The SFA have confirmed that they have responded to Rangers after the Ibrox club asked for an explanation to Alfredo Morelos' disallowed goal at Parkhead on Saturday.
The Gers striker had the ball in the net from a corner but referee Kevin Clancy controversially judged that the Colombian had fouled Hoops right-back Alistair Johnston when it looked like both players were tangling with each other.
After the game Rangers decided to write to Scotland's football governing body to for a full explanation into why the goal did not stand.
In response, the SFA released a statement today reading: "The Scottish FA can also confirm the Referee Operations team have responded to Rangers’ request for an explanation for an on-field decision involving Alfredo Morelos."
Celtic were “very, very lucky” not to fall behind to an Alfredo Morelos goal on Saturday, according to former English top-flight referee Dermot Gallagher.
Reviewing the incident on Sky Sports, Gallagher said: “I think Celtic got very, very lucky. Both players are grappling. For me, best let it go.”
Video assistant referee Nick Walsh did not call Kevin Clancy to his monitor and former Scottish top-flight official Stuart Dougal claimed there was no basis for intervention from Clydesdale House.
Dougal told BBC Scotland: “VAR can’t intervene here because it’s not seen as a clear and obvious error.
“If there is something much more blatant, if there is no contact whatsoever, then of course VAR can step in and ask the referee to have a look at it again.
“But where they are looking at that clip and it’s a bit 50-50, 60-40, depending on which side of the fence you’re on, VAR under the current protocols can’t get involved.”
Dougal dismissed suggestions Clancy could have allowed the goal to stand to allow the VAR official to have a closer look.
“The simple reason for that is if Kevin doesn’t call that the way he has and is relying on VAR, and VAR says to him, basically you’re wrong, then it means Kevin is wrong,” he said. “By not making a decision, you can still be wrong.
“It’s important that the referee team call the shots as they see them and if they need VAR to ‘rescue’ them, then that’s what can happen.”
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