In Celtic’s recent match at Fir Park, Kyogo Furuhashi played a killer though ball to Jota in the 59th minute. The Portuguese ran on before chipping Liam Kelly in the Motherwell goal. It was a thing of beauty.
The linesman raised his flag upon the goal being scored, and the usual check occurred as happens with all goals now under Video Assistant Referee (VAR) protocols.
After just over one minute, David Dickinson (the VAR) advised Willie Collum, the on-field whistler, to disallow the goal for offside.
Remember, VAR is a person operating a system, not a piece of technology independent of human thought.
Although disappointing, it was not a surprise decision as in real time it had looked an incredibly tight call.
VAR Evidence
What initially aroused some concern from the Celtic support was that no “standard” image was produced by the broadcaster showing the definitive parallel lines indicating clearly the nature of the offside.
What does that mean?
Here is an example of Heart of Midlothian’s second goal against Celtic from Lawrence Shankland, illustrating perfectly how the technology and VAR are to operate correctly:
You can clearly see there are two lines indicating the furthest most point of the body of the attacker (a part of the body he can score with) in green versus that of the last defender in blue (or in this case the ball as the eventual scorer is behind it).
The VAR uses the technology (a camera plus the Hawkeye system) to position the lines and make a HUMAN decision as to whether an offside offence has occurred.
In the Motherwell versus Celtic match, for Jota’s “goal”, we got this:
As you can see there are no clear green or blue lines and no indication of the distance between them. To the naked eye, it looks a very tight call.
So far as we know, this image, used in the broadcast available on Celtic TV and shown by Sportscene, was the image used by the Dickinson to make the human decision to definitively tell Collum he should disallow the goal.
It transpired that the cameras available at the ground were all operating correctly but that the crucial 18-yard line camera was not facing the action as Furuhashi passed to Jota, but instead trained on the dugout area.
Alan Burrows, the Motherwell Chief Executive Officer (CEO) took to Twitter to confirm:
He confirmed an “alternative angle” was used resulting in the image above.
As Steven Thompson said on BBC Scotland’s Sportscene that night (at 15:10):
“That’s a very difficult angle to look at and definitively say off or on.”
Given the available evidence, Celtic are reported to have asked the SFA for clarification on the making of this decision.
SFA Statement
Where this story really begins is with the statement issued by the SFA on Friday 11th November, two days after the game. in response to Celtic’s query.
It will be no surprise to Henry McLeish who completed a comprehensive report on the state of Scottish football in 2010 that the statement issued by the SFA is amateurish in extreme.
A competent Public Relations expert would surely blush – throwing a broadcasting partner under the proverbial bus whilst failing to take ANY responsibility for delivery of VAR for which THEY are the accountable party. The camera operators are responsible for the operation of cameras, the SFA are accountable for the end-to-end delivery of the VAR service of which cameras are one part.
More importantly, the statement confirmed two important facts.
- That the decision was made within the VAR room – “the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position”. Dickinson decided it was an offside, not Collum.
- That despite the camera that should have been used to make the decision being unavailable (trained on the dugout on “Ange-watch” no doubt), the “calibrated” Hawkeye technology nevertheless allowed a decision to be made.
Worryingly, the statement also revealed an ignorance of the laws of football, a stunning achievement in a statement from the governing body accountable for refereeing standards:
“the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position”.
A player is deemed offside at the moment the ball is passed to him/her, not at the point at which (s)he receives the ball.
Did Dickinson make the decision based on where Jota was relative to the last defender when he received the ball? Does he not know the offside law?
Surely not.
It is very difficult then to untangle such a woeful, lazy and inaccurate attempt at communication.
But it was a very revealing statement, but not in the way the author surely intended.
How Should It Work?
Before we get into how the decision making was handled to arrive at the offside call, and the implications of the subsequent SFA statement, a brief consideration of what should have happened.
The SFA statement infers that the Hawkeye system is so sophisticated, it can arrive at a decision based on either 18-yard line camera:
“Hawk-Eye technology is designed to calibrate an accurate offside decision from either of the two 18-yard line camera positions”
“Calibrate an accurate offside decision” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
The reality is more prosaic and less sci-fi.
An offside decision is the harmony of four factors:
- A camera providing a visual image of an event;
- Hawkeye technology establishing the positioning of objects;
- A human operator creates indicative lines based on the positioning of said objects (ball and players) to assist a decision and to inform the broadcaster and public; and
- A human VAR makes a definitive decision based on the compiled evidence.
The English Premier League have a helpful guide here. Always remember, when it says “VAR” they are talking about a person not a machine.
The bottom line is that Hawkeye on its own cannot determine offside as the SFA statement infers, it requires an ultimate human arbiter (the VAR).
Dickinson decided definitively on the offside decision based on the image presented above, unless there is another image they have not yet shared.
What Should Dickinson Have Done?
Given the circumstances – a failed camera system and imperfect evidence available – what should Dickinson as VAR have done?
I believe he had three options in this situation.
Do Nothing
This is always an option in any risk management scenario, but what does it mean in this context?
As James McFadden speculates on the Sportscene analysis linked to above, given the linesman put his flag up maybe they reverted to the original on-field call?
If I was in Dickinson’s position, the camera crucial to this decision has failed, the image available is inconclusive, I would have said to Collum:
“Willie, we’ve had an issue with the tech. We cannot make a definitive call. My advice is to go with what you guys on the field think.”
To me, this is honest (acknowledges there were issues limiting their ability to perform their duties), practical and fair. I would not have a problem with this and whilst the technical glitch is irksome, put it down to “teething problems”, learn the lessons, say sorry and on we go.
It is also sensible – the new system has failed; the backup option is the old system – referee and linesman decide.
The result would likely have been to disallow the goal and fair enough, I doubt many would have quibbled with this outcome.
In PR terms it was an easy “out”.
We know from the SFA statement that this is not what happened.
The statement is very clear.
The VAR (Dickinson) determined Jota was offside (when he received the ball – lol).
Follow Procedures
If you cannot do the “right” thing (in this case – be honest), do what is says in the manual.
For the 2021/22 season, the English Premier League adjusted their guidance to VARs on judging offsides to bring the EPL in line with the UEFA Champions League and protocols used at Euro 2020. Mike Riley describes the changes in this Sky Sports article.
ESPN reported the changes affecting offside in more detail here.
Encouragingly, the SFA appears to have picked up on the EPL learnings and adopted the following protocols for judging offside from the get-go – this from their own guidance:
The crucial part is
“if the two lines (blue and green as above) do overlap, the on-field decision (to flag offside) will be overturned, and the goal will stand”.
What that means in reality is that the benefit of any doubt should be given to the attacking side.
That means, the question in the VAR’s mind should be “can I confirm that the player if offside”?
Can you confirm Jota is offside from this image?
I asked an expert, the Yorkshire Whistler (a Sheffield Wednesday supporting professional referee from Yorkshire), and he could not confirm that Jota was offside based on this image.
When I presented the factual evidence to him without comment (the image used by VAR, the live game footage and the SFA guidance on offsides), his response was:
“Sticking purely to my remit of analysing what evidence is available and presented to decide on the outcome of on field refereeing decisions made, I would have to say the Celtic player is on the wrong end of a marginal decision.
To my eyes, he looks level with the defender as the pass is played and I would have applied the ‘benefit of doubt’ in favour of the attacker, as per the SFAs own guidelines you kindly attached.”
A verifiably neutral referee, in this instance, would have allowed the goal to stand.
Dickinson chose not to follow the SFA guidelines.
Offside Decision
The third option is the path Dickinson chose.
Eschewing doing the right thing (“we don’t know, you decide Willie”) and the correct thing by the book (benefit of the doubt to the attacker if you cannot establish definitively an offside decision) he told Collum it was definitively offside and to disallow the goal.
The SFA statement confirms this.
What Next?
Which brings us back to the SFA statement, which is the real story.
It doesn’t really matter whether Jota was or was not in fact onside.
What matters is that it appears the governing body may once again be misleading Celtic and the entire Scottish football community.
The SFA are being less than clear as to how the technology supporting VAR is used.
They are supporting a decision that is supposed to be definitive but based on all the available evidence, could not possibly be so and indeed the decision-making process did not appear to follow the SFA guidelines.
Oh, and they are ignorant regarding the offside laws of football.
The likes of Gordon Parks in the Sunday Mail Scotland will no doubt cry “moon howling paranoia”.
But how can that be so when there is a clear and irrefutable pattern of deceit from the SFA in their dealings with Celtic?
- The late Jim Farry (SFA CEO) lied to Celtic about Jorge Cadete’s delayed registration;
- Hugh Dallas (Head of Refereeing Development) and Dougie McDonald lied to Neil Lennon and Celtic regarding the withdrawal of a penalty to Celtic in a game against Dundee United that cost a young linesman his career;
- The SFA through President Campbell Ogilvie were aware of the existence and operation of EBTs at Rangers and did nothing;
- The SFA were aware Rangers had overdue tax payables to HMRC and were not eligible for a UEFA license in the 2011/12 season but issued one anyway.
This is all a matter of public record. The most senior officials in Scottish football administration have mislead Celtic for decades. And these are only the events we know about.
All this means a lack of trust.
So, when a seemingly trivial incident like an offside occurs, and the SFA feel moved to issue a statement that raises more questions than it answers, many are moved to doubt whether they are being told the truth by the governing body.
If there is a definitive image showing Jota was offside, this can be quickly put to bed. If there are protocols that support the decision-making process used here, issue it.
Otherwise, doubt remains that Celtic have been lied too again.
And that is a problem.
Over to you, Michael Nicholson.
Acknowledgement is due to David (@djquinn) for helping me understand the VAR processes and procedures and his excellent thread summarises this.
Excellent analysis. Transparency & the Scottish fitba authorities are two opposites.
Excellent article, well done for putting this together so well. The frustrating thing is information like this is suppressed. A long time ago the bias within the Scottish football system was brought to the attention of Frank Bough who co-hosted Nationwide with Angela Rippon. Their remit was to air injustices. They took it to UEFA but unfortunately nothing was done. Surely in this day and age of calling out racism etc a body of authority could investigate the sickness in Scottish football system.
VAR is showing them up to be the cheating incompetent barstewards that they are!
A brilliantly written, clear calm and logical look back on the process around the Jota decision. As is often the case, if they had only been honest post match….. But having stirred the Hornets nestvit really is incumbent on Celtic to challenge it. Celtic could do worse than simply ask the SFA to pour a coffee and read your article!
Thanks
The issue is the role of the VAR official Dickinson and the subsequent SFA statement. All focus should be on those two things.
Take it to court, every case mentioned, let’s highlight to the world of football that no person or organisation can hide from corruption using the bluff of ignorance to justify.
Keep recording these var for the archives and tape all communication on var.
A case of Soccergate.
Excellent read, well thought out and laid out, thank you very much
HH?
Brilliant analysis and expertly broken down and explained. Come on Celtic speak up
Doesn’t the V in VAR stand for Video?
Yes
Video Assistant Referee – sorry i should have clarified
it refers to a person although some also use the term for toe process of reviewing decisions using a remote operator plus some technology
Sorry – I should have clarified 🙂
The article (in the second paragraph) says “Virtual Assistant Referee”.
Great article by the way – definitely something we should chase up as a club.
Thanks it should be Video and i have corrected
Outstanding work Alan. The media’s dismissal of the evidence is expected and one that I take very little notice of. I do hope that Celtic pick up on this themselves and do something.
The continuing Cinch saga, these “honest mistakes” all impact on our commercial performance. If we do not address it, it will impact on our footballing performance as we will no doubt see Ange getting fed up with having to fight with a hand behind his back while others have loaded gloves.
To lose Ange in such a way will hit the club in sales etc. I myself have struggled with the decision to renew my seat for the past couple of years due to the treatment of Res 12 and the shareholders who have done so much work to present the smoking gun.
Great piece Alan !
An unintended consequence for sure, but the reality is that the sfa are actually now publicly confirming what Celtic fans have always suspected. That Celtic are repeatedly disadvantaged by referees in Scotland. (Your own analysis with the Yorkshire whistler also evidences this in a sensible and consistent manner).
Watching them twist themselves in knots whilst trying to justify is hilarious, but time for serious change is now.
Complete transparency, consistent implementation of their own rules and what ever steps needed to limit any bias in decision making must be implemented.
As you said …. Celtic, your move
One way or another this fraternity will be called out.
The only organisation in the world to be devoid of Africans, Mongolians and Frenchmen: anyone outside Lanarkshire really.
IMO, Jota’s ruled offside goal against Motherwell, @ Firpark recently, was onside.
The rules are, it’s wither the player was in an offside position, when the through
ball was played. & On that occasion, Jota was clearly onside, as the playback from
the match TV Cameras proved, that said goal was onside, & should have been
awarded a goal. I also heard that the so called VAR official that Evening, was none
other than the Ref against Hearts @ Tyncastle recently, when he did not award us
a penalty, when everyone could clearly see, that the Hearts defender clearly handled
the ball in their 18 yard box, another blatant denial by the honest mistakes mob.
While we are on the subject of dodgy awards, Ross County’s penalty goal against
us recently, should have not been given. The replay showed, that Matt was outside
our 18 yard box, when the bouncing ball, grassed the top of his arm. & the rules
clearly states, that if it’s either a deliberate attempt, or frinstance if the players
arms/hands are in an unnatural position. Another dodgy decision, awarded against
us by the “Honest Mistakes Mob”. VAR in Scottish Football, is becoming a laughing
stock around the Globe, & the honest mistakes mob, are being proven to be cheats
& liars, & that’s including the SFA, that’s for sure, we digress for the time being.
Jim
I’d focus on the statement and the behaviour of the VAR Dickinson
At this stage, whether it was or was not offside is largely irrelevant
Alan, we all know & have witness on numerous occasions, as mentioned,
that the refs & SFA in Scotland, are using VAR, to try & cover up their
blatant cheating mistakes & lies, it’s a fact, & it has now been going on
for nearly one hundred years, if you look back over our Club’s History.
I remember nearly twenty years ago, when MON was @ the helm, during
his time, in one particular Season during that time, every Club that Old Co
where playing, had a player sent off, & Old Co where awarded a penalty.
In fact it got that blatant during the course of that Season, that UEFA stepped
in, & had a word in the SFA’s ear, that the said cheating going on was blatantly
obvious, in the New Year of said Season for example. As John ‘Jock’ Stein once
said, we will not only beat the opposition, we will also beat the so called officials
& VAR as well, by playing them off the park, & being more clinical in the final
third of the pitch, that’s for sure. Hail ! Hail ! & COYBIG Alan. 🙂 🙂
In the New Year, of said cheating Season when MON was @ the helm,
it was less blatantly obvious, however it did not entirely stop.
Absolutely brilliant analysis so sadly lacking in MSM
An absolutely brilliant piece loaded with facts. It will still require a ‘human’ to fire the bullet. As you so rightly say, over to you Michael.
Your point about whether he was offside or not being almost irrelevant is the key. Hawker absolutely cannot, despite the sfa statement, determine offside from the other 18 yard line. Crucial body parts could be invisible to the camera (remember it is a visual system) due to the players’ bodies being in the way.
The correct course of action I think if the camera system had failed was to rever to onfoeld decision and call offside. For me it is incredibly telling that this is not what the sfa say happened. Either they are incredibly incredibly incompetent or they genuinely feel so baove the reach of criticism that they don’t care.
Hopeless or hubris, is basically the only option we have in this situation. It is, from the footage I’ve seen, a very marginal call and maybe Jota’s head is offside, maybe. It’s close enough that whilst we would have been annoyed with the decision it could be argued and folk would revert to the AR having a better view than the cameras (which he certainly would have) and so he was probably right. That this “easy out” wasn’t taken really really worries me. As it does that Collum doesn’t get to review the footage. Perhaps his own anger at being left so exposed by the VAR explains why they had to fudge together this pathetic statement.
I foresee onfield referee reviewing an awful lot more of the footage when VAR involved going forward. Certainlu if I was left in Collum’s position I would be absolutely insisting on seeing the footage myself in future.
An excellent article. One of, if not THE best I have read by you. I would hope ( but not necessarily expect) that Celtic would confront the SFA with the many points raised in this fine article. What a pity we don`t have anyone in the MSSM ( Main Stream Scottish Media)willing to produce something similar.
thanks James but i’d rather spend my time writing dull stats-based articles assessing performance! 🙂
I’d be surprised if Celtic took this any further unless there are more incidents to support the argument. We are correct to raise these issues when we are winning games so as not to be accused of sour grapes. However, one day it may cost us points (against the 2nd placed team??) and where do Celtic go from there? We will be accused of paranoia and being bad losers. The sooner Celtic make something official of this the better, but I doubt they have the balls.
I wouldn’t worry about what others think of us when those doing the thinking carry little genuine respect
Fat chance of that James. I also noted that of the 12 SPFL teams only one has avoided having a penalty given against them this season. I wonder who that would be?
are we still waiting for the ”lines” for the late goal Abada scored at tynecastle.
Yeah, VAR did not even bother going over that point you raised, passage
of play.
I would also ask, Why go to the expense of two 18yard line cameras if one is sufficient? , I believe somebody or some body are being disingenuous.
Ok. However, have you contacted Michael Nicholson with your article.
The more evidence he has the better.
In the light of all the lies the SFA have told, I say ONCE AGAIN – gather all the evidence and call in the LAWYERS. Otherwise, get someone with the balls (like wee Fergus) to do it. The fans put in loads of money (including myself who is a STH) to see an honest and fair game. I am sick of my club being cheated. Other fans of other clubs are too. Action, not words is needed. One club is benefitting from all this and guess which club that is. They have the patronage of the SFA.
Last thing Celtic or any club would want is to be pestered by some bloke off a website! In all seriousness it will be interesting to see what Celtic do next as i am sure they have the same info i have.
Excellent article and agree with the Celtic board need to get involved. Last time Mr McCann did it, well, we know the outcome!
Moonhowlers like Parks tell us we weren’t paranoid enough……with the intriguing question, what exactly has been kept in the bias vaults at the SFA?
Well researched and explained no doubt SFA will put thier heads in the sand and hope it goes away,keep up the good work. Digger
Most excellent analysis of the Jota situation leading to the core issue created by events over the past 22 years – total lack of trust.
I have a blog on that issue ready with a suggested way forward.
Thanks Paddy. I look forward to it. I am not sure why those call “paranoia” when so much of this is in plain sight (i do know).
Celtic could yet perhaps ask for the entire feed from the camera at the other end of the stadium! It may not have been recorded as it was a live feed but then again, it might have been. This way, we’d know for sure if the camera man had been looking elsewhere as has been suggested! What has the cameraman said in his own defence? What was he focusing on at that precise moment? Human error is allowed of course but was he looking at a pretty face in the crowd or was it a football related distraction? Like your own suggestion of it being big Ange! This is one further line of enquiry Celtic should explore.
Great piece Alan.
I think we’ll need to give them the benefit of the doubt on the “received the ball in an offside position” statement since technically a player isn’t offside until they actually receive the ball.
“If there is a definitive image showing Jota was offside, this can be quickly put to bed”
Is that the case? Surely they cant use other images when making a VAR decision?
Celtic must be so unlucky with the honest mistakes as out of the 13 penalties var have given 4 of them against celtic going by figures it should be around 1.1 per team, Sevco 12 have nil against, celtic have 1 penalty for Sevco 3?, there is total bias through all channels and broadcasts, clyde 1 on Saturday Hugh Kevin’s started to mention how it was funny that all these bad decisions go against Celtic to be brought down by D Currie who says it was not var it was poor refereeing, and shut down the conversation, var was involved therefor I guess two poor referee decisions, clyde 1 is getting as bad as sportscene ( ie Rangers News) no mention of keeper picking ball up twice again referee error, they don’t want mainstream to see the blatant cheating, there have been 5 other major decisions this season before var got involved, we keep hearing you are looking through green tinted glasses which I believe can be true when looking at certain 50/ 50 decisions or even 60/40 decisions, this is why so many go against celtic as we keep getting told its the colour of the glasses you look through. Var could be judged by Welsh referees and in turn we could get our referees to judge thier teams, only fair – unless one of thier teams ware green strips. Celtic should call it out and whilst at it ask of McLean working with Rangers youth constitutes a conflicts as some of them are now in first team, and he has had personal working relationship with them.
I am sure they have the same info as you as well. However, it is good to let them know how we feel.
In saying that they have someone who reads these sites for them anyway. I am just fed up with my club’s impotence on all this.
I’m now digitally paranoid
But are you digitally paranoid enough?
What monitor was the VAR official watching when Jota was “receiving” the pass from Furuhashi?
Is it not the case that all live VAR cameras should have a dedicated monitor to view the ongoing football action enabling an immediate reaction to any disputed call or on field incident.
How can a supposed VAR camera be used to look over the technical areas and this be unnoticed by the reviewer at the time.
Is the reviewer incompetent or is something else going on?
Seems a totally implausible and feeble response from the SFA.
Should Celtic or someone notify Hawkeye Sports that the SFA are ridiculing their system by indulging in this mush?
Maybe Hawkeye will sue for bringing their technology into disrepute.
Charles Green’s vice chairman at sevco fled to Pakistan so he could not be tried for fraud. He is on record saying he would not receive a fair trial in Scotland as both sevco and the SFA are controlled by the OO.
The image of Shankland showing VAR working well doesn’t for my imperfectly registering eyes, as it looks to be drawn on his foot, but his knee, torso and head look further forward.
Not suggesting it was offside, it just adds to the confusion. In England they use dotted lines down from the furthest forward part of the body, which helps, as a lot of people simply focus on foot position. Not sure if that’s the same in Scotland.
wrt SFA statement referring to receiving the ball may just be clumsy phraseology, as I believe VAR works backwards from there to when the ball was played.
Even if that was the case, it’s appalling that in trying to clarify, they simply add to the confusion!
Final point, YW states that can’t determine offside from published pictures. VAR will have sharper, more focussed, tracking, different angles (normally but debatable here).
Obviously, not available to YW but Celtic should be demanding to see the claimed clear evidence (if there’s nothing to hide, justice must be seen to be done etc).
The Observer 2005
“Players,managers and fans complain about referees’ decisions so often that you wonder if they can do anything
right. Sometimes,though,it appears they may have a point.
Hoyzer was a German referee who was found guilty of fixing matches by sending off players and giving dodgy
penalties.
He was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison in November 2005 ”
Under the name Conflict of Interest I posted the above in the comments section at the end of a Keevins piece.
It disappeared very, very QUICKLY !
I believe we have racist/hate crime legislation in this country and I think Celtic have a cast-iron case that they
are discriminated against as a result of the ethnicity and religious beliefs of a sizeable proportion of their
support Forensic examination of historical footballing facts eg penalties awarded,red cards given and not
given,refs who are repeatedly harsh to a certain team whilst being very helpful to another particular
team etc.
I have often wondered why Celtic have been silent about this for so long and find myself thinking is there some
kind of sub-text at play here ? Kompromat ? Lawwell ?
I found it interesting that Collum had his arm raised above his head (a la,indicating an indirect free kick) perhaps frantically trying to alert the assistant referee to raise his flag to signal an offside offence had occurred as the play developed.
Maybe,if Celtic decide to pursue this,then whoever takes this forward should ask the SFA to enquire of the bold William why his hand was in an unnatural position.
If we let them slither out of this we,as a club,deserve all we get but our fans are already close to the point of protesting this shitshow outside Celtic Park.
Perhaps the threat of a boycott of Christmas merchandise will focus the minds of the powers that be in the boardroom.
William – he had his hand raised because the on-field linesman originally flagged for offside when the goal was scored. Dickinson confirmed this, in bis eyes. Collum did not know at the time what the “evidence” was Dickinson was dealing with.
I’m sure the photograph l saw showed Collum with his arm raised just after the ball had left Kyogo’s foot,not after Jota had put the ball in the net.
Perhaps someone may be able to source the foto concerned.
It struck me as odd because it implied to my suspicious side that he may have been signalling to the assistant referee to flag for offside as it was obvious to everyone it was a marginal decision even as Kyogo played the ball forward.
I don’t care if people say l’m paranoid because l have every reason to suspect skullduggery as this mob have plenty of form.
l’ve been called worse.
Ps,l forgot to mention beforehand,outstanding article,l have forwarded it to a lot of my contacts.
Brilliant piece Alan I’ve said for years that the sixth floor at Hampden needs gutted from top to bottom it’s the only way we’ll get a level playing field. The SFA and SPFL and the referees association are as corrupt as they come and the only way it’ll change is for the fans to call for change as the club’s haven’t got any appetite for it. How else do you explain Neil Doncaster coming out and saying Rangers are the same club despite being liquidated that told me everything I needed to know about the governance of the game here. There’s only one club pandered to in Scotland and it’s certainly not Celtic. Since VAR came in on 21st October there’s been at least one contentious decision in every Celtic game and the “honest mistakes” defence can no longer cut the mustard as it’s abundantly clear that Celtic are refereed to a different standard than the rest of Scottish football. I think sites like yours that continue to challenge these ridiculous decisions against our club will leave the SFA and SPFL no hiding place but Celtic as a club have to threaten litigation or things will never change. How ironic is it that we’re paying the lions share for VAR only for it to be used to shaft us in every game we’ve played since its inception in Scottish football, surely that can’t be lost on the club.
The line displayed in the Jota picture shall henceforth be known as the “Mason Dickinson Line”.
lol
Brilliant! ha ha
This is a really excellent piece of work, Alan. Congratulations and thank you.
I also enjoyed the follow up conversation on the podcast, as ever, including Enda’s contribution: an antiquated old boys’ club (amateurish) ethos in Football Associations is hardly unique to Scotland. I have no doubt that the FAI is every bit as bad in that regard, and that were we to shine the torch on any number of equivalents across the continent, we’d spot similar patters (particularly those in smaller countries with roots going back over a century).
But, to ape and abuse the words of Stephen Stills: you fix the one you’re with!