Eddie Howe & Fabian Hurzeler in agreement as Premier League issue statement after Newcastle United controversy

Yankuba Minteh gave Brighton the lead in the first half before Newcastle were awarded three second half penalties by Craig Pawson.

The first was overturned by VAR as Anthony Gordon was fouled by Tariq Lampety outside the penalty area and the second was overturned after Jan Paul van Hecke’s challenge on Joe Willock was deemed not to be a foul. Willock was booked for simulation as a result.

Then in the closing stages of the match, Fabian Schar’s free-kick hit off the hand of Yasin Ayari and it was third time lucky for The Magpies as this penalty was finally awarded. Alexander Isak stepped up and slotted home his 27th goal of the season.

It also secured a 1-1 draw which effectively guarantees Newcastle will not drop out of the top five before they host Chelsea next weekend.

But there was also some penalty drama in the opposite box as Brighton felt they should have been awarded a penalty after Sandro Tonali brought down Matt O’Riley. Seagulls boss Fabian Hurzeler felt his side should have been awarded a penalty but Pawson waved away the appeals and VAR did not intervene.

Fabian Hurzeler reacts to penalty controversy v NUFC

When asked if he felt his side should have had a penalty, Hurzeler said: “Yes, and that's a thing I don't understand, because every time the referee makes [a decision] when there's not even a touch, he makes a whistle and gives a penalty for them.

“I don't see that there's a big difference between the foul from [Lampety] on Gordon instead of the foul from [Tonali] on Matt O’Riley, so I don't see a big difference. I think if he gives the penalty, VAR has no chance to overturn it.

“We tried our best. So I thanked him. I think it was not an easy game, so we tried our best. He made a decision, we have to accept it, and now we have to carry on.

“I always say the VAR makes the football more fair, and today we saw it. I think the one foul was not even a touch from JP. I think if we wouldn't have a VAR, we would sit here and talk about someone who tried to get a penalty without a touch, so I think that confirms my opinion again that the VAR makes football more fair, but of course it breaks the rhythm of the game, it takes a long time, so sometimes it's very frustrating how long it takes. Therefore, on the one side it's very positive, on the other side we all know that it breaks the rhythm of the game.”

Eddie Howe reacts to triple penalty call for Newcastle United

Newcastle head coach Eddie Howe was in agreement with Hurzeler about the benefits of VAR and had no complaints over its use on Sunday.

Reflecting on the decisions, Howe said: “I think keeping our composure in those moments, because it's not easy, and also making sure our performance wasn't affected negatively by the outcomes of the decisions.

“I think that is what VAR is there for, so if Anthony's is outside the box, that's the right decision. If Joe's not touched by Van Hecke, that's the right decision.

“I've got no issue with those two calls if that's the case. The third one for me was a stonewall penalty the minute I saw it. I'm pleased that the right decision was made.”

The point keeps Newcastle fourth in the Premier League table heading into the final three games of the season. It was the side’s first draw since the 3-3 draw against Liverpool in early December.

“Yeah, absolutely [a good point],” Howe added. “I think if you look at our season as a whole, we probably haven't dug out enough points in games that are in the balance, which is surprising, really.

“But we are a team that's set up to try and win, so you've got to be careful what you wish for. We want to win games and we'll attack and try and do that, but if you can't, make sure you don't lose the game. I thought today was a really battling performance.

“I thought we were the better team in both halves. I thought we were pretty good, maybe apart from around the box, especially in that first half, I thought we lacked a cutting edge. But the majority of the performance tactically substitutes.

“I was really pleased and to come here and come back from a goal down is a great thing, I think.”

Premier League release official statements explaining penalty decisions

Explaining the decision, the Premier League’s official match centre account tweeted a short statement.

It read: “57’ VAR OVERTURN VAR checked the referee’s call of penalty for the challenge by Lamptey on Gordon and recommended that play restarted with a Newcastle free kick as the contact was outside the penalty area.”

Shortly after, Pawson awarded Newcastle a penalty after Willock went down under a challenge from Jan Paul van Hecke inside the area. VAR intervened and prompted Pawson to go to the pitchside monitor.

After consulting the monitor, Pawson awarded Brighton a free-kick instead and booked Willock for simulation.

The Premier League’s match centre statement on the second penalty incident read: “70’ VAR OVERTURN VAR checked the referee’s call of penalty for the challenge by van Hecke on Willock and recommended an on-field review – with this deemed to be minimal contact and not sufficient for a penalty. Upon review, the referee awarded an indirect free kick to Brighton and issued a yellow card to Willock for simulation.”

For Newcastle’s penalty that was given, the match centre tweeted: “The referee’s call of penalty was checked and confirmed by VAR – with the action by Estupiñán deemed to be a handball offence.”

That statement could have benefited from a VAR check itself as replays showed that it was Ayari rather than Pervis Estupiñán who handled the ball.

No statement was issued regarding Brighton’s penalty shout.

Your next Newcastle United read: Everton make Dominic Calvert-Lewin U-turn - Newcastle United take note