The difference between Celtic and Hearts penalty claims as one pundit tells Steven Naismith he's missed key point

Steven Naismith has every right to be irked his side didn't get a penalty for handball before Celtic did - but he's missed one key point, according to Michael Stewart.

Hearts were initially awarded a spot-kick in the 2-0 defeat at Parkhead by whistler Colin Steven but he overturned it after a VAR review, letting Liam Scales off the hook after Lawrence Shankland's header hit him in the arm. In the second half, there was a complete reversal, with Celtic appealing for a handball by James Penrice in the Hearts box. This time, Steven didn't give it, but was called over to the VAR monitor, and after a review, pointed to the spot.

A beleaguered Naismith was subdued after the game and believed neither should have resulted in a penalty. He did however say that if the one that went in Celtic's favour was a penalty, then his team should have had one too. But pundit Stewart reckons there was a difference between the two. Here's what three BBC pundits had to say on the incidents.

Michael Stewart: “I can completely understand where the Hearts manager is coming from. But the difference was that it probably hits Liam Scales far enough up the arm that it negates anything else. It hits his shoulder so it’s not a penalty regardless of all the rest of it.

“Penrice, the comparison that Allan Preston was talking about with Connor Barron. Barron’s arm was really tight in against his chest. Penrice’s is not.

“Look, it’s a sore one and tough one from a Hearts perspective. It’s completely understandable you are going to try and draw comparisons. But the difference was that it hits Scales on the shoulder and it hits Penrice flush on the hand.”

Stephen Craigan: Initially we thought it was a penalty kick (to Hearts) but there was a lot of