SBOTOP VAR Vindicated: Officials Got It Right on Isak’s Penalty and Sesko’s High Boot Decisions

The debate surrounding the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system continues to dominate discussions in modern football, but every now and then, a weekend emerges that reminds fans and pundits alike of the technology’s true purpose — to ensure fairness and accuracy in the game. In a dramatic round of Premier League action, VAR found itself under the spotlight once more following two major incidents: Alexander Isak’s awarded penalty for Newcastle United and Benjamin Šeško’s disallowed goal due to a high boot. After a thorough post-match review, refereeing experts and analysts agreed that both decisions were, in fact, correct — a rare moment where VAR’s intervention earned more praise than criticism.

A Tale of Two Controversial Calls

The first incident came during Newcastle United’s clash against Brighton at St James’ Park, where Alexander Isak was brought down inside the penalty box midway through the second half. Initially, referee Simon Hooper waved play on, but VAR quickly advised a review. Upon closer inspection, it became evident that Brighton defender Lewis Dunk made contact with Isak’s trailing leg before touching the ball — enough to overturn the on-field decision.

Isak confidently converted the subsequent penalty, helping Newcastle secure a vital three points in their pursuit of a European qualification spot. However, the decision sparked immediate debate among pundits and fans, with Brighton supporters arguing that Dunk’s challenge was legitimate.

Later that weekend, VAR found itself under scrutiny again in a match between Tottenham Hotspur and RB Leipzig in a pre-season friendly — a game that still drew global attention due to its high-profile players and managers. Benjamin Šeško appeared to have scored a stunning volley to put Leipzig ahead, only for the goal to be ruled out after VAR determined the Slovenian forward had raised his boot dangerously high, narrowly missing the head of Spurs defender Cristian Romero in the process.

The call, while harsh to some, was later confirmed to be consistent with the laws of the game regarding dangerous play.

Expert Analysis The Right Decisions Were Made

Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher, now a respected analyst on Sky Sports’ Ref Watch, was among the first to comment on the weekend’s incidents. According to Gallagher, both calls demonstrated the VAR system’s growing maturity and the officials’ improving ability to apply the technology effectively.

“In both cases, the officials made the right decision after a clear and thorough review,” Gallagher stated. “For Isak’s penalty, Dunk made contact with the attacker before touching the ball. That’s a foul, even if the contact is minimal. The VAR team followed protocol — it wasn’t a ‘clear and obvious error’ from the referee, but once he went to the monitor, the evidence was strong enough to overturn his initial call.”

Gallagher also defended the high-boot ruling against Šeško. “Football’s laws are designed to protect player safety. Even though Šeško didn’t make contact, the action itself was dangerous. If Romero had gone in for a header, it could have been a serious injury. VAR did what it’s supposed to — ensure that the referee had the clearest possible view of the situation.”

Managers Weigh In Divided Opinions Unified Respect

As expected, the decisions sparked contrasting reactions from both sides. Newcastle boss Eddie Howe expressed gratitude toward the officiating team, emphasizing that fairness was the ultimate goal.

“I’ve always said I’m a fan of VAR when it’s used properly,” Howe said in his post-match press conference. “Today, it was. The referee missed it in real-time — and that’s understandable. Things happen fast in the box. But when you see the replay, it’s obvious Isak was tripped. I’m glad the system worked in our favor this time.”

Brighton’s Roberto De Zerbi, while visibly disappointed, refrained from harsh criticism. “We respect the decision,” he admitted. “Dunk tried to get the ball, but maybe he was a bit late. Sometimes these moments go against you. What’s important is consistency, and I hope VAR continues to be used in this way — quickly and transparently.”

Meanwhile, Tottenham manager Ange Postecoglou, whose team benefitted from the Šeško disallowed goal, was equally pragmatic. “You don’t like to see goals ruled out,” he said, “but player safety has to come first. It’s a fine line — Šeško’s technique was brilliant, but if his boot was even slightly higher, it could have been dangerous. The officials got it right.”

The VAR Evolution From Controversy to Clarity

Since its introduction, VAR has often been the subject of heated debate, with fans lamenting long delays, inconsistent interpretations, and questionable interventions. Yet, in recent months, there’s been a noticeable shift toward smoother implementation and faster decision-making — a credit to the Premier League’s ongoing efforts to improve communication and transparency.

According to PGMOL (Professional Game Match Officials Limited), the body overseeing referees in England, the current season has seen a 23% reduction in review time compared to last year. Officials are now being trained to rely on the VAR room not as a crutch but as a complement — a safety net for moments where the human eye might miss crucial details.

Howard Webb, the PGMOL chief, recently emphasized this progress in an interview with BBC Sport: “Our aim is not to eliminate human error entirely — that’s impossible — but to reduce its impact on decisive moments. VAR is there to support the referee, not to take over. When used properly, as we saw this weekend, it enhances the fairness of the game.”

A Rare Moment of Agreement

Perhaps most remarkably, fans — often the fiercest critics of VAR — appeared largely satisfied with how both incidents were handled. Social media, typically a battleground of outrage after contentious calls, was instead filled with measured responses and even praise.

A popular Newcastle fan account on X (formerly Twitter) wrote:

“For once, VAR actually worked the way it’s supposed to. Clear foul, fair review, quick decision. No drama.”

Brighton fans, though disappointed with the outcome, also acknowledged the legitimacy of the process. One supporter posted:

“Didn’t like the penalty, but can’t really argue it. Dunk caught him. At least it didn’t take five minutes to decide.”

Similarly, in the Tottenham-Leipzig game, neutrals noted that the Šeško call aligned perfectly with modern officiating standards. Football analyst Ben Jacobs tweeted:

“Šeško’s goal was a beauty, but by the letter of the law, that’s dangerous play. VAR got it spot on.”

Technology Meets Interpretation

While the accuracy of VAR-assisted decisions is undeniably improving, experts caution that the technology’s effectiveness ultimately depends on human interpretation. The Isak and Šeško cases highlight how crucial context remains — contact, intent, and consequence all factor into whether a referee decides to intervene.

Mark Clattenburg, another former Premier League referee, explained the nuance: “VAR can show you the contact, but it can’t tell you how hard it was or what the player’s intention was. That’s still up to the referee. In both of these cases, the officials balanced those elements well. The penalty was soft but correct. The high boot was dangerous, even if accidental. It’s about consistency, and this weekend showed that’s improving.”