Dundee United has asked for an important review of how Var is implemented in Scottish football, withdrawing its support for the key incident panel of the SFA party.
Furious because a contentious goal by Marley Watkins was allowed to stand in a 1-0 defeat against Kilmarnock last weekend, United has contacted the SFA to express her complaint.
The head of United, Jim Goodwin, insisted at that time that Watkins' goal should have been sent for a field review after what seemed to be a foul on goalkeeper Jack Walton.
He left incredulous for that decision among several others, the Tannadice Club has withdrawn his representation in the incident panel of the key party (KMI).
The KMI panel of five people consists of three independent members with races within Scottish football (coaches, former players or media figures), a representative of the SFA and one of the SPFL clubs.
People revolve weekly, and an expert knowledge of the rules book is not a previous requirement to feel in the judgment of potentially challenging calls.
United cited a “lack of experience” in the panel and also hurried to what they considered that they had been great inconsistencies with the use of VAR throughout the season.
Marley Watkins of Kilmarnock challenges goalkeeper Dundee United Jack Walton
Although United felt that there was a foul on the goalkeeper, the goal was allowed to stop
United's manager Jim Goodwin felt that the decision should have been revoked by Var
A club statement said: 'Dundee United FC has formally notified the Scottish FA of our decision to withdraw our representation from the KMI panel.
'This decision continues to broad discussions throughout the season with the department of arbitrator of Fa Scottish, where we propose concerns regarding the purpose, effectiveness and impact of the panel on Scottish football.
'We believe that the results of the panel have been inconsistent with the comments provided by the Scottish FA.
'There have been cases in which decisions in the field, backed by VAR and backed by the Department of Referees of Fecosses, were contradicted by the KMI panel.
'In many cases, these disagreements seem to be based on the opinions of panel members who, for the most part, lack significant experience in the laws of the game.
'The subsequent results have been expanded by misrepresentation of external media, exerting undue pressure on our party officials and potentially influenceing decisions in future coincidences.
'We believe that changes should be made in the KMI panel or an alternative and more robust process should be used to review arbitration decisions if it is considered a requirement.
'In addition, we have expressed our concerns to the Scottish FA regarding the inconsistent interpretations of the laws of the game that arise from Var.
'This inconsistency, in several moments, has caused other Premier League clubs of William Hill to express their frustration for the use of VAR, and although we are fully aware of our desire to ensure that Duende United at all times has a fair representation, We also want to improve the general game in Scottish football and encourage all parties to collaborate in making improvements.
United believes that the introduction of VAR has “highlighted the inconsistency in decision making”, but insisted that they are 'looking for ways to support our officials and improve both the var var and any subsequent review panel, in order to improve Scottish football for the benefit of their member clubs'.
The United position comes after St Mirren expressing 'disappointment' after the controversial called not to grant them a penalty in the defeat of last weekend against St Johnstone.
The Poseley Club has been particularly affected by VAR decisions that have subsequently been considered incorrect by the KMI panel.
Friends confirmed that they had written to the SFA to seek clarifications about 'this and other decisions', while cited 'an accumulation of errors made against St Mirren'.