The decisive strike by Erling Haaland in the Manchester derby on Sunday sparked a heated debate due to the unusual circumstances surrounding its validation, and several aspects of the incident remain unresolved. Initially, the goal was ruled out for off‑side on the field, but the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) intervened and reversed the decision, allowing the goal to stand. According to the VAR review, Manchester United defender Patrick Dorgu had kept Haaland onside, which meant the initial off‑side call should have been overturned. However, the review also highlighted that Manchester City midfielder Enzo Fernández was positioned off‑side as he attempted to play the ball before it reached Haaland.
This nuance created a complex situation for the officials. Pro Ref – the Professional Game Referees body formerly known as PGMOL – issued a statement on Sunday night acknowledging that an error had been made when the goal was awarded. While they admitted there was "an error of judgement," the explanation they offered only partially addressed why the goal was mistakenly allowed. They conceded that the goal should have been disallowed because Fernández was off‑side, but added that the VAR "did not recognise the likely impact of his position." The core question that remains unanswered is why the VAR failed to appreciate that a player standing six yards from the goal, attempting a diving header, and positioned off‑side, did not materially affect play.
In a mid‑game post on X, Match Centre explained the decision by stating: "The VAR also deemed that while in an off‑side position, Fernández didn't play the ball." Sky Sports' coverage showed replays of the VAR team seemingly concentrating on whether Fernández actually made contact with the ball as it crossed the six‑yard box. This raises the possibility that the VAR became overly fixated on a technical detail that, under the off‑side law, should not have mattered because the law states a player can be penalised for being off‑side regardless of whether they touch the ball. Pro Ref clarified that the original off‑side call was made against Haaland, who was, in fact, on‑side.
The review then shifted to Fernández, correctly identifying him as off‑side. However, the VAR team appears to have subsequently focused exclusively on whether Fernández touched the ball, rather than on the broader question of whether his off‑side position interfered with play.
This misdirection meant they could not correctly confirm that the goal should have been disallowed for the off‑side offence committed by Fernández, not for the erroneous Haaland call. The proper protocol, according to Pro Ref, would have been for the VAR to request an on‑field review by referee Michael Oliver. Oliver would then have been tasked with making a subjective judgement on whether Fernández's off‑side position had any impact on the play. In the footage, Manchester United goalkeeper David de Gea (referred to as Martinez in some reports) initially reacted to Fernández's movement, raising his arms in anticipation of a header and losing his balance just before Haaland struck the ball.
This reaction suggests that Fernández's presence already influenced the goalkeeper's positioning, meaning the goal should have been ruled out irrespective of whether de Gea was distracted by a potential touch. Thus, the situation can be summarised as follows: the off‑side decision was incorrectly applied to an on‑side player (Haaland), while the correct off‑side offence (Fernández) was not properly considered.
Consequently, the goal should have been disallowed for the off‑side infraction, not because Haaland was off‑side. The VAR in charge of the incident was Matt Donohue. Although Donohue has officiated only four Premier League matches as the main referee, he has amassed considerable VAR experience, serving as the VAR for 24 Premier League games and as an Assistant VAR for six matches in the 2025/26 season. This season, the Premier League has introduced semi‑automated off‑side technology, which generates a kick‑point graphic for incidents under review.
This system differs from the previous manual method where VAR officials placed crosshairs and drew lines to determine off‑side positions. The new technology is intended to increase accuracy and speed, but the Haaland incident shows that human interpretation still plays a crucial role. Another lingering question from the derby concerns the amount of added time allotted after the goal. Haaland's strike occurred at 59 minutes and 24 seconds.
Following the extensive VAR review, play did not resume until 63 minutes and 15 seconds. Despite this four‑minute interruption, the referee only added five minutes of stoppage time at the end of the half, raising doubts about whether the officials accounted for the VAR review when calculating the additional time.
In summary, the controversy stems from a cascade of errors: an initial off‑side call against the wrong player, a VAR focus on an irrelevant technicality, and a failure to request an on‑field review that could have clarified the situation. The incident highlights the challenges of integrating new technology with human judgement and underscores the need for clearer protocols to prevent similar mistakes in future high‑stakes matches.
Fans and pundits alike are calling for greater transparency and consistency in VAR procedures, arguing that multiple officials making the same mistake in a Premier League match is unacceptable. The incident has reignited debate over the balance between technological assistance and the traditional role of the referee, and it will likely influence discussions about future reforms to the off‑side review process.
The controversy also serves as a reminder that even with advanced tools, the interpretation of the Laws of the Game remains a nuanced and sometimes subjective task. As the league continues to refine its use of semi‑automated off‑side systems, stakeholders will be watching closely to see how lessons from this incident are applied to improve fairness and accuracy on the pitch.
Finally, the match concluded with a promotional reminder: "Play Super 6 for a chance to win £1m! Enter for free," a typical post‑match call‑to‑action that underscored the commercial aspect of modern football broadcasting.