Howard Webb says VAR tunnel vision let Erling Haaland’s Manchester City derby winner stand in 2026

The incident that sparked the controversy

On 14 September 2026, Manchester City clinched a dramatic 2-1 victory over Manchester United at Old Trafford, with Erling Haaland scoring the decisive goal in the 88th minute. The goal was allowed to stand despite a clear off‑side position by United defender Victor Lindelöf, a fact that many pundits and fans flagged immediately after the match. The referee, Michael Oliver, consulted the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) team, but the decision was not overturned, leading to a flood of complaints on social media.

The VAR panel consisted of Matt Donohue as the lead VAR and an assistant VAR whose identity was not disclosed at the time. According to the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) report released later, the assistant VAR raised a concern about the off‑side, but Donohue reportedly dismissed it, believing the ball had already crossed the line before the off‑side occurred. The incident reignited a long‑standing debate over the reliability of VAR in high‑stakes matches.

How ‘tunnel vision’ can cripple the VAR system

Howard Webb, the newly appointed chief of the Referees' Association, described the error as a case of "tunnel vision" – a cognitive bias where officials focus on a single aspect of a play and miss other crucial information. In a press conference on 16 September, Webb explained that Donohue’s concentration on the ball’s trajectory caused him to overlook the defender’s positioning, a mistake that the assistant VAR should have corrected according to the protocol.

VAR technology itself is not immune to human error. The system relies on a chain of decision‑makers: the on‑field referee, the lead VAR, and the assistant VAR. When any link in that chain narrows its focus, the whole process can break down. Experts at the International Football Association Board (IFAB) have warned that over‑reliance on a single viewpoint can create blind spots, especially in fast‑moving situations like a counter‑attack in a derby.

Why the fallout matters for the Premier League and its stakeholders

The Premier League generates over £5 billion in annual revenue, much of it from broadcasting rights and betting markets. A controversial decision that directly influences a match’s result can affect betting payouts, sponsor confidence, and fan engagement. In the days after the derby, betting firms reported an unprecedented surge in disputes, with some customers demanding refunds for wagers placed on a “draw” outcome that never materialised.

Beyond the financial dimension, the incident threatens the perceived integrity of the league. Fans across Europe and Africa have expressed frustration that technology, which was introduced to reduce errors, can sometimes amplify them. The Premier League’s credibility rests on a balance between fairness and entertainment; repeated VAR mishaps risk eroding that balance and could prompt calls for a review of the current protocol.

The African angle: how VAR controversies affect African players and fans

African talent is a cornerstone of the Premier League, with players like Mohamed Salah, Sadio Mané (now retired but still influential), and new stars such as Victor Osimhen shaping the competition. When VAR decisions go awry, the impact on African players can be disproportionate because many of them already face scrutiny over subjective calls such as fouls or off‑sides. A missed off‑side that nullifies a goal for an African striker could reinforce narratives of bias, even if the error is purely procedural.

The diaspora community in the UK, the US, and across the continent follows the league closely, often using it as a cultural touchstone. A high‑profile controversy like the Haaland derby fuels online debates in Nigerian, Ghanaian, and South African fan forums, where the conversation frequently shifts from the specific incident to broader concerns about representation and fairness in European football. Moreover, African betting markets, which account for an estimated 12 % of global football wagering, feel the ripple effects of disputed outcomes, influencing local bookmakers and, indirectly, the economies tied to those wagers.

What could change: reforms and the road ahead for VAR

In response to Webb’s comments, the PGMOL announced a review of its VAR communication procedures. One proposal under consideration is the introduction of a mandatory “second‑eye” check, where the assistant VAR must provide a written confirmation before the lead VAR can finalize a decision. This would create a documented audit trail and reduce the chance of a single official’s tunnel vision dictating the outcome.

IFAB is also exploring the possibility of integrating semi‑automated off‑side technology that flags potential infringements in real time, allowing officials to verify rather than discover them. While such technology promises greater accuracy, critics warn that it could slow the game further if not calibrated correctly. The balance between speed, accuracy, and transparency will likely define the next iteration of VAR, with the Haaland incident serving as a case study for future policy.

Quick Answers

Why did Howard Webb say VAR showed ‘tunnel vision’ in the Manchester City derby?
Webb said the lead VAR, Matt Donohue, focused too narrowly on the ball’s movement and missed the defender’s off‑side position, a mistake the assistant VAR should have corrected.

How could VAR errors affect African players and fans?
Mistakes can reinforce perceptions of bias against African players, impact betting markets that many African fans use, and spark broader discussions about fairness in European football.

What changes are being considered to improve VAR after the controversy?
Proposals include a mandatory second‑eye confirmation from the assistant VAR and the use of semi‑automated off‑side technology to provide real‑time alerts.

Source: www.espn.com