Howard Webb, the chief executive of Professional Referee Organization, has openly expressed his disappointment with a recent VAR decision that allowed Erling Haaland's decisive goal in the Manchester derby to stand. According to Webb, the video officials suffered from a kind of "tunnel vision" that caused them to overlook the off‑side position of Manchester United midfielder Enzo Fernandez, whose actions arguably interfered with the defending side. Webb explained that the on‑field referee initially flagged Haaland for off‑side, but the VAR review reversed that call, declaring the Norwegian striker on‑side by a margin of just three centimetres.
The review then proceeded to assess the full attacking possession phase (APP). While the VAR team confirmed that Haaland had not touched the ball before it was headed into the net, they failed to consider that Fernandez, who was standing well beyond the second‑last defender, dived for the ball and impeded both Lisandro Martinez and United goalkeeper Senne Lammens. The officials argued that because Fernandez did not make contact with the ball, no off‑side offence had occurred.
Webb pointed out that the Laws of the Game state a player can be penalised for off‑side even without touching the ball if they obstruct an opponent's ability to play the ball. In an interview with the Mic'd Up podcast, Webb said, "The on‑field decision was not about Fernandez; it was about Haaland. When the VAR started their check, they saw that Haaland was actually on‑side.
The VAR became hyper‑focused on Haaland's position and, once they confirmed his on‑side status, they did not fully evaluate the impact of Fernandez's movement. That is classic tunnel vision. The rest of the VAR team should have pulled the focus back, but they didn't, and the goal should have been disallowed." Webb went on to describe the procedural breakdown in detail. He noted that the VAR officials correctly identified Haaland as on‑side, but then neglected to run a complete analysis of the attacking possession phase.
In doing so, they missed the fact that Fernandez, while off‑side, moved into the ball's trajectory, effectively blocking Martinez's clearance attempt and limiting Lammens' ability to dive for a save. According to Webb, "Fernandez didn't touch the ball, but his presence in an off‑side position still interfered with the defence. The rules are clear: interference, even without contact, is an offence." The incident was captured in a series of audio and video exchanges that illustrate the confusion.
The assistant VAR initially called out "Enzo, Enzo" and flagged a possible off‑side. The main VAR then announced that Haaland was on‑side and moved to check the full APP. After confirming Haaland's position, the VAR declared "no touch" from Fernandez and proceeded to award the goal. This chain of events sparked immediate criticism from pundits and fans alike.
Sky Sports' Laura Hunter argued that merely admitting the mistake does not absolve Professional Referee Organization of responsibility. She wrote, "A full‑scale review is owed to the clubs and the players because the VAR decision directly altered the match outcome. The Premier League's match centre posted that Fernandez did not play the ball, but they ignored the crucial part of the law that a player can be penalised for obstructing an opponent while off‑side." Similarly, Sky Sports News analyst Kaveh Solhekol offered a more sympathetic perspective, acknowledging the human element in officiating. He said, "I feel for the VAR and his assistant.
They made a huge error in a high‑stakes game, and they will likely replay the incident for weeks. Human error is inevitable, but the magnitude of this mistake is hard to forgive, especially for Manchester United supporters." Webb confirmed that Professional Referee Organization has reached out to Manchester United to explain the error and has provided the club with the relevant audio and video footage.
He added that the officials involved will not be assigned to any matches until after the international break, underscoring the seriousness with which the organization is treating the incident. The broader debate sparked by this controversy touches on the very purpose of VAR technology. Critics argue that if a system designed to eliminate clear errors can still miss a fundamental off‑side infringement, its efficacy is called into question. Proponents, however, maintain that VAR remains a valuable tool that, when applied correctly, can improve the fairness of the game.
In summary, the VAR's narrow concentration on Haaland's position led to a failure to recognise Enzo Fernandez's off‑side interference, resulting in a goal that should have been disallowed under the Laws of the Game. Howard Webb's candid admission of the mistake highlights the need for more comprehensive checks during the VAR process and a reminder that technology should augment, not replace, thorough human judgment on the pitch.