This season, Premier League refereeing has faced intense criticism for inconsistency in the application of the DOGSO (Denying an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity) rule. Still, Manchester United’s clash with Crystal Palace featured a precise, correct application.
The Eagles took the lead within five minutes, as defender Maxence Lacroix, who went from hero to villain, struck early from a corner to put them one goal ahead.
Both teams created opportunities to either equalise or extend the lead, but the overall quality in the final third was lacking at both ends of the pitch.
The Red Devils emerged with greater intensity after the break. A through ball from Bruno Fernandes sent Matheus Cunha racing clear on goal, only for Lacroix to tug him back and halt his run.
The referee pointed to the spot, and after a VAR review, Chris Kavanagh upheld the penalty decision and issued a straight red card to the French defender for denying what looked to be an opportunity for the Red Devils to equalise — a classic DOGSO moment that flipped the game.
What is DOGSO?
DOGSO stands for Denying an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity. It is one of the most debated rules in football, and it is governed by IFAB Law 12, Fouls and Misconduct.
Under the guidelines set by the International Football Association Board, if a player denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity through a foul, they are sent off with a red card, but the key word here is “obvious”, meaning four factors must be considered before the referee makes a decision.
DOGSO And Four Factors to Consider: Distance
Before a referee makes a decision under the DOGSO rule, they aren’t just looking at how many yards away the player is, but whether that distance makes a goal “obvious” rather than just “possible.”
For example, if the foul is committed on a player close to the goal who is about to pull the trigger, then there’s a high chance of a red card being shown.
However, if the foul occurs 40 yards out, it is rarely the DOGSO rule can be applied because there is still time for other defenders to recover and intercept or for the attacker to lose steam.
Most DOGSO distances are within the final third of the pitch, so the referee has to determine if the attacker was close enough to score.
The case of distance is always judged in relation to the speed of the player and the gap between them and the defenders.
In Lacroix’s case, Cunha had already gained ground on the defender and was entering the penalty area; that distance factor was easily satisfied.
He was within a range where a goal is statistically very likely, making the opportunity “obvious”.
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Rayan’s Form for Bournemouth: A Good Start to Life in England for the Teenager
DOGSO And Four Factors to Consider: Direction
For this to be deemed a clear and obvious denial of a goal-scoring opportunity, the referee has to ascertain where the momentum of the player and the ball is headed. For this to be given, the player has to be moving toward the opponent’s goal.
The attacker does not have to be moving in a perfectly straight line, even if they are moving diagonally, but their angle still clearly has to lead towards the goal, and that can still make it fall under DOGSO.
Cases where it is not deemed “obvious” are when the attacker is wide and moving toward the corner flag or the touchline.
In that case, the foul is often downgraded to SPA (Stopping a Promising Attack), resulting in a yellow card instead of a red.
In Manchester United’s clash against Palace, Cunha was in on goal and was racing towards the six-yard box. The “Direction of Play” was undeniably towards the goal, helping satisfy the DOGSO criteria.
DOGSO And Four Factors to Consider: Ball Control
The factor that determines whether a foul is awarded with a red card or a yellow card is the likelihood of the player keeping or being the favourite to gain control of the ball.
Referees must decide if an attacker was fully in the right position to gain control of the ball and convert the chance.
For example, if the ball is a few yards away from the attacker after a heavy touch, but he is clearly the favourite to reach, then the DOGSO rule can be applied.
Imagine a player being played into space and is sprinting onto the pass, about to reach it, when a defender who is clearly beaten for pace trips them five yards from the ball.
The verdict would be that even though the striker was not yet touching the ball, they had a very high chance of gaining control, and because it was an obvious opportunity, it would be a straight red card.
However, the most common reason the rule is not applied is when an attacker takes a heavy touch that completely changes the direction of the ball before being fouled.
Imagine this: an attacker has broken forward towards the goal, and as a defender lunges in, the attacker pushes the ball to the side to evade the tackle, but in doing this, the touch is too heavy and sends the ball toward the corner flag, away from the goal. The defender then trips the attacker, and at that point, the opportunity is no longer obvious.
In this case, Cunha, who was the clear favourite to reach the ball after the pass from Bruno Fernandes, despite not having touched it, was impeded by Lacroix, preventing him from taking a shot. The correct decision was a red card and was therefore justified.
DOGSO And Four Factors to Consider: Location And Number Of Defenders
This factor, also known as the “Covering defender” rule is one of the main reasons why a red card is downgraded to a yellow.
Before deciding on the colour of the card to give, the referee takes into consideration different outcomes.
The referee looks at whether there are other defenders in a position to intervene, and whether the defenders are close enough to make an interception.
In cases like this, it’s not always about where the defenders are standing, but their speed and trajectory in recovery.
For a foul to be deemed DOGSO, the player must be “clean through” on goal without any other defender in sight to cause an obstruction.
If a striker is brought down but a teammate is positioned centrally between the attacker and the goal, the referee may determine that the chance is no longer “obvious,” since the presence of another defender means the opportunity could still have been disrupted.
However, there is an exception. If the foul happens inside the penalty area and the defender makes a genuine attempt to play the ball, the referee can downgrade the red card to a yellow.
This is called the “triple punishment” mitigation. The thought behind this is that giving a penalty and a red card is too harsh if the defender was genuinely going for the ball.
In Lacroix’s case, he pulled Cunha’s shirt, did not attempt to play the ball, and had no realistic chance to win the ball.
The offence occurred in the penalty area, and Cunha had a clear path to goal, which ticks all the boxes for DOGSO.
In this case, the referee issued a straight red card and awarded a penalty, which was calmly converted by Bruno Fernandes, a moment that swung the momentum decisively in the home side’s favour.
From that moment, the Red Devils seized control and went on to secure a 2–1 victory, significantly boosting Manchester United’s top four finish hopes.
Justice Or Harsh Reality? The Debate Over Football’s Last-Man Red Card Rule
If all four factors point to an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, and a defender commits a foul to stop it, the player will be shown a red card.
The rule dates back to 1990, when the International Football Association Board (IFAB) introduced a mandatory directive ahead of the World Cup to clamp down on cynical “professional fouls.”
It was officially written into the Laws of the Game in 1991 through amendments to Law XII, now Law 12, to safeguard attacking play and discourage last-man challenges that deliberately deny clear scoring chances.
The DOGSO rule is not perfect, but it forces defenders to think twice before pulling down an attacker who is clean through on goal, and that is exactly what it is supposed to do.
Main Photo
Credit: IMAGO / Sportimage
Recording Date: 01.03.2026
