David Martindale admits he felt ‘aggrieved’ that big calls did not go Livingston’s way as they were denied victory by Dundee United.
Trailing 1-0 to Steven Bradley’s goal, Tannadice side could have had Kieran Freeman sent off for two bookable offences before the half-hour mark. Sadat Anaku was carded for a challenge on Luiyi de Lucas, as was Loic Ayina after taking out Scott Pittman in the second period.
VAR looked at the latter two, and Martindale questioned why referee Matthew McDermid was not called to the pitchside monitor for a closer look. United rallied in the second-half and claimed a point via Aziz Behich’s well-taken strike, leaving Livingston to rue not further pressing home their dominance in an impressive opening 45 minutes.
Martindale conceded his side should’ve done more to put a struggling United away while in the ascendency, but insisted he was ‘astounded’ by the some the decisions made by the officials.
“We probably have to capitalise a bit more in the first half, but I think there was a big moment with the double yellow card,” he said. “I feel a wee bit aggrieved. If that’s a Livingston player? I don’t know. We’ve been tarnished lately. That’s a double yellow card but we don’t get it.
“Then I thought there was another two big moments, a huge moment with the tackle on Pittman. There was also one on De Lucas.
READ MORE: Livingston trigger one-year contract extension for Joel Nouble
“The disappointing thing for me is the referee hasn’t had an opportunity to go and look at monitor.
“We’ve got the technology now. The referee’s not always going to make the right decision in real time, but with the use of technology I think he can arrive at a better decision.
“The one on De Lucas, and especially the one on Pittman, I’m astounded both came out yellow cards and the referee wasn’t asked to go to the monitor.”
Only taking a point prevents Livingston from moving back into the Premiership top six as they remain one behind St Mirren. A draw halts a run of four straight defeats in all competitions, but they have not picked up a victory since February 4.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel