Tora Tora Tora! in News 2019-20 Posted February 20, 2020 Incidents happen in the blink of an eye and it is entirely understandable that referees will make incorrect decisions from time to time. As a result, players who are innocent of wrong doing receive inappropriate sanctions. It is these injustices which an appeals panel is there to set right. Unlike the referee, the appeal panel can view the incident in the knowledge that a contentious decision was made about it. They can see the incident several times. They can see the incident in slow-motion. They can see the incident from different angles. They can specifically look at different aspects of the incident on different viewings. As a result, the appeal panel in the James Keatings appeal will have clearly seen that:- a) the defender made no attempt to go for the ball, b) the defender lent into Keatings and nudged him, and c) Keatings was put off balance by the contact. It is inconceivable that anyone looking repeatedly at the footage can conclude that Keatings dived. Yet this is the conclusion the panel apparently came to. That a panel set up to correct obvious errors can themselves come to a decision which is so obviously wrong beggars belief and brings the SFA into disrepute. The SFA should now take the appropriate action both to reverse this injustice and to take steps to prevent them making a laughing stock of themselves again in the future.