₦airaland Forum

Refereeing body Pro Ref has admitted an error in awarding Manchester City's winner at Manchester United in their 1-0 victory at Old Trafford.

In a statement released just hours after Man City's win, Pro Ref revealed it had made contact with Man Utd to acknowledge an "error of judgment" and that the VAR "should have recommended an on-field review" for Erling Haaland's winner.

The striker's goal was initially disallowed for offside on the pitch before VAR overturned the decision.

The VAR officials deemed that Haaland was played onside by Man Utd defender Patrick Dorgu. However, Man City's Enzo Fernandez was in an offside position as he attempted to play the ball before it reached Haaland.

Despite not touching the ball, Fernandez's movement appeared to impact the defending of Man Utd's Lisandro Martinez before Haaland's back-post finish, which by the laws of the game should have led to the goal remaining disallowed.


A Pro Ref spokesperson said: "Following the incident in the 60th minute of Sunday's Premier League fixture between Manchester United and Manchester City at Old Trafford, we can provide clarification regarding Erling Haaland's awarded goal.

"The on-field decision was offside against Erling Haaland - that was checked by VAR and he was found to be in an onside position.

"In the same attack, it was established that Enzo Fernandez did not play the ball and therefore that makes any offside offence subjective, however, on this occasion, the VAR did not recognise the likely impact of his position and should have recommended an on-field review.

"Contact has been made with Manchester United this evening to acknowledge what we deem is an error of judgement. A review of the incident will take place."

What is Pro Ref?


Pro Ref (Professional Game Referees) is English football's refereeing body, which was formerly known as PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials) after a rebrand in the summer.

Ex-Premier League referee Howard Webb leads the body, which oversees the four men's top divisions, the National League, the WSL and the U21s Premier League 2.

What did the officials say?
Who were the match officials at Old Trafford?

Referee: Michael Oliver
Assistants: Stuart Burt, Tim Wood
Fourth official: Paul Tierney
VAR: Matt Donohue
Assistant VAR: Blake Antrobus

In their post on X explaining why the goal was awarded, the Premier League Match Centre wrote: 'VAR checked the referee's call of no goal for offside - and determined that Haaland was in an onside position and recommended that the goal was awarded. The VAR also deemed that while in an offside position, Fernandez didn't play the ball.'

That stress on Fernandez not playing the ball chimed with replays shown during the VAR review, in which the VAR officials apparently sought to detect whether or not the City midfielder played the ball.

However, the offside rule clearly stipulates that a player can be offside despite not playing the ball and can interfere with an opponent by:

●preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or
challenging an opponent for the ball or

●clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or

●making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

Neville predicted error admission

Speaking at the time of the goal on co-commentary, Sky Sports' Gary Neville believed the VAR officials were "wrong" to award Haaland's effort.

Pro Ref's statement, however, fell short of Neville's prediction that they would apologise.

The former Man Utd defender told Sky Sports: "We will see an apology from Pro Ref.

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

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

Speaking on his podcast, Neville continued: "I think they are ignoring the rule.

"They are digging themselves a bigger hole [with the Match Centre statement]. I'm really surprised they put that out.

"They will have to retract that."

Meanwhile, Man Utd defender Martinez said in his post-match interview that the goal should not have stood.

He told Sky Sports: "Every season the officials come to our club and spend an hour explaining the rules and they look so confident with that.

"Then after, five or six people [officials] doing this kind of mistake in the Premier League is unacceptable.

"We have to go home with this injustice."

Former Man City defender Micah Richards dismissed Match Centre's explanation that the goal was awarded because Fernandez didn't touch the ball as a "nonsense".

Asked whether Fernandez was clearly attempting to play the ball, Richards told Sky Sports: "One hundred per cent he is.

"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.

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

"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."

Roy Keane concluded: "Fernandez is interfering with play. Basically, United have been punished for holding a good line. When you are in that position, you are impacting the game. You're in the middle of the box, you're going for the ball.

"Their line is good. Fernandez is offside, and he goes to play the ball, so United are getting punished for good defending.”

BlackViper:
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/33694/13585607/eerling-haalands-man-city-goal-decision-vs-man-utd-an-error-of-judgement-says-pro-ref

boxypane:
That League has been rigged a long time ago.

boxypane:
That League has been rigged a long time ago.

femi4:
The damage is done already

Human error at interpreting VAR is the new challenge now

Father4all:
ManChester United should be compensated

Penguin2:
They came to Old Trafford to rob us and then offer explanations later?

Oya, can they take the 3 points from City and give us 1 while they retain 1?

Or are they going to be allowed to retain their loot?

bluefilm:
Rob you?

Even after awarding you a one-man advantage from that red card?