Hate the way it's set up, it seems that the smaller and or the struggling teams usually have less possession, meaning they are often on the bad end of the VAR stick.

The endangering an opponent and reckless challenge 'interpretations' need reviewed by all including representation from professional players.
As does the contact above the ankle.

I heard Shankland say it was explained at start of season to all that a challenge like that would be a red. I don't buy that a challenge like Fatah's was even discussed.

Absolute nonsense rules backed up by slowed down replays to find THE moneyshot.

I am not picking on Celtic but the challenge on Ferry may not have been above the ankle but it did endanger an opponent and could be argued as reckless.

Regarding Fatah, neither him or his opponent were going in to the tackle recklessly or with an intent to endanger. Same with the St Mirren v Dundee.
It was simply 2 players doing what they are paid to do and that was to win the ball.
It could be argued that every player could be endangering themselves each time they tackle. In todays world if they did hurt themselves a la McPake then rather than see it for what it was, it wouldn't surpise me if VAR finds an angle that could get the opponent sent off.

Camara's actions were stupid and that motion deserved a red but action needs taken against the player falling down clutching his face when clearly not injured.

For me, VAR should not step in other than offsides. Coaches should get 2 challenges and when they challenge, they should play VAR at full speed always.
Let the ref make a decision on that as to if he made a clear and obvious mistake.

VAR should spend more time looking at intent and indeed the reactions of the players involved. This is where the ex professional comes in.
Does the player tackling go in with the intent of 'leaving a mark'
Does the player tackled stay down needlessly then pop up and sprint.

VAR needs reviewed big time.

Last edited by Danzaa (01/2/2026 6:02 pm)