The Trio team evaluated the controversial positions in the Gaziantep FK-Galatasaray match: 4 red cards should have been issued

In the critical clash of the 22nd week of the Süper Lig, Galatasaray faced Gaziantep FK away from home. The Lions, who lost their chance to qualify directly for the UEFA Europa League Round of 16 after losing to Ajax during the week, managed to win 1-0 against Gaziantep with a goal scored by new signing Ahmed Kutucu.

With this result, Galatasaray managed to maintain the point gap with second-placed Fenerbahçe.

The most curious topic after the match was the referee's decisions. The Trio team evaluated the controversial decisions in the Gaziantep FK-Galatasaray match.

Is there an offside in Ahmed Kutucu's goal, is the goal decision correct?

Bahattin Duran: Geographically, Sallai is in an offside position the moment Ahmed Kutucu kicks the ball. For there to be an infringement in the position, the ball must touch Sallai, who is offside; the ball does not touch him. Other than that, is he in the goalkeeper's line of sight, is he preventing him from seeing the ball? Sallai did not affect the goalkeeper's angle of view. Finally, Sallai is very slightly avoiding the ball so that it does not touch him. He is taking an action. Does this action he takes affect the goalkeeper? It does not. Galatasaray's goal is clean, a legitimate goal.

Deniz Çoban: Bahattin Duran explained it well. The goalkeeper and Sallai are not on the same line. There is no situation where he would be affected by a small action. Offside does not come to my mind. The ball did not touch Sallai. The goal is legitimate.

Bülent Yıldırım: From my perspective, there is no question of the goalkeeper being affected by this goal. Since there is no contact with the ball, the goal is clean.

Sorescu fell to the ground while entering the penalty area, is the decision to continue correct?

Deniz Çoban: I watched it from beginning to end. Sorescu has only one intention: to enter the penalty area as soon as possible, fall there, and get a penalty. He feels the slight contact on his shoulder, flies into the penalty area, grabs the player, and pulls him on top of himself. To me, this is simulation. A yellow card for simulation.

Bahattin Duran: When Sorescu felt the arm, he grabbed his opponent's arm and jumped into the penalty area. A yellow card for an action intended to deceive the referee.

Bülent Yıldırım: A possible ineffective small contact, outside the penalty area. An indisputable simulation.

There is contact with Davinson's arm on the ball deflected from Muslera, is a penalty required?

Deniz Çoban: Handballs are always debated. The more you slow down the position in handballs, the more you lean towards a penalty. His hand was raised to shoulder height, he played the ball with his hand at or above shoulder height. If you stop it like this, at that moment, the ball deflected from Muslera and hit his hand, this is a penalty, because it is a penalty. However, we will not look at it from a photograph. There are criteria for handball. The ball, which his teammate played intentionally, does not hit his hand. Muslera does not play it intentionally; it deflects from Muslera. Other criteria come into play. The ball deflected from a short distance hits the player's hand. Are his hands in a natural position? As the ball comes towards his hand, after deflecting from Muslera, his hands are in a natural position. In the subsequent position, it is an unexpected ball coming from a short distance. Is the ball coming to the hand, or is the hand going to the ball? The ball is going to the player's hand. He is pulling his hand away so that the ball does not hit it. If he had a little more opportunity, he would have saved his hand without contact. There is no effort to play with the hand. I am of the same opinion as the referee. There is no handball. The decision to continue is correct.

Bahattin Duran: The decision to continue is correct. Davinson is doing everything to pull his hand away; he is raising his hand to avoid the ball. In an unexpected ball, his hand was natural at first, his hands were not open. I have no doubt, the decision to continue is correct.

Bülent Yıldırım: The decision to continue is correct.

Regarding the yellow card Lungoyi received due to his objection, is the foul decision in the Mandouki-Sallai position correct, is a card required?

Bahattin Duran: Lungoyi made contact with the referee, the yellow card decision is correct. Mandouki's action on Sallai is reckless. Along with Lungoyi, Mandouki should also have received a yellow card. Mandouki's second yellow card was missed, minute 18.

Deniz Çoban: Mandouki's foul on Sallai can be called a tactical foul, an unsportsmanlike foul, a reckless foul. Mandouki deserved a yellow card for the second time... Lungoyi's card is correct, not showing a yellow card to Mandouki is wrong.

Is the card decision correct in Sorescu's intervention on Sallai?

Deniz Çoban: One hundred percent correct. It has nothing to do with that area. What does it have to do with off-the-ball? Unsportsmanlike, off-the-ball...

Bahattin Duran: A correct yellow card for 2-3 reasons.

Bülent Yıldırım: There is no ball, he sees his opponent and hits him directly. A clear yellow card.

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

Deniz Çoban: Torreira received a yellow card not for objection, but for a foul. Torreira did not commit a foul. The Gaziantep player Lungoyi's hand hits him in a dual challenge. If it is a foul according to the referee, it is a foul. Even if Torreira was the one who did it first, the blow Lungoyi made towards the face is a very clear reckless foul. Lungoyi should have been sent off with a second yellow card. Torreira has neither an infringement nor an objection.

Bahattin Duran: For me, the big decision here is Lungoyi. Lungoyi, who had a yellow card in the 24th minute, should have been sent off in the 36th minute. This is a yellow card in every way.

Bülent Yıldırım: Lungoyi should have clearly been sent off with a second yellow card in the 36th minute.

Is the decision correct regarding the yellow card Barış Alper Yılmaz received?

Bahattin Duran: Wrong decision, just a foul.

Deniz Çoban: What is the player supposed to do here? His foot slips. It should not have been a card.

Bülent Yıldırım: Wrong decision.

Is a card required for Sorescu's intervention on Sallai when the ball is not in play?

Bahattin Duran: Sorescu gave the ball to Sallai. Sallai kicked the ball with the outside of his left foot. He didn't want to take it immediately. Let's look at the facial expression of assistant referee Süleyman Özay. Süleyman Özay is in control of the position. Sorescu stepped on Sallai. This is at least a yellow card. He stepped on the upper part. Even if I were to soften it, a second yellow card for Sorescu. You should send off Sorescu with a direct red card for this position. The assistant referee's facial expression tells it all.

Deniz Çoban: Sallai wants to delay the game, Sorescu, who noticed this, came in a rage and issued a penalty. There is a foul, the player accepted the foul, he threw the ball there, Sallai's behavior angered the opponent. Did he provoke the opponent? Yes, he did. A yellow card for Sallai; a red card for Sorescu for a wounding, ruthless, cruel, violent action from the middle of the book. VAR should have intervened.

Bülent Yıldırım: Indisputably, before the ball met the ground, it was on the opponent's ankle. A yellow card for Sallai for delaying the game, and Sorescu should have been sent off with a red card.

Deniz Çoban: Sorescu, Boateng, and Lungoyi should have received red cards. If we count Mandouki, 4 red cards should have been issued. Sara's yellow card is wrong, Torreira's yellow card is wrong. Abdülkerim and Muslera's yellow cards are correct.