VAR controversy as Haaland goal gives Man City 1-0 win at Man Utd

Gary Neville believes VAR officials were wrong to award Erling Haaland's Manchester City winner at Manchester United, predicting Pro Ref will apologise. Haaland's goal was initially disallowed for offside before VAR overturned it, ruling defender Patrick Dorgu had played him onside despite Enzo Fernandez's offside position.

What was said

"They're the words that I think - emphatically - means we will see an apology from Pro Ref,"

— Gary Neville, Sky Sports pundit, on the offside law wording

"There is no doubt that Enzo is attempting to play the ball and putting Lisandro Martinez off"

— Gary Neville, Sky Sports pundit

"It's a really strange one. They'll recognise they got that wrong."

— Gary Neville, on the VAR decision

"One hundred per cent he is."

— Micah Richards, when asked if Fernandez was clearly attempting to play the ball

"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."

— Micah Richards, Sky Sports

"How you can not say Enzo Fernandez is challenging for the ball - of course he is!"

— Micah Richards

"I've been in that position as a defender where any slight movement can make the difference for going for the ball or not, so of course it affects him. I just think they've got it so wrong."

— Micah Richards

Neville and Richards did not hold back, and their analysis hinges on one key detail: the offside rule does not require Fernandez to touch the ball to be penalised. The VAR officials' explanation on X stressed that Fernandez did not play the ball, but Neville and Richards argue his movement clearly impacted Lisandro Martinez.

Richards pointed to his own experience as a defender to explain why even a slight movement can be decisive. Both pundits agree the correct decision was to leave the goal disallowed, and Neville anticipates Pro Ref will acknowledge the error.

Tactical analysis: Why Fernandez's run mattered

When Kevin De Bruyne's cross came in, Enzo Fernandez was standing in an offside position. Even though he did not touch the ball, his attempt to reach it forced Lisandro Martinez to adjust his body shape, which created the space for Erling Haaland to finish at the back post. Under the offside law, a player can be penalised for challenging an opponent or clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent.

Patrick Dorgu was deemed by VAR to have played Haaland onside, but that only addresses Haaland's position, not Fernandez's. The VAR officials focused on whether Fernandez played the ball, but the law also covers interference without touch. That is why Neville called it a strange one and predicted an apology.

The wider point is that this was a bad day for officials, as Richards said, with the Phil Foden red card also scrutinised. Those two calls will dominate discussion, but the Haaland winner is the one that directly changed the result.

Talking points

  • Should the Haaland goal have stood? The offside law says Fernandez's attempt to play the ball, even without touching it, can be penalised.
  • Did VAR misinterpret the rule by focusing on whether Fernandez touched the ball? Neville and Richards say yes.
  • Was the Phil Foden red card also wrong? Richards grouped both decisions as part of a bad day for officials.
  • Will Pro Ref actually apologise? Neville predicts yes, which would be a rare public admission.

What happens next

Pro Ref is expected to review the incident, and if Neville is correct, an apology could follow. Manchester United will await any clarification, while the result stands as a 1-0 win for Manchester City. The incident will likely be discussed further by the Premier League Match Centre and refereeing body.

Frequently asked questions

Why was Erling Haaland's goal awarded after VAR review?

VAR determined Haaland was in an onside position and that Enzo Fernandez, while offside, did not play the ball. The goal was awarded on that basis.

Did Enzo Fernandez interfere with play despite not touching the ball?

Gary Neville and Micah Richards believe Fernandez's movement impacted Lisandro Martinez, arguing that under the laws of the game the goal should have been disallowed.

Will Pro Ref apologise for the decision?

Gary Neville has predicted that Pro Ref will issue an apology, stating that the offside rule wording emphatically means they got it wrong.

Filed under: Match Reports | LA Premier League Home