ALLY McCOIST, the Rangers manager, found himself at odds with his opposite number Peter Houston last night over referee Alan Muir's refusal to award Falkirk a late penalty that could have taken their sides' meeting in the third round of the League Cup into extra-time.
Rangers were leading 2-1 in the final minute through an own goal from Owain Tudur-Jones and a Dean Shiels strike when a toe-poke from Rory Loy, who had opened the scoring for the home team, clearly struck the hand of Bilel Mohsni in the area.
Muir ignored furious protests from the Falkirk players and Ian Black completed a 3-1 victory for the visitors in the second minute of stoppage-time with an outrageous effort from distance. While McCoist backed the referee's judgment after the final whistle, Houston was unable to disguise his unhappiness.
"I felt we were denied a stonewall penalty kick," stated the Falkirk manager. "Rory took a bad touch, but it smacked against the boy's arm and the players are adamant it was a penalty. I did. I was disappointed with some of the refereeing decisio ns. I am going to ask him the question. It came at a crucial time. If we get a penalty then, perhaps it's going to extra-time.
"I have no idea why he didn't give it because I thought he was in a good position to see it. If the arm is up in the box you are leaving yourself in a position where it is a penalty kick if it hits it."
McCoist remains unconvinced, however, that Mohsni was capable of doing anything to prevent the infringement and certainly does not believe it was intentional.
"I didn't think it was a penalty," said the Rangers manager. "I don't think there is any doubt it hit his hand. Deliberate handball? Absolutely not for me.
"I will watch it again and stand corrected if I need to, but I would agree totally with the referee. I know it hinges on controversial decisions, but we deserved the win."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article