Put simply: how the referee and VAR treat the sequence matters. If the whistle stops play at first contact then you get a 30-second check and whatever that decision is, it stands. But when play continues, VAR is supposed to look at the incident in sequence. That changes everything.


When VAR follows the sequence, you can end up with a foul that carries on into the box. The laws are clear in principle — a foul that continues into the penalty area can be a penalty. Fans often reduce that to "only holds count" but that's not what the rulebook says; examples are just examples. Apply the rule properly and a spot-kick is the right call.


Flip it round and treat the first contact as THE foul and you have a different picture. Moore, still in the act of shooting inside the box with no defender between him and the goal, is denied a clear goalscoring opportunity. That isn't close to marginal. That's a sending-off. No debate — no defender is getting there first.


I want to stress I'm upbeat about the squad and where we're heading on the pitch, but these referee and VAR conversations aren't academic. They shape results. We saw attention on added time after some data came out about inconsistencies, and then the following week we ended up playing 11 minutes of stoppage time after eight had originally been signalled. Coincidence? Plenty of fans think not.

Same with the handball incident involving Shankland at Ibrox — one week it's missed, the next week a similar moment is correctly punished. It's wearisome having the same argument, but shrugging your shoulders doesn't make the pattern go away. If we're serious about fairness, we have to keep asking the questions and calling out inconsistency when we see it.

These debates won't win matches on their own, but they do influence outcomes. And when the same unclear decisions keep cropping up, supporters are right to get a bit twitchy. To be fair, VAR can get it right — when it's applied consistently. That's all anyone really wants.

Written by TommyGunxxx: 28 February 2026