The spotlight fell on a contentious decision on Saturday afternoon in Dingwall where Celtic’s goal was disallowed for offside—a decision that now appears to be marred by potential human error in the VAR room.

The controversy centres around the frame used by the official, Andrew Dallas, to determine if Daizen Maeda is offside. In such decisions, precision is paramount, as the difference between a legal goal and an offside can be a matter of centimeters and milliseconds. The frame in question was purportedly selected after the ball was played, which goes against the standard protocol that necessitates the exact moment the ball is struck. This slight discrepancy has the potential to change the outcome of the call, casting a shadow over the reliability of the VAR system.

The margin of offside was so tight that any error—no matter how small—could tip the scales unjustly. It raises a fundamental question: If the technology and its operators fail to apply the tools with meticulous accuracy, can the decisions made be trusted? In the age of VAR, where the promise is to eliminate human error, this incident has shown that technology is only as infallible as the people wielding it.

The implications of such an oversight extend beyond the single game; they touch the very integrity of the sport. Fans, players, and officials alike are left to wonder about the legitimacy of the outcome. While the goal might still have been offside, the fact that the VAR room did not use the correct frame to make this critical call is, to put it bluntly, wild.

As the dust settles, the incident calls for a thorough review not just of the decision, but of the VAR protocols and the training of its operators. Ensuring that the right tools are used correctly is the only way to maintain the credibility.