🚨Sky Sports Criticises Officials After Reviewing VAR Footage From St. Johnstone Vs Celtic
Sky Sports has sparked a fresh refereeing debate after pundits closely examined the controversial footage from Celtic’s 1–0 victory over St Johnstone — and the discussion has left supporters asking one huge question: DID VAR GET IT WRONG?
Celtic left McDiarmid Park with all three points.
Mika Baur scored his first goal for the club.
Martin O’Neill’s side maintained their perfect start to the Scottish Premiership season.
Six games.
Six wins.
But that is not the moment dominating the conversation.
Instead, attention has turned towards an incident involving Haissem Hassan.
And after Sky Sports showed the footage again, the debate became even louder.
Because what appeared to be a straightforward decision suddenly looked much more complicated when the incident was slowed down and examined from different angles.
THE MOMENT THAT HAS EVERYONE TALKING
Celtic thought they had doubled their advantage during the second half.
Hassan’s effort found the net after Sebastian Tounekti’s cross was judged to have gone out of play before Kasper Høgh headed the ball back across goal.
The assistant referee immediately ruled that the ball had crossed the line.
The goal was therefore disallowed.
VAR then reviewed the decision.
But rather than overturning the original call, the decision stood.
Sky Sports later replayed the footage and asked whether the available evidence actually proved that the ball had completely crossed the line.
That is where the controversy exploded.
Because if the footage cannot conclusively establish that the ball was out, should the original decision really have remained untouched?
That became the central argument.
And it divided the Sky Sports pundits.
“DID I JUST HEAR THAT?”
Kris Boyd was particularly critical of the decision.
The former Rangers striker questioned whether the ball had genuinely gone out of play and made it clear that he believed the footage suggested otherwise.
James McFadden, however, took a different position.
His argument was based around the threshold required for VAR to intervene.
If the footage does not provide conclusive evidence that the original decision was wrong, then VAR cannot simply overturn it because the replay creates doubt.
That distinction became the heart of the debate.
And suddenly the conversation moved beyond Celtic.
It became another argument about the effectiveness of VAR in Scottish football.
Because supporters are increasingly asking:
If VAR cannot settle an incident like this, what exactly is it there for?
CELTIC FANS WERE NOT HAPPY
Celtic supporters watching the discussion had plenty to say.
For some, the issue was not simply whether the ball had crossed the line.
It was the fact that the technology appeared incapable of providing a definitive answer.
One moment could potentially decide whether a goal stands.
Yet the system still relies heavily on camera angles and interpretation.
That is exactly what frustrated many supporters.
One fan reaction would sum up the mood perfectly:
“So we have VAR, but still don’t have the footage to tell us what actually happened?”
Another asked:
“Why are we still debating whether the ball was out when we have technology designed to settle these decisions?”
And then came the bigger question:
Was the assistant referee simply given too much protection by the VAR process?
SKY SPORTS REVIEW CHANGES THE CONVERSATION
The most uncomfortable part for the officials was arguably the replay itself.
When viewers watch a controversial decision once at full speed, there can be uncertainty.
Slow it down.
Freeze the frame.
Show another angle.
Then another.
Suddenly the situation looks completely different.
That was what happened with the Hassan incident.
The Sky Sports discussion demonstrated just how divided experts could be when looking at the same footage.
And that is precisely why the decision has become such a talking point.
If respected former players cannot agree after multiple replays, what does that say about the original decision?
For critics of the officiating, it was another example of the limitations of VAR.
For those defending the officials, it was evidence that the technology should not overturn an on-field decision without clear proof.
MARTIN O’NEILL HAS ALREADY BEEN CRITICAL OF VAR
The controversy comes at a particularly interesting time for Celtic.
Martin O’Neill has already expressed frustration with VAR and officiating following earlier incidents this season.
After Celtic’s recent victory over St Mirren, the manager questioned the accuracy of VAR’s offside technology following two disallowed Celtic goals.
O’Neill even raised concerns about the precision of the lines being drawn.
That makes the latest incident even more significant.
Because Celtic have now found themselves involved in another major VAR discussion only days later.
And while O’Neill was able to celebrate another victory, the underlying issue has not disappeared.
BUT CELTIC STILL WON
There is an important part of this story that cannot be ignored.
Celtic won.
And they deserved credit for finding a way through a difficult match.
Mika Baur scored in the 52nd minute, finishing from close range after good work involving Haissem Hassan.
It was Baur’s first Celtic goal.
And it proved decisive.
The champions were not at their fluent best, but they managed the game and protected their lead.
St Johnstone created opportunities, particularly in the first half.
Joel Cotterill forced an important save from debutant Celtic goalkeeper Sam Johnstone.
The hosts continued pushing after falling behind.
But Celtic survived.
And that is perhaps why this controversy has not turned into an outright crisis.
The result remains.
The three points remain.
The perfect league record remains.
But the questions around the officiating remain too.
“WHAT IF CELTIC NEEDED THAT GOAL?”
This is where the debate becomes uncomfortable.
Imagine Celtic had been trailing 1–0.
Imagine Hassan’s disallowed goal had been the equaliser.
Would the conversation be completely different?
Absolutely.
Instead of discussing whether Celtic had been fortunate to leave Perth with three points, supporters would be talking about potentially dropped points.
That is why every VAR decision matters.
A controversial call in a 4–0 victory may be forgotten.
A controversial call in a title-deciding match can become part of Scottish football history.
And Celtic know that better than most.
THE OFFICIALS NOW FACE THE SPOTLIGHT
The match officials were:
Referee Matthew MacDermid.
VAR Grant Irvine.
Assistant VAR Duncan Williams.
The decision-making team had the technology available to review the incident.
But the final decision remained unchanged.
That means the debate is not simply about whether the assistant referee made a mistake.
It is about whether VAR had enough evidence to correct the mistake if one had been made.
And that is a much bigger issue.
Because VAR was introduced to reduce obvious errors.
It was never supposed to eliminate every controversial decision.
But when supporters watch several replays and still cannot understand why a decision was made, frustration is inevitable.
SKY SPORTS’ BIGGER WARNING
The biggest takeaway from the Sky Sports discussion may therefore be less about Hassan and more about Scottish football’s VAR system.
If the technology cannot definitively establish whether the ball crossed the line, broadcasters and supporters will continue relying on slow-motion replays and expert opinions.
And that creates another problem.
The more angles people see, the more arguments they can have.
Kris Boyd sees one thing.
James McFadden sees another.
Supporters see something else.
And the officials are left defending a decision that has already become controversial.
That is not the clarity VAR was supposed to provide.
CELTIC FANS HAVE A MESSAGE
For Celtic supporters, the reaction has been particularly strong because this is not the first VAR controversy to surround the club this season.
They want consistency.
They want transparency.
And above all, they want decisions to be based on the best possible technology.
One fan summed up the frustration:
“We don’t want decisions given to Celtic. We want the correct decisions.”
That may be the fairest way to describe the argument.
This is not necessarily about wanting a goal to stand because it benefits Celtic.
It is about wanting everyone to know exactly what happened.
If the ball was out, show the definitive angle.
If it wasn’t, overturn the decision.
But if the footage cannot establish either conclusion, then Scottish football has a technological problem rather than simply a refereeing problem.
AND NOW COMES THE OLD FIRM
There is another reason why this debate could not have arrived at a more interesting time.
Celtic’s next major challenge is looming.
The Old Firm.
Martin O’Neill’s side are heading towards another huge clash with Rangers, and the pressure surrounding every refereeing decision will only increase.
There will be no room for uncertainty.
No room for questionable calls.
And certainly no appetite among supporters for another VAR controversy.
Celtic have now won six league games from six.
They have maximum points.
They are sitting at the top of the table.
But the St Johnstone match has raised an uncomfortable question before one of the biggest fixtures of the season:
CAN SCOTTISH FOOTBALL’S OFFICIALS HANDLE THE PRESSURE WHEN THE STAKES GET EVEN HIGHER?
That is the question supporters will be asking.
Because the Hassan incident may eventually disappear from the headlines.
Celtic may continue winning.
Baur’s goal may become a footnote.
But the wider VAR debate is not going away.
And if another controversial decision arrives during the Old Firm…
EVERYONE WILL BE WATCHING THE REPLAYS.
This time, there will be no hiding from the cameras.
No hiding behind uncertainty.
No hiding behind the phrase “clear and obvious.”
The technology will be under the microscope.
And after what happened at McDiarmid Park, Scottish football has already been warned.
ONE MORE CONTROVERSIAL VAR CALL COULD TURN THIS DEBATE INTO A FULL-BLOWN OFFICIATING CRISIS.