I have refereed a few games in my life and run the line slightly more times. It is a difficult job. I am not a Rangers supporter but do agree with the sentiment behind this statement -

'Rangers statement in full

The handling of key incidents during Sunday's semi-final has again raised legitimate concerns about the consistency of refereeing in Scottish football.

Club representatives met with the Scottish FA this evening to seek explanations for major decisions in the match, including the incident involving Jack Butland and Auston Trusty.

Following that meeting, we remain unsatisfied with the explanation of the referee's decision in that incident, the application of the Laws of the Game, and the VAR review itself, which we do not believe was sufficiently robust or thorough.

We recognise that refereeing decisions can impact both sides in a game, but too many important matches continue to be influenced by calls that are inconsistent and difficult to justify. These decisions have real consequences, determining results, impacting fans, and affecting the livelihoods of players, coaches and staff whose work is judged by outcomes on the pitch.

The club has consistently raised issues as they have occurred with the Scottish FA, but we do not feel there has been enough change in how refereeing is being developed at the highest level.

We understand and share the anger among our supporters, who have grown frustrated at the repeated inconsistencies in major match decisions that continue to affect the club.

For the benefit of our supporters and the wider game in the country, we will continue to hold the Scottish FA to account and expect them to lead meaningful progress that delivers lasting improvement. '

I am not sure VAR has raised refereeing standards but nor have I any suggestions on how to achieve positive results unless every handball or foul in the box that results in a penalty is an automatic yellow card. Goalkeepers are quite rightly perhaps over protected but Trusty's stupidity should have resulted in a red card should similar acts occur in the future.

I think, in general the world over, VAR has stunted referreeing standards. Refs are often reluctant to jump in with potentially controversial decisions in case they are proved wrong and knowing that VAR will help them correct it if they should have made the call but didn't. They use VAR as a type of insurance policy to make the tough decisions for them.

I think there is also an element of VAR officials trying to justify their existence by making "technically correct" decisions that are a bit out of context with the actual events - they seem to bring just as much controversy as decisions made before we had VAR when people were screaming for it.

The incidents at the weekend are, in my view, not all that clear cut. With the red card that was given I don't think there is any intent other than to try and control the ball, but it was reckless and no doubt bloody painful. A red was right IMO even though there was no intent. The one on the GK though was much less physical (and the player was entitled to go for the ball) but I think there was an element of him leaving his foot in purposely. Whether that intent is worthy of a red or just a yellow I'm really not sure. Clearly if you are a fan of a team involved you want it done to benefit your team.

As for the penalty, I think it was harsh. He was falling and also tucked his arms in (although his elbow did appear to move a bit downwards as the ball arrived). I don't think there was really anything he could do to stop it and I'd be annoyed if a penalty was given against us for that.

It could easily have ended 10v10 but then again the penalty might not have been given so I'm not sure Rangers have been too hard done by.

Personally I'd amend VAR to be more like tennis and cricket where you call for it if you think a poor decision has been made against you. Give each team 2 challenges per half that the manager or captain can call on. If they are right they keep the challenge, if they're wrong they lose it. Otherwise let the game flow and referee it on the pitch.

Overall, I am cautiously in favour of it provided it is applied consistently but VAR is only as good as the referees operating it, or crucially, only effective when those on the field are open to admitting to a 'clear and obvious error' was made. I never bothered watching the game, nor any highlights so not sure about this past weekend.

Its been on the books over here for years and I have seen both great and terrible decisions, sometimes in the same game. When it works well, it really does work well. You can literally see the ref pause for about 10 seconds when something happens, usually when waiting for a restart or a free kick so no perceptible delay, and then either waves play on or holds it up. If the ref goes over to the screen, you know the VAR folks have told him he may have made a mistake ... the question is then entirely human and is more about whether the ref has the balls to admit a mistake or whether that mistake falls under the "clear and obvious" definition whatever that may be! That's where the ego comes in and if you have a ref who is all about his power and control and thinks he is immune to making mistakes or being unsighted in the moment, then he still has the power to control the VAR decision and over-rule it rendering it ineffective.

Scotland -v- Belarus recently is one example where I think VAR worked well, or at least in our favour. We got decisions based on VAR in that game and also against us too. The ref was consistent in his use of VAR and it seems the decisions were right.