A statement released by The Scottish FA admits that not all evidence was taken into consideration by a member of its judicial panel during a review involving James Keatings.
The Inverness striker was shown two yellow cards in a Tunnock's Caramel Wafer Cup game against Rangers Colts, the second for simulation.
Inverness appealed the decision following footage of the incident, showing that contact was made between Keatings and the Rangers player resulting in the striker's loss of balance.
READ MORE: Lampard questions VAR after Lo Celso escape
The Highland Club expected the yellow card to be rescinded before the judicial panel decided to uphold the ban.
A statement was released by the club expressing their dismay at the decision which in turn forced further investigation by the SFA into the panel that reviewed the incident.
In a statement from the SFA, it admitted that one of the panel members "did not undertake their obligations with respect to the consideration of all the available evidence" and have decided to review the incident again as it "cannot in this instance consider the tribunal verdict competent".
The member of the panel in question has also been withdrawn from the team of potential future officials.
The full statement-available on the SFA's website-read:
"The Scottish FA’s Chief Executive, Ian Maxwell, has received notification that the tribunal convened to hear the Claim for Wrongful Caution raised by Inverness Caledonian Thistle on behalf of James Keatings failed to implement its duties as per the Judicial Panel Protocol.
"Specifically, one of the panel members has advised that, despite raising no concerns throughout the process, they did not undertake their obligations with respect to the consideration of all the available evidence.
"While the Fast Track Claims process is by definition an appeal, and therefore not open to further consideration, none the less the Chief Executive and Presidential team, Rod Petrie and Mike Mulraney, are unanimous that the tribunal outcome cannot be considered competent in light of the disclosure from the panel member and that the input from that panel member must be withdrawn.
"With that in mind, and only in extremis based on the information provided by the panel member, the determination cannot be considered valid. Therefore, the Judicial Panel Secretary has been instructed to convene a new tribunal and a fresh date will be set in due course.
"The initial outcome is rendered invalid by the acknowledgement of a panel member of their failure to dispose of their duties in respect of section 13.13.4 of the Judicial Panel Protocol and, in particular, the following paragraph:
"The Determination of the Claim shall be made by the Fast Track Tribunal by examining and deliberating upon: (ii) all of the evidence and submissions delivered by the Claimant in support of the Notice of Claim.
"The Scottish FA upholds the independence of the Judicial Panel Protocol but cannot in this instance consider the tribunal verdict competent, based on the admitted failure of a panel member to adhere to the process as outlined.
"The panel member in question has subsequently been withdrawn from the pool of potential panel members for all future tribunals."
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 hereComments are closed on this article