

Impact on the Player’s Career

The four‑year ban is a heavy blow to Sobhi’s career, especially since he is still of an age to compete and was a key pillar at Pyramids, with a contract through 2028.

Nevertheless, the defense maintains Sobhi’s innocence and vows to pursue all legal avenues to defend his name and reputation, stating that he did not deliberately participate in any manipulation and that the club will defend his rights to every available degree of recourse.

The Next Step

The defense team plans to file an appeal with the Swiss Federal Court within 30 days of CAS’s decision. The court will assess whether CAS adhered to standards of integrity and transparency. If the appeal is accepted, the ruling could be overturned or sent back for reconsideration.

Zahran concluded by urging fans and media to pause and not judge prematurely, as the case remains open. He stressed that the team is moving forward with clear, legally grounded steps and that justice will eventually prevail.

Punchline 1: If this case were a football match, Sobhi would be out for four years, but at least the paperwork would be well‑stocked enough to fill a locker room shelf. Punchline 2: In football and law alike, sometimes the loudest noise isnt come from the crowd, but from the backlog of briefs piling up at the door.