Michael Stewart’s outrage over Alistair Johnston avoiding a red card against Rangers ignores one major problem. A former FIFA referee has already explained why the Celtic defender’s challenge did not meet the threshold for serious foul play.
Stewart reacted furiously after Johnston’s challenge on Mikey Moore during Celtic’s 3-1 win, claiming VAR had failed badly in a crucial title-race weekend.
The pundit posted on X: “A good many people feared VAR/officiating would have a huge part to play in the title race. Hopefully it isn’t decisive but deary me. How the VAR can look at the replays and not see a red card has occurred is wild.”
But Stewart’s rant did not stop there and even though 67 Hail Hail contacted Mark Clattenburg for his view, it’s clear the Premier Sports pundit does not agree with the ex-Premier League referee.
Who was your Celtic MOTM vs Rangers?
Mark Clattenburg’s explanation changes the debate completely
While Stewart presented the decision as an obvious mistake, former FIFA referee Mark Clattenburg offered a far more measured interpretation.
He later added: “This weekend has been a really terrible one for the officials at a time where it needed to be at its best. Crucial penalties and red cards incidents so poorly officiated which have had a direct effect on results. To hear some people say the follow through doesn’t matter is like going back 20 years.
“To hear some people say the follow through doesn’t matter is like going back 20 years. Couldn’t believe what I heard on commentary “where’s he meant to put his foot?”
“You’re not allowed to jump into a tackle and have a follow through like that plain and simple. Terrible VAR!”
Clattenburg argued Johnston’s challenge was reckless rather than an example of excessive force. That distinction matters because the IFAB Laws of the Game define serious foul play through excessive force or actions that endanger an opponent’s safety.
According to Clattenburg, Johnston’s foot arrived in front of Moore rather than going directly through him. He viewed the incident more as a tripping action than a dangerous lunge deserving a dismissal.
That does not mean everybody has to agree with the yellow card. It does mean Stewart’s suggestion that VAR somehow ignored an obvious red card becomes much weaker once experienced refereeing analysis is applied.
Michael Stewart is treating a subjective Celtic decision like settled fact
The biggest issue with Stewart’s reaction is not disagreement. Football will always produce split opinions on tackles like this.
The problem is the suggestion that officials ignored something clear and undeniable when the refereeing world itself remains divided.
No official SFA clarification has contradicted the on-field decision from Nick Walsh or the VAR team led by John Beaton. Multiple former referees disagreed publicly on whether Johnston crossed the serious foul play threshold.
That alone shows this was not the scandal Stewart tried to present.
Celtic supporters do not need to pretend the challenge looked good. It was aggressive and carried risk. But there is a major difference between a reckless tackle and a clear red-card offence under the laws.
Stewart’s frustration is obvious. The certainty behind it is far less convincing.
Receive a digest of our best Celtic content each week direct to your mailbox
