Premier League
🚨 OFFICIAL: Pro Ref admits VAR error over Haaland goal after Manchester derby controversy
SevensSportsArena
0 comments
The controversy surrounding Erling Haaland’s decisive goal in Manchester City’s 1-0 victory over Manchester United has taken a major turn, with refereeing body Pro Ref admitting that VAR made an “error of judgement” in the incident.
Pro Ref has also confirmed that Manchester United were contacted directly to acknowledge the error, with a review of the decision now set to take place.
[Reuters +1]
The admission comes just hours after City secured a dramatic victory at Old Trafford, with Haaland’s 60th-minute strike proving decisive in the 199th Manchester derby.
Haaland was onside — but Fernandez changed the controversy
The original on-field decision was to rule Haaland offside when he finished the move.
However, VAR checked the incident and established that the Norwegian striker was actually in an onside position, with Manchester United defender Patrick Dorgu playing him on.
That part of the decision was therefore correct.
The controversy centred on City midfielder Enzo Fernandez.
Fernandez was in an offside position during the same attacking move and attempted to play the ball, although he did not make contact with it.
According to Pro Ref, that meant the question of whether Fernandez had committed an offside offence was subjective.
The organisation has now acknowledged that VAR failed to properly consider the likely impact of Fernandez's position on the United defence.
Pro Ref admits VAR should have recommended an on-field review
The most significant part of the statement is Pro Ref's admission that VAR should have intervened differently.
The refereeing body said the VAR official “did not recognise the likely impact” of Fernandez's position and therefore “should have recommended an on-field review.”
That means the issue was not that Haaland himself was offside. Instead, the review centred on whether Fernandez's position and attempted involvement affected United's ability to defend the attack.
Pro Ref has now classified the decision as an “error of judgement” and confirmed that Manchester United have been informed directly.
A review of the incident will follow.
Carrick's criticism gains new significance
The development comes after Michael Carrick launched a furious criticism of the decision following the final whistle.
The Manchester United manager had questioned why the goal was allowed to stand and expressed serious concerns about the interpretation of the offside law and the VAR process.
At the time, the Premier League's Match Centre explanation was that Fernandez did not play the ball and therefore was not considered to have interfered with play or an opponent. ďż˝
Reuters
Carrick's frustration was also shared by United defender Lisandro MartĂnez, who questioned how Fernandez's position could be disregarded given its apparent influence on the defensive situation.
Now, Pro Ref's admission that the VAR should have recommended an on-field review gives the controversy an entirely different dimension.
City keep the three points despite the controversy
The ruling does not change the result.
Manchester City remain 1-0 winners at Old Trafford, with Haaland's goal separating the teams despite City's playing with 10 men for more than an hour following Phil Foden's red card.
United were unable to make their numerical advantage count and missed opportunities to equalise, including efforts that struck the woodwork. Gianluigi Donnarumma also produced an important late save to preserve City's lead.
For City, the victory maintains their perfect start to the Premier League campaign.
For United, however, the refereeing admission will inevitably leave the club wondering what might have happened had the goal been reviewed differently.
The debate over Haaland's winner is therefore unlikely to disappear anytime soon.
The key point is now officially clear: Haaland was onside, but Pro Ref believes VAR made an error by failing to recognise the potential impact of Fernandez's offside position and recommend an on-field review.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!