SFA referees chief admits VAR was WRONG to chalk-off Sam Dalby goal for Dundee United vs Hibs

Willie Collum accepted there was no conclusive proof that Dalby headed the ball off his own hand or arm.

By Sean Hamilton

March 7 2025, 3:47pm

Sam Dalby heads home at the back post for Dundee United. Image: SNS

SFA referees chief Willie Collum has admitted Sam Dalby’s headed goal for Dundee United against Hibs should have stood.

United were drawing 1-1 with their rivals for third place in the Premiership at Tannadice when Dalby headed home at the back post from a second half free kick.

On-field referee David Dickinson initially awarded the goal before VAR Matthew MacDermid began his checks.

Having been unable to draw lines to check for offside, MacDermid then focused on an apparent “secondary touch” on the ball, which came after Dalby made contact with his head.

The SFA’s latest VAR Review video, posted on YouTube, features MacDermid’s discussions with his assistant as the pair scour footage.

On-field referee David Dickinson signals to restart the game with a free kick to Hibs after Dalby’s goal was ruled out. Image: Ross Parker/SNS

Despite failing to uncover conclusive evidence of the ball striking Dalby’s hand or arm, they agree that the goal should be chalked off for handball and communicate their decision to the match referee.

Asked by VAR Review host, Gordon Duncan, if there was enough proof of a handball for MacDermid to make his factual decision to rule out Dalby’s goal, Collum concedes: “That’s the issue here.

“The starting point is on-field, the goal is awarded. The VAR does very well at the beginning – to identify there are two things that require to be checked

“Offside – it takes quite a while to check but they need to be thorough. And then he also identifies immediately there’s a possible handball.

He continues: “The VAR and AVAR (assistant VAR) go through criteria – they talk about a change in the trajectory of the ball. The ball comes down, it hits something.

“Could it hit the arm? Yes, absolutely, it could. But do we have 100% conclusive evidence of the ball striking the arm? And we don’t. So therefore, the on-field decision should be supported.

“People have said to me, well, then the other club will have a complaint, because perhaps it did [strike Dalby’s hand or arm], but it’s about proof.

“We need to be categorical, we need to be clear, especially when you’re overturning an on-field decision – it needs to be clear evidence.

“That’s what we’re coaching the VARs and AVARs – we don’t want any intervention here.

“It’s a factual overturn because of the handball. We are saying you must have clear evidence – it can’t be based on criteria for a decision like this.”

He added: “If you take this clip in isolation, what people need to see when they watch this back is a clear image of that ball on the attacker’s arm.

“Because if there’s a clear image of that then it’s a correct decision. But we don’t see any clear image of that at all.”