Chris Sutton and Kris Boyd were split over whether Jayden Meghoma should have seen red in the opening half of Rangers’ match with Falkirk

Chris Sutton also found himself at odds with Kris Boyd over a controversial first-half moment involving Jayden Meghoma during Rangers’ match against Falkirk, with the pair disagreeing on whether the challenge warranted a sending-off.

The incident in question came after a heated opening period in which Rangers found themselves 2-0 down to a strong Falkirk side, who had taken control through early goals and were firmly in command of the game. Despite the pressure, Rangers began to find a way back into the contest, helped by moments of fortune and persistence in the final third.

Attention soon turned to a major talking point when a challenge by Meghoma on Calvin Miller, as the Falkirk winger attempted to break from deep, sparked debate over whether it met the threshold for a red card. Kris Boyd felt the foul was not serious enough for dismissal, describing it as a mistimed but not reckless challenge, and arguing that Miller was not through on goal at the time of the contact.

However, Sutton strongly disagreed, insisting that consistency in officiating was key. He argued that similar challenges in other matches had resulted in red cards and that the same standard should be applied here if the laws of the game are to be enforced fairly.

The discussion also took place against the backdrop of Rangers’ controversial goal that brought them back into the match. After sustained pressure, an effort struck the post and the ball was eventually worked back into the box, leading to confusion over whether it had gone out of play before the cross that created the chance. Despite protests from Falkirk players, a VAR review confirmed the on-field decision, allowing the goal to stand and reducing the deficit before half-time.

Chris Sutton questioned the decision in his usual outspoken style, even joking about how close the ball looked to going out of play, while still maintaining that refereeing standards needed to be applied consistently across similar incidents.

Overall, the debate highlighted both the tension of the match and the contrasting interpretations of key incidents, with Sutton and Boyd once again divided over refereeing decisions that proved crucial in shaping the flow of the game.