As the groans over Rangers’ penalty v Celtic echo out around Scotland, Cyriel Dessers’ disallowed goal has gone under the radar.
The Nigerian striker, 28, thought he’d broken his Old Firm duck when he forced the ball home from a scramble to make the scoreline 2-2.
With less than an hour on the clock, Rangers would’ve surely gone on from that position as favourites and it stands as a crucial moment in the match.
And yet when put up against Alistair Johnston’s clumsy challenge, there’s only one of the two decisions which deserves such scrutiny.
Cyriel Dessers goal call “re-refereeing”
As Chris Sutton and Brendan Rodgers were busy moaning about Silva’s role in winning Rangers’ penalty, it’s all been a little quiet on Cyriel Dessers’ disallowed goal.
But no fewer than three ex-referees have claimed that the strike should’ve been allowed to stand, even if Tom Lawrence committed a foul in the build-up.
First, Sky Sports Ref Watch stalwart Dermot Gallagher suggested Rangers were unlucky to see Cyriel Dessers’ goal v Celtic ruled out amid allegations of the game being “re-refereed”.
“I don’t think we’d argue it’s a foul but is it re-refereeing?” Gallagher said. “They travel a long way, they have a lot of time to reset.
“I know they don’t get the ball back but the referee goes to the screen and decides it’s a foul.
“I don’t think there’s any doubt it’s a foul. It’s a matter of whether that foul is in the immediate buildup? Is that foul in the attacking phase? VAR felt it was and sent John Beaton to the screen.”
Former referees Steve Conroy and Dennis Roache, who have refuted Michael Stewart’s claims with regards the Johnstone tackle on Silva, also agree that Cyriel Dessers was unlucky.
Rangers, not Celtic, should have VAR gripe
Speaking on the Behind the Whistles podcast, the two ex-Premiership whistlers reckon the Rangers striker’s maiden goal v Celtic could’ve stood.
Host James Sweeney claimed VAR has gone back and “looked for a reason” to chop off the goal but claimed there was “not enough” to call off the strike.
Also describing it as the “re-refereeing of games”, Sweeney went on to suggest he’s at a loss with VAR.
Steve Conroy then said he doesn’t “have an issue” with it being called off as it is up to VAR to decide when the attacking phase of play starts.
However the ex-ref described the decision as “a nonsense” adding “surely we must be using VAR for better purposes than looking for reasons to disallow goals”.
Des Roache then describes the decision as “anti-football” and claims that he completely “agrees” with the earlier points.
“If John Beaton thought in that moment in time it was a foul he’d have given it,” said Roache. “That’s the clear and obvious.
“You’ve got another 40 yards of play to progress to then have that impact on a goal to then chop it off.
“I don’t agree with the goal being chopped off at all. I think it was wrong. VAR is there for clear and obvious errors, see if you want to re-referee games you’d be here for two weeks to play one game.
“I entirely don’t think that goal should’ve been chopped off, I think taking it back that far was wrong.”
And to think, we’re the ones who’re supposed to be in charge of this conspiracy…
