World Cup 2026: Three red cards – are referees getting tough?

The third red card, again for Dogso, seemed controversial initially.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

Marcos Senesi brought down Ismaila Sarr, with the Palace striker moving into a similar position to Mudau.

Referee Jarred Gillett produced the yellow card, but the VAR sent him to the screen to upgrade it to a red.

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.

Maybe it provides an indication that Sampaio was right. His decision was certainly supportable.

There was a law change this summer which did not get the same attention as some others.

The wording to Dogso was slightly altered to say that a referee should take into account the position of other attackers, as well as defenders.

As Mudau had a team-mate in the centre who he could have passed to, this can now be considered.

Advertisement

It would be easy to say this World Cup is about to be blighted by referees throwing around red cards.

There is a danger we fall into a trap, whereas this game may well prove just to be an outlier. A statistical anomaly across a 104-game tournament.

The two on-field red cards probably were, on balance, both correct decisions.

Let’s not panic about the referees just yet.