The Scottish FA have published an explanation of Graeme Shinnie's red card appeal decision and subsequent extension of his suspension.
The Aberdeen midfielder was sent off for a tackle on Jack Baldwin in the 1-0 win over Ross County last week.
Shinnie was ordered off after a VAR review with referee Euan Anderson checking the challenge on the pitch side monitor.
Aberdeen had appealed the ban - with Shinnie to miss three matches having previously been sent off this season - but it was rejected.
The decision to add a further match ban to Shinnie's suspension then caused outrage at Pittodrie with the fast track tribunal deeming the appeal had no prospect of success.
Now, the Scottish FA documentation detailing the fast track tribunal decision has been published.
A summary of the appeal, in point five, reads: "In summary, the Claimant’s written submission was that the player pivots and chases down the loose ball, and prepares to make contact with it, which is at the time no way near to his opponent.
"He does not lunge in any shape or form, does not engage in any tackle, and makes a clean and successful effort to challenge for the ball, with his eyes remained fixed on it and his foot maintaining a natural position throughout.
"It was submitted that the player made contact with the bottom of the ball, did not use excessive force, and at no point has endangered the safety of his opponent, especially as he bends his knee to avoid a follow through and full-on contact.
"It was further submitted that the player’s right foot continued in that natural forward motion after contacting the ball, which was deflected off his opponent’s leg.
"It was also emphasised that the Referee had an unobstructed view of the incident and would have seen the mechanics of it.
"Finally, the Fast Track Tribunal was invited to accept that the opponent’s movements directly influenced the player’s, and as such resulted in the incident before the Fast Track Tribunal."
Point eight of the document then reveals the tribunal agreed unanimously that Aberdeen had been unsuccessful in demonstrating an obvious refereeing error.
It reads: "Having considered all the evidence, the Fast Track Tribunal decided, unanimously, that the Claimants had been unsuccessful in demonstrating that an Obvious Refereeing Error had occurred, and that the Claim should be Dismissed."
Then, the document explains the reasoning for the further one-match ban for Shinnie with the appeal deemed to have "no prospect of success" unanimously by the panel.
Point nine reads: "The Fast Track Tribunal also decided, unanimously, that having considered all the evidence and submissions before it that the Claimants had No Prospect of Success under JPP Rule 13.21.8.1.1.
"The decision was unanimous that based on the evidence presented, the manner of how it was presented and especially suggesting the opposing player’s actions resulted in the incident, the prospects of success of the Claim did not stack up.
"The Fast Track Tribunal could not reasonably deduce from the evidence presented, that the opposing player was not endangered by the player’s actions as submitted.
"To do so, was entirely unreasonable and implausible. It was also unanimously rejected that the player did not lunge, did not use excessive force, and was in control of his movement on the evidence presented.
"For those reasons, we felt that the Claim had no prospect of success."
