AFCON 2025 VAR Controversy: Both Penalty Decisions Scrutinised in Egypt vs South Africa Clash
- Egypt’s narrow AFCON 2025 victory over South Africa was overshadowed by two VAR penalty decisions that left supporters divided and reignited debate over officiating consistency
- A late handball incident in Egypt’s box and an earlier spot-kick awarded against Bafana Bafana became the defining moments of a tense Group B encounter
- Briefly News exclusively interviewed football analyst Mandla Biyela to unpack the controversial calls using FIFA’s Laws of the Game, as opinions remain sharply split
Egypt and South Africa’s Africa Cup of Nations group-stage encounter on Friday, 26 December 2025, ended with football fans across the continent debating one moment long after the final whistle. The game, which ended in a 1-0 win for the Pharaohs after a Mo Salah first-half penalty, was one that many South African fans felt was too soft.
Source: Getty Images
In the second half of the match, which continued at high intensity with qualification stakes looming, a series of flashpoints, none bigger than a late stoppage-time incident in Egypt’s penalty area. With Bafana Bafana pushing forward, a goal-bound effort struck an Egyptian defender’s arm inside the box. Players appealed instantly, and the referee halted play for a VAR review, but no penalty was awarded.
The decision came just minutes after South Africa itself had been penalised earlier in the match, intensifying claims of inconsistency.
A football journalist explains the handball call
Briefly News exclusively interviewed football analyst Mandla Biyela, who offered a detailed breakdown of the incident using the FIFA Laws of the Game as his reference point.
PAY ATTENTION: stay informed and follow us on Google News!
According to Biyela, not every handball inside the penalty area constitutes an offence.
“FIFA Law 12 is very clear,” Biyela explained.
“Contact with the hand alone is not enough. Referees must assess intent, arm position, reaction time and whether the player made their body unnaturally bigger.”
He noted that VAR officials would have focused on the defender’s body movement at the moment of contact.
“If the arm is close to the body and the ball is struck from close range, FIFA allows referees to consider that a natural position. Reaction time is critical in these situations,” he added.
Why VAR did not intervene
Biyela stressed that VAR’s role is often misunderstood by supporters.
“VAR is not there to re-referee the match,” he said.
“It only steps in when there is a clear error. If the referee’s original decision can still be justified within the laws, VAR will not overturn it.”
From that perspective, the decision not to award a penalty against Egypt, while contentious, remains legally defensible under FIFA guidelines.
Comparing it to South Africa’s earlier penalty
The analyst also addressed the earlier penalty conceded by Bafana Bafana, which many fans felt set a different standard.
“Each incident is judged on its own merits,” Biyela explained.
“If a defender makes their body unnaturally bigger or extends the arm into the ball’s path, the referee has stronger grounds to award a penalty. That appears to be the distinction here.”
Correct decision, frustrating outcome. While acknowledging the anger felt by South African supporters, Biyela concluded that the controversy reflects a broader issue in modern football.
“The laws are clear, but their interpretation still leaves room for debate. You can have two decisions in the same match that are both technically correct, yet feel inconsistent to fans.”
Source: Getty Images
Mike Makaab strongly disagrees
However, the ruling has not gone unchallenged within football circles.
Prominent sports agent Mike Makaab offered a sharply contrasting interpretation, arguing that the defender’s actions clearly crossed the line set out in FIFA’s handball guidelines.
“Sorry, I totally disagree,” Makaab said.
“The rule about using your arm to break a fall applies when a player is falling naturally. In this case, the defender intentionally lunged forward with his arm outstretched.”
Makaab also rejected the idea that defenders can slide or lunge with extended arms without consequence.
“You cannot slide tackle with your arms away from your body and get away with it. That is not what the law allows,” he added.
Makaab believes this exception applies directly to the Egyptian defender’s action, strengthening the case for a penalty.
While Biyela argues the referee acted within the letter of the law, Makaab’s stance highlights how interpretation remains football’s biggest grey area even in the VAR era.
What both agree on is that the controversy reflects a wider problem: supporters, players and officials often operate with different understandings of the same law.
As AFCON 2025 continues, the incident serves as another reminder that while the rulebook may be written in black and white, its application on the pitch is anything but. Bafana Bafana started the tournament with a 2-1 victory over Angola, but now find themselves desperate for a win against Zimbabwe on Monday, 29 December, to progress to the next round.
Broos names AFCON favourite
Briefly News also reported that Hugo Broos named the team he thinks are favourites to win the Africa Cup of Nations in Morocco.
The Belgian tactician snubbed Bafana Bafana, Nigeria, and Egypt while predicting the team that could lift the trophy.
PAY ATTENTION: Follow Briefly News on Twitter and never miss the hottest topics! Find us at @brieflyza!
Source: Briefly News
