The governing body for English football officials, known as Pro Ref, has publicly admitted that it made a mistake when it confirmed Manchester City’s winning goal against Manchester United at Old Trafford. In a brief statement released only a few hours after the match, Pro Ref said it had contacted United officials to acknowledge an "error of judgment" and conceded that the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) should have recommended an on‑field review of the incident involving striker Erling Haaland. The controversy centres on the goal that gave City a 1‑0 victory.
Initially, the on‑field referee ruled Haaland offside, and the goal was disallowed. After a VAR check, the decision was overturned and the goal stood.
VAR officials argued that United defender Patrick Dorgu had played Haaland onside, allowing the Norwegian forward to receive the ball. However, the replay also showed Manchester City midfielder Enzo Fernandez standing in an offside position when the ball was played. Although Fernandez did not touch the ball, his movement appeared to impede United defender Lisandro Martinez just before Haaland struck the ball into the back of the net. According to the Laws of the Game, a player can be penalised for offside even without touching the ball if his position interferes with an opponent’s ability to play the ball.
In this case, many analysts, former players and pundits argued that Fernandez’s presence disrupted Martinez’s line of sight and timing, which should have resulted in the goal being ruled out. Pro Ref’s own statement admitted that the VAR officials failed to recognise the likely impact of Fernandez’s position and should have prompted a referee review on the pitch.
The official release from Pro Ref read: "Following the incident in the 60th minute of Sunday's Premier League fixture between Manchester United and Manchester City at Old Trafford, we can provide clarification regarding Erling Haaland's awarded goal. The on‑field decision was offside against Haaland – that was checked by VAR and he was found to be in an onside position. In the same attack, it was established that Enzo Fernandez did not play the ball and therefore any offside offence is subjective. However, on this occasion the VAR did not recognise the likely impact of his position and should have recommended an on‑field review.
Contact has been made with Manchester United this evening to acknowledge what we deem is an error of judgement. A review of the incident will take place." Pro Ref, formerly known as the Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) before a summer rebrand, is overseen by former Premier League referee Howard Webb.
The organisation is responsible for officiating the top four men’s divisions, the National League, the Women’s Super League and the U21 Premier League 2. Its admission of error is unusual, as refereeing bodies typically defend their decisions unless clear evidence forces a reversal. The Premier League Match Centre posted on X (formerly Twitter) an explanation for the goal, stating: "VAR checked the referee's call of no goal for offside – and determined that Haaland was in an onside position and recommended that the goal was awarded. The VAR also deemed that while in an offside position, Fernandez didn't play the ball." This wording emphasised Fernandez’s lack of contact with the ball, echoing the official VAR rationale, but it omitted any reference to his interference with Martinez, a point that sparked further debate.
Former United defender Gary Neville, who was providing co‑commentary for Sky Sports, immediately criticised the decision, calling the VAR’s conclusion "wrong". Neville predicted that Pro Ref would eventually apologise, saying: "There is no doubt that Enzo is attempting to play the ball and putting Lisandro Martinez off. It's a really strange one.
They'll recognise they got that wrong." On his podcast, Neville expanded his criticism, accusing the officials of ignoring the rule and digging themselves a deeper hole with the Match Centre statement. Lisandro Martinez himself echoed the sentiment in his post‑match interview, stating that the goal should not have stood.
He lamented the frequency of such mistakes, noting that officials regularly visit clubs to explain the rules, yet still make high‑profile errors that affect the outcome of matches. Former City defender Micah Richards also weighed in, dismissing the explanation that the goal was allowed because Fernandez did not touch the ball as "nonsense".
Richards argued that Fernandez was clearly challenging for the ball and that his movement inevitably affected the defender’s ability to play. "One hundred per cent he is," Richards told Sky Sports. "I think it's been a bad day for referees and VAR. They got the Phil Foden decision wrong, and they got this decision wrong.
How can you not say Enzo Fernandez is challenging for the ball – of course he is!" Roy Keane, another former United player, summed up the controversy by stating that United were punished for maintaining a solid defensive line. He said: "Fernandez is interfering with play.
Basically, United have been punished for holding a good line. When you are in that position, you are impacting the game. You're in the middle of the box, you're going for the ball. Their line is good.
Fernandez is offside, and he goes to play the ball, so United are getting punished for good defending." The admission by Pro Ref has reignited calls for greater transparency and consistency in VAR usage. Critics argue that the technology, while intended to reduce human error, often introduces new complexities and subjective interpretations, especially regarding "interference" and "obstruction" clauses. The incident may prompt the refereeing body to review its protocols for when VAR should advise an on‑field review rather than making a final call from the booth.
As the Premier League season progresses, the fallout from this decision could influence future VAR guidelines and potentially lead to revisions in the wording of the offside rule to clarify what constitutes interference. For now, Manchester United remain dissatisfied, awaiting a formal apology and any possible corrective action from Pro Ref, while Manchester City celebrate a hard‑fought victory that will be remembered as much for the controversy surrounding it as for the quality of the goal itself.