Howard Webb, the chief executive of Professional Referee Organization (PRO), expressed deep disappointment after VAR failed to spot Enzo Fernandez’s off‑side interference during Erling Haaland’s decisive strike in the Manchester derby. Webb argued that the video officials became so fixated on confirming Haaland’s position that they neglected the broader attacking possession phase, a lapse he described as "tunnel vision".
The sequence began with the on‑field referee signalling an off‑side on Haaland, only to have VAR intervene. After a quick review, the VAR team concluded that Haaland was, in fact, on‑side by a few centimetres and therefore the goal should stand. However, the review stopped short of considering Fernandez, who was standing well ahead of the defensive line and had dived toward the ball. Although Fernandez never made contact with the ball, his presence in an off‑side position obstructed both Manchester United defender Lisandro Martínez and goalkeeper Senne Lammens, limiting their ability to react to the ball’s trajectory.
Webb explained the error in a Mic’d Up interview, saying: "The on‑field decision was not about Fernandez; it was about Haaland. When VAR began their check, they saw Haaland was on‑side by three centimetres.
Their attention then narrowed to Haaland’s position and they failed to evaluate the full impact of Fernandez’s off‑side movement. In that moment they got tunnel vision, and the rest of the VAR team did not pull them out of it. The goal should have been disallowed." The VAR commentary captured during the incident illustrates the procedural steps taken. Assistant VAR initially noted a possible off‑side, then confirmed that Haaland was on‑side after a tight review.
The officials then proceeded to examine the full attacking possession phase (APP), checking whether other players, such as Iliman Ndiaye, were on‑side when the ball was flicked. They eventually announced a goal, stating there was "no touch" from Fernandez and confirming the decision as final. This rapid conclusion ignored the fact that the off‑side law penalises a player who interferes with an opponent’s ability to play the ball, even if he does not touch it himself.
Webb’s statements after the match highlighted the seriousness with which PRO treats the mistake. He said, "We felt it was important to acknowledge the error. Haaland was not off‑side, but Fernandez, who was off‑side, almost certainly interfered with United’s defence and probably the goalkeeper. I was really disappointed with the outcome; we all were.
The officials take personal pride in their work and are now hurting after falling short. They will not be officiating until after the international break." PRO has reached out to Manchester United to explain the situation, sharing both the audio and video footage of the VAR review. Webb added that the organization will conduct an internal audit to pinpoint which elements of the process broke down, ensuring greater transparency and preventing similar errors in the future.
He clarified that while Fernandez did not touch the ball, the off‑side rule still applies when a player in an off‑side position obstructs an opponent’s line of sight or movement. In this case, Fernandez’s dive impeded Martínez’s attempt to clear the ball and limited Lammens’ ability to position himself for a potential save, thereby influencing the outcome of the play.
Commentators from Sky Sports weighed in on the controversy. Laura Hunter argued that merely admitting the mistake is insufficient; a full‑scale review is owed to the clubs and players affected, given the decision directly altered the match result. She pointed out that the Premier League’s match centre had posted a real‑time update stating that "VAR also deemed that while in an off‑side position, Enzo Fernandez didn't play the ball," effectively ignoring the broader interpretation of the off‑side law that includes interference without touching the ball. Hunter questioned why the VAR team, after confirming "no touch" by Fernandez, failed to recognise his live presence in the play.
She noted that neither Michael Oliver, the referee, nor his linesmen appeared to discuss whether the flag should have been raised for Fernandez, Haaland, or both. A chronological analysis of the incident, applying the correct laws, would have resulted in the goal being disallowed solely on the basis of Fernandez’s off‑side interference.
Instead, the VAR officials spent nearly three minutes deliberating a goal that many casual viewers could have judged as invalid with a single replay. Kaveh Solhekol of Sky Sports News offered a more sympathetic perspective, acknowledging the human element behind the error.
He said, "I have sympathy for the VAR and his assistant – they made a mistake. Many Manchester United fans will see this as unforgivable, but human beings make mistakes. No one is hurting more than the VAR and his assistant.
They will likely replay this incident for weeks and months, regretting the impact of their error." The incident reignites the broader debate over the reliability of video‑assisted officiating. Critics argue that if forensic technology cannot eliminate basic mistakes—such as overlooking an off‑side player who interferes with play—its value is questionable.
Proponents, however, contend that VAR, despite its flaws, provides a safety net that can be refined through better training, clearer protocols, and more rigorous checks on the entire attacking possession phase. In summary, Howard Webb’s condemnation of the VAR’s tunnel‑vision focus on Haaland underscores a critical flaw in the current review process: the tendency to isolate a single player’s position while neglecting the collective dynamics of the play.
The failure to penalise Enzo Fernandez’s off‑side interference not only altered the result of a high‑stakes derby but also highlighted the need for VAR officials to adopt a more holistic approach when evaluating complex attacking sequences. PRO’s commitment to transparency, the forthcoming internal review, and the ongoing public discourse suggest that the sport’s governing bodies are aware of the issue and are working toward more consistent and accurate officiating in the future.