Martin O’Neill believes Derek McInnes’ anger over Celtic’s late penalty against Motherwell came from the emotion of the title race rather than the actual laws of the game.
The penalty was awarded after referee John Beaton reviewed Sam Nicholson’s handball on the VAR monitor following advice from Andrew Dallas.
The incident has dominated discussion across Scottish football ever since.
O’Neill has consistently backed the decision itself while also admitting modern handball laws have become difficult for supporters and managers to accept emotionally during matches.
The Celtic manager also pointed out Celtic felt they should have had another penalty in the same game after Daizen Maeda’s collision with Motherwell goalkeeper Calum Ward.
O’Neill addressed McInnes’ comments while speaking ahead of this afternoon’s title decider between the two clubs at Celtic Park.
He said: (The Herald), “In the heat of the moment, he’s come out and had a go.
“But when he looks at it, if it had been awarded for him, he would have been happy enough to take it.
“There should be a proper debate in the summer about penalties. We all know what a clear-cut penalty is, but the word ‘deliberate’ seems to have gone out of the game. To me, in terms of the rules, it’s not really a debate. It was relatively clear-cut if he handled the ball.
“You can debate the whys and wherefores of what’s happening, and FIFA and UEFA should look at it, because it’s not great at all. But as we stand, these are the rules.
“I genuinely think we should have had a penalty the other night when Daizen was fouled. But if you look back over the course of the season, the top three sides have had decisions go for them and against them.
“I’m not saying things level themselves out, I wouldn’t make that argument with a couple of games left. But the reason there’s been a big furore is because it’s the end of the season. If this happened in October you wouldn’t have heard a word.”
O’Neill’s argument has stayed pretty consistent throughout the fallout.
He is not pretending supporters enjoy these handball calls or even that the law itself works perfectly.
Instead, his position is that referees are currently applying the rules as written, even if the outcomes often feel harsh in real time.
That distinction has become lost in some of the wider reaction this week.
The debate around whether the law should change is one thing.
The question of whether John Beaton correctly applied the current interpretation is another.
Now attention turns fully back toward the football itself.
And fittingly, the two managers who have spent the week arguing over Wednesday’s penalty now meet directly with the title on the line at Celtic Park.
COYBIG