Willie Collum has insisted VAR would have supported EITHER on-field decision in two major Rangers refereeing decisions.
The referee chief has explained both the disallowed goal for Motherwell and the penalty for Hibernian were "very subjective" decisions with the final factor the on-field decision.
In the VAR Review show, Collum explained that the referees could have disallowed or allowed the goal for Motherwell or given a penalty or not for Hibs with VAR to back the call.
The reason for that comes down to the inability to disprove the on-field decision from the referee.
Collum explained that should the referee be called over to the monitor to review the call then they would not have concrete evidence one way or the other in the call and it would again come down to their individual decision.
As a result, VAR did not intervene on either incident with Jack Butland awarded a free-kick after being impeded by Tony Watt and Hibernian being awarded a penalty for a foul on Josh Campbell by Ianis Hagi.
On the Motherwell disallowed goal, Collum said: "This decision here is an important one to highlight for us because sometimes when you discuss VAR people expect wrong, right, black, white.
"We need to talk about subjective decisions, and I know people will dispute that. It is not always plain sailing there needs to be some sort of subjectivity.
"The referee immediately awards a free-kick and allows the process to take place because he doesn't blow the whistle until the ball is in the goal.
Read more:
-
Matondo 'set for Coventry City switch' in Rangers transfer exit
-
What the Man United camp said about Rangers ahead of Euro clash
"For him, the Motherwell attacker does enough to impede the goalkeeper, affects him from being able to play the ball properly or challenge for the ball properly.
"The VAR and AVAR go into a thorough check. I like how they use a variety of angles to make a judgement of it.
"There is nothing there to tell them that what the referee has said is wrong. If they bring the referee to the monitor, what are they going to show him that is different from what he has described?
"The referee deems it as contact on the goalkeeper that is legal. What doesn't do the Motherwell attacker any favours here is the Motherwell attacker doesn't play the ball at all.
"This is a subjective decision for us, and regardless of what the referee had awarded here, the VAR would have supported this decision. We would have supported both decisions."
Discussing the penalty against Hibs, Collum said: "There are loads of elements in this decision to consider.
"I'll go back again, this again is a very subjective decision. There are loads of different things to consider. It's subjective.
"The referee awards a penalty here, there is nothing to bring the referee to the monitor to overturn that.
"If the referee had decided to play on here, there is also elements to support that decision.
"For us, it is very subjective where we would say regardless of the on-field decision we would support it."
