Should Davinson Sanchez have been shown a red card? Was the Osimhen incident a penalty for Galatasaray? Here are all the controversial decisions from the Galatasaray-Eyüpspor match

In the 14th week of the Super Lig, Galatasaray hosted Eyüpspor at Rams Park. The match, which was the scene of great excitement, ended in a 2-2 draw with goals from both sides.

Oğuzhan Çakır was the referee for the match, with Serkan Olguncan and Murat Ergin Gözütok serving as his assistants. Erkan Engin served as the VAR, while Deniz Caner Özaral was the AVAR. The match was as much a subject of debate for its refereeing decisions as it was for the gameplay.

On the broadcaster beIN Sports' referee analysis program, beIN Trio, former referees Deniz Çoban, Bahattin Duran, and Bülent Yıldırım evaluated the critical incidents of the match.

Here are the evaluations regarding the controversial decisions of the match between Galatasaray and Eyüpspor:

Here are the evaluations regarding the controversial decisions of the match between Galatasaray and Eyüpspor:

"Should Mame Thiam have received a yellow card in the 10th second?"

Bülent Yıldırım: It was a chaotic match. We saw Thiam hit Sallai in the face. There was a blow to the face with the palm. The match started with a missed yellow card.

Bahattin Duran: Thiam, who was in an unfair challenge, opened his hand inappropriately and there was clear contact; it was an uncontrolled movement and should have been a yellow card along with the foul.

Deniz Çoban: One of the most critical moments of the match. If the referee catches the violations at the beginning of the match, the players stay controlled. When the referee doesn't catch them at the start, the players behave freely. A clear yellow card was missed.

"Galatasaray expected a penalty in the 6th minute, was the decision to continue correct?"

Bahattin Duran: Yunus Akgün enters the penalty area, Caner Erkin is next to him. Caner's hand makes slight contact with Yunus's body. It is definitely not enough intervention for a penalty.

Bülent Yıldırım: Seeing that Caner is coming in risky, he will widen his steps and open up. There is no effective holding, pushing, pulling, or situation that qualifies as a violation. There are involuntary small contacts. The decision to continue is correct.

Deniz Çoban: I am of the opinion that it is not a penalty.

"Was there a foul before Eyüpspor's goal in the 12th minute?"

Bülent Yıldırım: What is striking about the referee is that it started in the 10th second. The foul standard was never consistent. At times, he called very easy fouls. He was subjected to criticism from the coaches, and I find some justification in that. You call fouls for simple contacts throughout the whole match, but that didn't happen either. During a dual challenge, Sallai and Dubois were struggling, Eyüpspor won it, and it resulted in a goal before the attacking phase changed. There is also an uncontrolled foul by Metehan sliding into Thiam from behind. At the beginning, he pushed Dubois with his right knee while Sallai was in control of the ball, and pushed him out of the sideline with an effective push. I think it was a foul. There is a foul by Metehan on Thiam within the attacking phase. Metehan should have received a card. The goal should have been canceled. There is a clear foul at the beginning. There should have been a VAR intervention. Missing this on the field... It is a very clear foul. An indisputable foul. VAR should have intervened because there is a two-handed push. VAR could have shown this.

Bahattin Duran: On the edge of the sideline, the ball is under Sallai's control, his back is turned. How could the Eyüpspor player have a chance to get the ball here? He could put his foot in front, only that way. By now, the Galatasaray player has gained control of the ball; if you hit the hip with your knee and push with your hand while the ball is under control, he falls. Logically, the chance of the Galatasaray player losing this ball is very, very low. The response to this movement made against him is a foul. What Metehan did is also an uncontrolled movement. After the goal, Metehan should have received a yellow card. The start of the position is a foul, it was a position that should have been solved on the field. VAR could also have intervened. The goal should have been canceled.

Deniz Çoban: The issue here is this; our friend started the match by not making decisions, and continued by not making decisions. After the 10th second, he didn't make any decisions at all. Then he started blowing the whistle very easily. A VAR intervention is required. Dubois pushed Sallai out to the sideline. There is a charge from behind. Since the VAR system has existed, discussions have been on the wrong ground. You are the referee on the field, if you call it, it will end. You don't say anything, you continue. A clear yellow card violation, no card for that either. A goal comes in the aftermath.

''Should there have been a card for Barış Alper's foul on Caner Erkin?"

Bahattin Duran: Barış Alper makes a sliding intervention but does it towards the front, he doesn't sweep Caner. The trailing leg makes contact, the foul is complete but it wouldn't be a yellow card.

Bülent Yıldırım: If Barış Alper had made the intervention on Caner while sliding, it would be a yellow card anywhere. Barış jumps for the ball, there is distance in between. He disrupts his knee with his calf, but the foul is correct, no card needed.

"The Davinson Sanchez and Mame Thiam incident, and what happened afterwards..."

Bülent Yıldırım: We have very chaotic situations in our leagues. You can't say it's like this from the middle of the book. Thiam pushes Davinson in the chest. The foul is correct. Let's look at the reaction Davinson gave to this. If you go by the photo, this reaction is an indisputable red card. Since there is no strong contact, what the referee will look at is this: if it is an attempt to kick, it is a direct red card; if he found the force low, he will show a yellow card for unsportsmanlike conduct. However, he must absolutely show a card to Davinson, but he didn't. Not showing a card is unacceptable. If he had given a red, we would accept it. If he had given a yellow, this is truly open to interpretation. Even Thiam didn't feel it. I cannot accept that he didn't show a card.

Bahattin Duran: It shouldn't pass without a card. Thiam's movement is a foul, okay, it's a foul. Afterwards, Davinson didn't feel the movement he made and couldn't realize it. If he had already experienced the violence, if he had felt the blow, he would have said red card. By the way, the definition of violent conduct says hitting or attempting to hit; you can see this footage and show a very clear red card. I would have preferred a red card. At least he should have given a yellow. I would have preferred a red on the field.

Deniz Çoban: He calls the foul Thiam made based on feeling. He is far from the position, he has no chance to evaluate it from this angle. Is there a possibility that he sees that subtle movement but doesn't see the rough movement? He sees Davinson on the ground, it's a whistle blown so as not to get into trouble. As for what Davinson did; the referee's yellow or red card would be respected. If it's an attempt to kick, it's a red card; if he calls it unsportsmanlike, it's a yellow card. The referee needs to evaluate this. It's not a VAR issue.

"Was the decision to continue correct in the 21st minute when Osimhen fell in the penalty area?"

Bahattin Duran: First Osimhen touched the ball, then Claro clearly played the ball. The Eyüpspor player did not step on or strike Osimhen.

Bülent Yıldırım: I see the same things. Although it is very, very risky, Claro makes contact with the ball. The direction of the ball that Osimhen touched in the first stage changed with Claro's contact. The move he made later is not a careless intervention. It's a small contact within football. This position continues.

"Was the decision to continue correct in the 21st minute when Barış Alper fell?"

Bahattin Duran: There is a hand contact on Barış Alper, albeit slight. It is correct for the game to continue. There is no violation in the Barış Alper position that would require a penalty.

Bülent Yıldırım: When he felt the opposing player's hand while they were side by side, he let himself go easily. There is no effective push that would require a penalty. Continuing is correct.

Deniz Çoban: I am of the same opinion. In the Galatasaray-Samsunspor match, a penalty was called in favor of Samsunspor for such a charge. Success is when referees are collectively successful if decisions are made at the same standard within the same tournament.

"In the 21st minute, is there a foul by Davinson on Thiam, is the yellow card correct, is a red card needed?"

Bahattin Duran: After Caner Erkin hit the ball, Mame Thiam put himself in front of his opponent. Muslera is not in his goal. Even though the ball is not going to the goal from the middle, it is now tending to slow down, the ball is not coming from the air, the ball is not under Thiam's control but the possibility of controlling it is very high because he is in front. The ball Caner Erkin hit is spinning outwards. If this position is a foul, I accept the yellow card, even though Muslera is not in his goal.

Bülent Yıldırım: Foul. Thiam took priority, there is contact, albeit small. His stride is disrupted. There is a foul. The ball is coming convexly. From other angles, it looks like an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, but what changes my opinion is the angle of the ball. Because it is convex, if this ball were heading towards the goal, I would say obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Since it is turning outwards, I think like the referee and say yellow card.

Deniz Çoban: One of the criteria for an obvious goal-scoring opportunity is the distance between the ball and the goal. When the ball first drops, it's about 7 meters to the midfield line. It is said that it is a clearer goal-scoring opportunity when it is close to the goal. Sometimes the distance of the ball from the goal is an advantage. The ball has gone towards the sideline in a way that it will lose its angle completely. If the player's speed didn't drop and he met the ball, who would come and catch up to Thiam after he had possession of the ball and prevent him from going to the goal? The bravest decision should have been a red card.

"In the 21st minute, is there a foul by Davinson on Thiam, is the yellow card correct, is a red card needed?"

Bahattin Duran: After Caner Erkin hit the ball, Mame Thiam put himself in front of his opponent. Muslera is not in his goal. Even though the ball is not going to the goal from the middle, it is now tending to slow down, the ball is not coming from the air, the ball is not under Thiam's control but the possibility of controlling it is very high because he is in front. The ball Caner Erkin hit is spinning outwards. If this position is a foul, I accept the yellow card, even though Muslera is not in his goal.

Bülent Yıldırım: Foul. Thiam took priority, there is contact, albeit small. His stride is disrupted. There is a foul. The ball is coming convexly. From other angles, it looks like an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, but what changes my opinion is the angle of the ball. Because it is convex, if this ball were heading towards the goal, I would say obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Since it is turning outwards, I think like the referee and say yellow card.

Deniz Çoban: One of the criteria for an obvious goal-scoring opportunity is the distance between the ball and the goal. When the ball first drops, it's about 7 meters to the midfield line. It is said that it is a clearer goal-scoring opportunity when it is close to the goal. Sometimes the distance of the ball from the goal is an advantage. The ball has gone towards the sideline in a way that it will lose its angle completely. If the player's speed didn't drop and he met the ball, who would come and catch up to Thiam after he had possession of the ball and prevent him from going to the goal? The bravest decision should have been a red card.

"In the 21st minute, should Abdülkerim have received a yellow card for protesting the referee?"

Bülent Yıldırım: There is a threat with a finger, this gesture is not acceptable. The referee got scolded, he said 'calm down' with his hand the whole match. Either the referee will make him lower that finger or he will show a yellow card to Abdülkerim.

Deniz Çoban: Abdülkerim's action should be a yellow card.

Bahattin Duran: The response to Abdülkerim's action must be a yellow card. He insists on continuing, he insists on continuing.

"In the 26th minute, was the decision to continue correct when Barış Alper fell in the penalty area, is a penalty needed?"

Bülent Yıldırım: Bruno made a dangerous move. If he wrapped him with both hands... This position is a penalty on the field. There is an angle that serves as evidence for VAR, he wrapped him with both hands. VAR should have intervened.

Bahattin Duran: Barış Alper is in front, Bruno put his hand over his shoulder, wrapped him with his hand on the right. This is an indisputable penalty on the field.

Deniz Çoban: Barış Alper took his position and tried to jump. Bruno didn't want to let him jump. A clear penalty. There is also evidence for VAR. They say in training, if you see him wrapping with both hands. There is wrapping here.

"In the 35th minute, was the decision correct in the position where Claro received a yellow card?"

Bahattin Duran: Very clear, correct yellow card.

Bülent Yıldırım: Correct yellow card.

Deniz Çoban: Yellow card is the correct decision.

"Is the decision to continue correct in the Barış Alper - Halil struggle?"

Bahattin Duran: The decision to continue is correct. There is nothing Barış Alper can do while falling. He accidentally grazes the back of his foot. There is no violation here.

Bülent Yıldırım: Accidental stepping. No violation involved.

Deniz Çoban: This is an accident...

Is the referee's decision correct regarding the yellow card Osimhen received?

Bülent Yıldırım: There must be a foul or a tactical foul, it must be uncontrolled, it must prevent a promising attack for him to receive a yellow card. Is there a foul, what is the nature of the foul? It is not an uncontrolled foul, there is no promising attack. The referee may not have been able to catch whether Osimhen stole the ball at that speed, he may say Osimhen put his foot there to block. It's momentary, very difficult, but there is no need for a yellow card, what is the yellow card for? It's a foul, but a yellow card is unnecessary.

Bahattin Duran: We watched it a lot. I accept the foul here. Very difficult position. The foul is correct but I don't object much to the yellow card, it would have been more correct if he hadn't shown a yellow card.

Is the yellow card the correct decision for the move Thiam made on Torreira?

Bahattin Duran: There is a slight hand rubbing and pushing. The foul is indisputable but I would say it would be more correct if it weren't a yellow card. However, I cannot criticize the referee much.

Bülent Yıldırım: I cannot criticize the referee. There is an intervention that comes to the chin, below the face.

Deniz Çoban: I can't say anything about him calling it a yellow card.

"Is there any doubt about Galatasaray's second goal, was a foul committed on Caner?"

Bülent Yıldırım: The aerial ball is clean, Barış Alper stole the ball, no foul involved.

Bahattin Duran: No violation, the goal is clean.

Deniz Çoban: The goal is clean.

"Is there a foul in the Yunus Akgün - Dubois position?"

Bülent Yıldırım: It's not a foul on Sallai, is this a foul! If this is a foul, the one on Sallai is a double foul.

Bahattin Duran: I mean, professor, a very slight intervention. Dubois is in control of the ball; Yunus has a lighter intervention compared to the Sallai position. If this blow, which is very light when we compare it to that, is a foul, that is even more of a foul.

Deniz Çoban: When he touched Dubois's shoulder, his feet left the ground. This cannot be a foul in football.

"In the 56th minute, should a second yellow card be needed for the intervention Davinson made on Thiam?"

Bahattin Duran: Sanchez stepped with both feet uncontrollably at the same time. A very clear yellow card. Indisputable. It would be both the first and second yellow card, no matter what minute it is, this should have been a yellow card along with the foul.

Bülent Yıldırım: Davinson managed to step with both. Very interesting. There are almost two uncontrolled interventions. He should have been sent off with a second yellow card, indisputable. This is a yellow card that would be seen even from space.

Deniz Çoban: There is no place to discuss this position. There is no side to discuss. The referee friend didn't make a decision again.

"Is a foul needed in the intervention Metehan made on Ampem?"

Bülent Yıldırım: If it were inside the penalty area, it would be a foul. This is a clear foul.

Bahattin Duran: He wrapped his arm, foul.

Deniz Çoban: There is no such way of struggling in football.

"Is a card needed for Okan Buruk's protest?"

Bülent Yıldırım: Sinan Kaloğlu only raised his arm once within his own area and said 'come on'. He didn't enter the field of play. Bam, red card. Persistent, continuous.

Deniz Çoban: Sinan Kaloğlu received a red card for doing this action, he did it 1 time. A coach who did it 1 time was sent off.

Bahattin Duran: Okan Buruk's action is a clear sending off, a clear sending off. And it's not just once either.

"In the 83rd minute, is the referee's decision of simulation correct in the position where Ampem fell?"

Bahattin Duran: Mertens looked at the referee because he knows what he did. This position is a penalty. This is evidence. A penalty should have been given with a VAR intervention.

Bülent Yıldırım: What Mertens did is a clear penalty. There is enough evidence to show the penalty. Why didn't VAR, which intervenes in fractional contacts, intervene in this, let them evaluate it.