Kevin McKenna on Celtic: Rangers derby decisions & distorted discourse

Certain conclusions we can all agree on though. Celtic didn’t perform as well as they should have; Cameron Carter-Vickers was the outstanding player on the pitch; Alistair Johnston produced one of the most impressive debuts in this fixture’s history. 

Daizen Maeda and Reo Hatate also performed well although others, including at least one national newspaper which gave the midfielder a five-out-of-10 rating, felt differently. 

Immediately after the game, the phrase “got out of jail” was predominant among those I spoke with. As the week has progressed, though, I’m less sure of that judgment. 

The champions were dominant for at least 45 minutes of the 97 played. And when you saw Kyogo Furuhashi's reaction after scoring his equaliser you realised – and so did many Rangers people – that with 10 minutes of the game still to be played, including stoppage time, Celtic were the more likely to score a winner. 

What can’t be overlooked either is how the early injury to Greg Taylor affected Celtic. His performances over the last year have been central to how quickly and how overwhelmingly the team flood the last third of the pitch. He was beginning to dominate the left side before leaving the pitch and this more than anything else led to Rangers’ surge. 

You’re tempted immediately to criticise Ange Postecoglou for replacing him with Josip Juranovic rather than the natural like-for-like Alexandro Bernabei. On the other hand, though, Juranovic would have been well rested after several stirring displays at the World Cup and his confidence would have been high. He’d played on the left before and he knows how to win at Ibrox.

READ MORE: Detailed Celtic player ratings as Kyogo rescues point vs Rangers

Yet I’ve rarely seen the Croatian perform so poorly. It’s since been suggested that the Celtic camp had been struck by a vomiting bug before the game and this seems plausible enough. I’m not having the 'his head has gone' owing to transfer speculation. He simply had an off day which may or may not have been caused by illness. It happens to the best. 

The only selection issue I’d take up with the manager was the decision to start with James Forrest over Liel Abada. I wouldn’t dwell on this too much though; Forrest has thrived in these matches over many years and Postecoglou was entitled to believe there was at least one more big performance in him.

And besides, there will be at least two more games against Rangers before the end of the season and maybe at more crucial periods. It's best we know now that Abada should be first pick on the right in these games. 

I’ve been championing Aaron Mooy’s credentials for several months on here. It seemed to me that as soon as he’d reached full match fitness after a lengthy lay-off he’d become crucial to Celtic's ambitions. When he appeared at Ibrox he subtly began shifting the game in the champions' favour. His ability to troubleshoot during moments of jeopardy and then to recycle the ball cleanly is invaluable. 

Matt O’Riley may also have been affected by illness but, in any case, in a potentially 53-game season played at Ange-ball intensity he would always be due a spell on the bench. By the time Celtic meet their rivals again this squad will have been strengthened by more players capable of walking straight into the team. For 50 minutes or so, Rangers had a chance here but I doubt they’ll get another one anytime soon. 

Michael Beale will surely also know that Celtic were not half as bad as has been described in the immediate aftermath and Rangers were not quite as brilliant. 

But you can’t really talk about this match without referring to the performance of the referee and his officials in the VAR room.

A couple of weeks ago I mentioned the possibility of a pattern beginning to emerge since the introduction of VAR. In every game bar two since we first saw it at Tynecastle on October 22 Celtic have been on the receiving end of every contentious decision that’s occurred in these games. Their nearest rivals – and I may stand to be corrected here – have had the benefit of these in almost all of their games in which it's been an issue. 

At Ibrox, all it took was a single replay to ascertain that Carl Starfelt may not have fouled Fashion Sakala for Rangers’ second goal. Meanwhile, our attention has been drawn to the IFAB rules Q+A section to explain why Connor Goldson’s clear handball wasn’t a penalty.

Yet this failed to take into account that there can be two reasons why a player deliberately handles a ball with both hands. One could be an instinctive protective measure and the other could be an instinctive measure to prevent a possible goal.

Why the men in the VAR room didn’t invite the referee to have a second look at either incident is incomprehensible. 

Some are too quick to reach for the old paranoia accusation when Celtic supporters ask for explanations. “There’s nothing to see here,” they aver.

We should know from recent history though that 'nothing to see here' is clearly embedded in Scottish football's DNA. While two independent bloggers were detailing the extent of the mortal threat to Rangers up to and including 2012 that 'nothing to see here' approach was deployed regularly.  

In other sectors of Scottish and British life, journalists are hard-wired to seek out anomalies. This is mainly evident when scrutinising governments’ spending decisions. Questions like 'why has one region or community received disproportionately more than another? Is it because it favours a specific party’s core supporters?'

Or ones like 'how much money from our privatised public utilities and services goes directly into the pockets of institutional shareholders rather than the actual service?' And 'why does a disproportionately high number of Britain’s most influential positions get filled by people from a tiny group of mainly privately-educated people?' 

Such issues are the warp and weft of basic journalism. It’s the way we try to hold governments to account.

In Scottish football there is the possibility of a major overlooked anomaly developing over several seasons: the penalty kick factor. The numbers override partisan feelings. This centres on how often Celtic have penalties awarded against them and how few they get in comparison to the only other club in the league with similar possession statistics and who happen to be their biggest rivals. Celtic’s VAR incidents in comparison to Rangers so far are another such area where a potential anomaly appears to exist.

Our sports pages use myriad graphics to illustrate the dynamics of a football match: possession; shots at goal; expected goals. In addition they dredge the statistics of the previous five/10/20 years to add drama to a forthcoming encounter. The penalty factor is rarely witnessed.

Celtic supporters are now starting to assume that any ball striking one of their players inside his own area will result in a penalty and that any shot which strikes an opposition player in his box will not. 

There may indeed be nothing to see here except for a curious set of random circumstances - and I honestly don’t see anything that speaks of an orchestrated plot - but there’s still more than enough for Celtic as a club to reasonably ask for clarification on how VAR is being used in their matches since its inception.