Michael Stewart has criticized the Scottish Football Association (SFA) for their explanation of Celtic’s penalty at Kilmarnock.
Brendan Rodgers’ team was able to secure all three points by being awarded a last-gasp penalty, which was converted by debutant Kelechi Iheanacho.
After a shot diverted off a Kilmarnock defender and onto the outstretched arm of Lewis Mayo, referee John Beaton sent the case to the VAR monitor and subsequently approved the award.
Stuart Kettlewell, the manager of the home team, was incensed, and it is widely believed that Mayo was unable to take any action as a result of the deflection from the close ranger.
However, the SFA’s explanation, which was broadcast on Sky Sports, was as follows: “The penalty was awarded to the Kilmarnock defender who committed a handball with his arm in an unnatural position.”
“A handball offense is not always rendered invalid by a deflection.” He is unaware of the ball’s trajectory and his arm is elevated in an unnatural position to prevent a shot.
Pundit Stewart was not convinced by any of this and was unable to comprehend the ‘does not negate’ assertion.
He rebuked the governing body and elucidated the reasons he believed they were off point.
In an interview with BBC Sportscene, he stated, “It would be greatly appreciated if they could provide an explanation for why it does not negate in this particular case.”
“To make such a broad statement suggests that we are increasing our efforts.”
“And the hand is in an unnatural position?” Completely, I would disagree with that. The hand is in an unnatural position if the movement does not suggest that the hand should be in that position.
“Currently, he is attempting to cross his leg in order to prevent the shot; his arm is in a completely normal position as a result of the action he has taken.”
“I am astounded that they could make a comment and assert that ‘the deflection doesn’t always negate’ when the ball is deflected from a teammate, a foot away, and the angle of the ball is completely altered.”
According to me, the arm is not in an unnatural position, and proximity and deflection are also factors. I believe that it is an exceptionally severe decision.
“I believe that as soon as John Beaton is sent to the monitor, it becomes challenging for him to turn around and deny a penalty, as it is evident that the arm is struck. However, I would have preferred to believe that the official could have discerned this and made an independent decision.”
“It is evident that this has not been the case, and I have a great deal of empathy for Kilmarnock.” If that decision were rendered against them, I believe that any team would be exceedingly dissatisfied.
Leave a Reply