Three big VAR calls, and they all went against Coventry. Frank Lampard must have walked under a ladder.

There is a strong argument that the Sky Blues should have been awarded a penalty just before half-time for a hair pull by James Tarkowski on Caleb Yirenkyi.

The law was relaxed at the start of this season to say not all hair pulling should be a red card, after three players were sent off last season.

The idea is that not all contact with the hair should be an offence, and it needs to be an act with excessive force for a player to be sent off.

But of course for a penalty the actions of Tarkowski only need to be a foul, not violent conduct. But if accidental, it should not be a spot-kick.

Did the video assistant referee, Tim Wood, concentrate too much on a possible handball by Tarkowski within the move?

It looked like there was a movement of Tarkowski's arm to pull the hair which should have led to a VAR intervention. Coventry probably should have received a penalty.

Then early in the second half came a possible penalty as Vitalii Mykolenko clipped Taiwo Awoniyi.

The camera positioned level with the edge of the penalty area did seem to show the contact was outside the area, and the VAR cannot intervene to award a free-kick.

It might have been a soft VAR intervention even if the potential foul was inside the box.

Perhaps most controversially was Thierno Barry's second goal, with the ball appearing to touch the striker's arm before it went into the goal.

We have seen this kind of situation a few times this season, most notably when Nottingham Forest had a goal against Tottenham disallowed.

This time, the VAR decided he did not have the necessary conclusive proof to be sure the ball touched the hand.

Yet it does seem like there is a change of direction after Barry's hand touches the ball, and that was the reason it goes into the goal. It looked like handball should have been given on video review.

Three decisions, and Coventry can feel aggrieved about two of them.