'Without question' - Willie Collum admits Rangers and Celtic VAR errors as Hearts gripes addressed

Rangers should have conceded a penalty kick while Celtic should have been awarded one

Willie Collum has admitted that St Mirren should have had a penalty in their 1-0 defeat by Rangers at Ibrox last month.

Rangers defender Emmanual Fernandez escaped punishment when he stepped on the foot of St Mirren attacker Ismeal Kabia in the box during the first half while the game was still goalless.

The incident was missed by referee Don Robertson and brushed aside by VAR Steven McLean as Rangers went on to secure a last-gasp victory thanks to a stoppage time goal from substitute Bojan Miovski.

Collum, the head of refereeing at the Scottish Football Association, has acknowledged that his officials got it wrong and that a penalty should have been awarded along with a yellow card shown to Fernandez for a "reckless" challenge.

Speaking on the latest VAR Review Show with host Gordon Duncan, he explained: “It should have been a longer check without a doubt. For us this is a penalty kick, without question.

“There will be occasions where attackers in the penalty area will play the ball and then there will be inevitable light contact, softer contact. Here it is quite clear for us that this is a reckless contact.

“This would also fall into the category of reckless, and a yellow card would be expected here for that kind of stepping action onto the foot. It is simple to say that the decision is wrong and we would agree with that.

“We had a discussion with the Premiership managers only the day after this match and we agreed completely and showed the incident and they agreed they’d expect a penalty kick.

“What we have to work with is not only the VAR team about taking more time to check, focusing on the defenders actions in that scenario, we also have to work hard with our on-field referees because we really want these kind of decisions identified live on the pitch.

“I repeat again, there will sometimes be a smaller contact, but this is too heavy. This should have been a foul."

Callum McGregor’s goal bound effort struck the arm of Lukas Fadinger and Collum insisted VAR was wrong not to recommend an on-field review for a spot-kick.

He said: “I have great sympathy for the Motherwell player because I think he is trying to avoid the contact as the shot comes in. He is turning his body away and bringing his leg up to block the ball.

“There is definitely discussion between the referee and VAR about the arm tucked in. I think the elbow is tucked in. But the Motherwell player takes a real risk by his arm out from his body here.

“In our opinion after reviewing this incident, our coaching going forward is a penalty kick should be awarded in this incident.

“The ball travels a fair distance, a clear shot at goal and ultimately when you pause the still image when the ball strikes the arm, it is out and unnatural from the body.”

Collum also explained the thinking behind a disallowed Hearts goal in their 1-1 Premiership draw with Kilmarnock last month.

With the game still goalless at the time, Hearts midfielder Laurent Mendy had a shot on goal that appeared to be going wide, until Kilmarnock defender Cathal McCarthy deflected the ball into his own net.

The ball struck Mendy’s arm after he jumped, which was confirmed by video replays, but McCarthy would have been the scorer were it deemed an own goal. Football laws state a goal should be disallowed if an arm was used by the goalscorer before shooting or in immediate build-up Hearts believe the goal should have stood, as McCarthy would have been the own goal scorer rather than Mendy. However, Collum has strongly backed the decision amid rumbling debate.

He explained: “This decision is fully correct and I'll explain why. Let's look at the law. We spoke about it earlier, about the ball touching the hand, and then the player scores. The ball clearly touches the Hearts player's hand, so we don't need to get into a debate whether it did or not. So he then gains an advantage from that because it's a punishable part of the arm. It's down low, the arm or hand, and he then shoots at goal.

“Where people have been very confused about this decision, absolutely nowhere in law does it talk about the shot being on target, nowhere. We can come back to that. Let's talk about the defender's actions, the Kilmarnock defender. He reacts like any player would, like a goalkeeper would. This shot's coming in. He doesn't know it's hit the Hearts player's hand, so he needs to try his best to save that. It's a saving action and he's unsuccessful.

“The way if you replace him with a goalkeeper and they get a fingertip to it and it goes into the net, people would still say that goal should be disallowed. So let's not get into this debate about, was it going past the post, was it on target? The ball strikes the hand, drops, player shoots, and a goal is scored. So in the laws of the game, this is correctly disallowed.

”We spoke to a few players about this, and every one of them agreed that the Kilmarnock player's actions are the actions of what any defender would do in that position, almost one metre from the goal line.”