Soccer Football - Scottish Premiership - Celtic v Livingston - Celtic Park, Glasgow, Scotland, Britain - December 21, 2022 Referee Euan Anderson looks at the VAR monitor and later disallows Celtic's third goal scored by Liel Abada REUTERS/Russell Cheyne
The fans inside the stadium and the thousands watching worldwide on Celtic TV were left in the dark over the decision to disallow a second half ‘goal’ from Liel Abada.
David Turnbull was pushed into a clearance knocking the ball forward, a Livingston defender got a despairing head onto the ball before the winger netted for what looked like Celtic’s third goal of the game.
The standard VAR check took longer than expected, the screen in the stadium announced a possible offside but it seems that VAR Steven Kirkland was unable to get a Hawkeye image to clear the confusion.
Celtic goal ruled offside coz stuff
— Lint (@Zeshankenzo) December 21, 2022
Should Celtic push SFA for transparency by publishing VAR reports?
Yes, VAR without explanations is pointless
No, let the teething troubles settle down
Incredibly match referee Euan Anderson was called on to have a look on the pitchside monitor, after a delay of four minutes the match restarted with a free kick to Livingston.
Seven minutes of stoppage time were added, Celtic held on to a 2-1 victory but fans watching on Celtic TV weren’t provided with a Hawkeye image to explain the decision to disallow the ‘goal’.
Scottish officials have no grasp or knowledge of the offside rule. Or we have var open season on Celtic one or two mistakes can be a coincidence but when you are having five or six that is no longer a coincidence.
Sorry unless I am mistaken when the ball from Turnbull was initially played forward Abada is closer to the opposition goal than the last defender … ie in an offside position.
The fact that in the second phase where the Livi defender drops back and miscues his header allowing Abada to score does not invalidate the fact that in the initial play he WAS in an offside position and consequently did profit from being in that position.. Therefore I do not understand the scandal .. It was OFFSIDE and therefore not a goal.
Editor: Just show the Hawkeye picture and everything is cleared up. Simple really.
If i am not mistaken the footage that you are showing would be from the offside camera that hawkeye was using. I agree that the lack of clarity from either the TV director or the VAR graphics department is causing a huge confusion over there.
Over here in Portugal the situation happens like this .. The cameras are synchronised pre match to the central hub in Lisbon. When something like this happens and there is a VAR check , within minutes the still image with the superimposed lines is sent from the central hub to the match day TV gallery in the Broadcast truck. The match director then will use this to justify the referees decision.
Over there it seems that this is not the case.. Looking back to the Jota offside how the club did not contest that decision given the lack of evidence, well I would love to have seen what would have happened if the bunnet was still in charge!! Trying to justify something and not having the entire opposition team in the shot .. who are they trying to kid ??! However our board would have to have grown a pair which unfortunately we know that is not the case!
Open chequebook anyone,I’m sure the William brothers in the var would not give the CHAMPIONS anything,if they did there wouldn’t be anything to talk about when they socialize in their sleazy outdated knuckledragging backward dens.