Kris Boyd has branded VAR in Scotland as an "absolute shambles" as he slaughtered the technology over "inconsistencies".
The former Rangers striker launched into a rant on the controversial technology after Ross County's Alex Iacovitti was penalised for a handball against Celtic.
The defender was competing with Cameron Carter-Vickers for a header when the ball appeared to strike his arm.
After a VAR check Willie Collum awarded a penalty to the visitors in Dingwall.
It was a decision that split the Sky Sports panel with James McFadden insisting the correct decision had been reached but Boyd questioning "inconsistency" in decisions.
Asked for his view on the penalty decision, McFadden explained: "We didn't see it in normal time, you get a chance to see it again. There might be an argument over whether it's natural or unnatural but it's a penalty kick.
"You can't have your arm up when you're jumping to head the ball.
🍀 JOTA FROM THE SPOT!
— Sky Sports Scotland (@ScotlandSky) April 2, 2023
Celtic are 1-0 up after a VAR check for handball. Andy Walker says the penalty is 'ridiculous', do you agree? pic.twitter.com/ItNbeM8rDf
"As soon as you put your arm out and make that motion to header the ball, then if it strikes your arm it's a penalty kick.
"You can't have it outstretched like that in the box, so it's a penalty.
"It's why VAR was introduced and we've got to the right decision."
But Boyd was less positive over the VAR intervention in the match as he insisted people are still discussing the tech "for the wrong reasons".
He said: "I'm just bemused. When you go back to before the international break, Andy Considine's against Kilmarnock which was clearer than that and you can't give a penalty there.
"Look, we were all for VAR coming in to start with and everything but you have got to be honest, it has been an absolute shambles hasn't it?
READ MORE: Michael Beale hints at Rangers recruitment in Celtic preview statement
"I think the inconsistency from the whole thing is why people are still speaking about it for the wrong reasons.
"You look at the one at Kilmarnock that wasn't given, that one is given. You don't know what you're turning up to, do you? Let's go to the break."
He continued: "You don't know what you are going to get, do you? It's the inconsistency some refs will do it, some refs in the VAR truck will give it and some won't.
"I think that's where I'm glad I'm sitting here and I'm not a manager because I think when you look at some of the decisions that have been given you'd be going off your head.
"[It's] Really, really frustrating."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel