\n<\/p>\n
The third red card, again for Dogso, seemed controversial initially. <\/p>\n
Khuliso Mudau broke towards the area and looked to skip past Montes, but the South African was stopped in his tracks by a rash tackle.<\/p>\n
Mudau was in a slightly wide position so a yellow card seemed the most likely outcome. Sampaio produced the red. Surely the VAR would step in again?<\/p>\n
On second viewing it seemed very likely that Mudau’s next touch would be to control the ball inside the area. There was no covering defender close.<\/p>\n
Mudau would probably have had one touch, and then a shot. The VAR was not likely to get involved and tell the referee he had made a clear and obvious error.<\/p>\n
An incident from the Premier League last season is a good comparison. It came in Crystal Palace’s 3-3 draw with Bournemouth in October.<\/p>\n
Marcos Senesi brought down Ismaila Sarr, with the Palace striker moving into a similar position to Mudau. <\/p>\n
Referee Jarred Gillett produced the yellow card, but the VAR sent him to the screen to upgrade it to a red. <\/p>\n
Gillett rejected the review, but the Premier League’s Key Match Incidents Panel voted that he was wrong. It should have been a red card.<\/p>\n
Maybe it provides an indication that Sampaio was right. His decision was certainly supportable.<\/p>\n