In the 4th round of the Premier League, Manchester City defeated Manchester United 1-0 away with a goal from Haaland in the 60th minute. However, this goal caused huge controversy. After the match, The Sun published an article pointing out that this level of error should never be made, as it amounts to giving conspiracy theorists ammunition.

Just one month into the new season, public attention has once again focused on referees and VAR.

Moreover, this is not good for anyone.

Lisandro Martinez, who was furious about the latest controversial decision, explained that the referee team confidently visits clubs at the beginning of each season to explain the rules.

But once on the pitch, if no one can understand the basis of a decision, then there is a serious problem.

Perhaps only the referee sitting in the Stockley Park VAR room would think that Haaland's winning goal in yesterday's Manchester derby should have been allowed.

At the time, the Norwegian striker slid in at the back post to tap in Gvardiol's deflected cross into the top corner of the Manchester United goal.

But the linesman immediately raised the flag for offside, and both Haaland and Enzo appeared to be in an offside position, so much so that even Manchester City players didn't celebrate at the time.

However, while the entire Old Trafford crowd was wondering why it took so long, VAR referee Matt Donohue, after a two-and-a-half-minute review, informed main referee Michael Oliver that Haaland was onside by a matter of millimeters.

Even more outrageous and crucial is that the VAR official believed believed Enzo's diving header did not touch the ball, meaning he did not interfere with play, even though he was right next to Lisandro Martinez at the time.

Martinez did pull his leg back after the ball went past his fellow countryman and did not challenge for it, but considering Enzo's header from such close range in front of goal, this should clearly not be the basis for allowing the goal.

The Manchester United defender could not understand this at all, and he had every right to think so. Lisandro Martinez said: "He was offside. He was right there. I rushed towards him precisely because he was in front of me, and that's why Haaland at the back post was unmarked."

"I'm trying to calm down now and control my emotions. It's really hard, because you lose, you lose in a derby, and you lose three points at home. Every season they come to our club and spend one to one and a half hours explaining the rules, and they do it confidently. However, in the game, it's unacceptable for five or six people to make such mistakes in the Premier League."

"Because this league has some of the best teams in the world, and some of the best players in the world. But now we have to go home with this injustice. I really can't understand it. Let's see how they plan to explain it now. I'd love to hear – what was the basis for their decision? I want to hear it now."

Later that evening, the Professional Game Match Officials Limited publicly admitted that it was a significant error, which is the least they could do, although it did little to console Carrick or Manchester United.

But this level of error should absolutely not happen at this level; it only provides more "ammunition" for conspiracy theorists.

Television viewers were shaking their heads, especially Manchester United fans, who were seething with anger.

Commentators in the studio, regardless of their club affiliations, also began to wonder if the world had turned upside down.

Gary Neville, who never hides his stance, frankly said: "I need someone to explain the current offside rule to me, honestly, it's completely baffled me. There has to be an official statement telling us why that goal wasn't offside."

Wayne Rooney also agreed: "Wasn't that offside? Martinez was clearly affected by Enzo's movement, who was in an offside position."

But Mr. Donohue clearly did not see it that way, even with such clear evidence in front of him.

Perhaps, looking back at Enzo's jump and Martinez's reaction, you might be able to find some obscure justification for this decision – no matter how absurd it sounds.

But overall, taking into account all other details of this play, plus the fact that even Manchester City players at the time accepted the linesman's offside flag without protest, this decision simply makes no sense.

If even players, coaches, and fans cannot understand how this decision was made, even according to the most rigid interpretation of the rules, it indicates a very serious problem.

In fact, even without Haaland's winning goal, this match was already contentious enough.

It's not just that Foden was sent off in the first half for kicking Bruno Fernandes in the groin – Maresca also admitted after the match that the red card decision was correct.

What's truly perplexing is that the Manchester United captain, after kicking the Englishman down first, then kicked him in the backside again, yet received no punishment whatsoever.

Rooney felt that Foden was unfairly sent off, saying: "That absolutely shouldn't be a red card. It was more like an instinctive reaction, not a deliberate kick at all."

However, he himself has a similar record from his playing days.

Michael Keane pointed out: "Bruno touched him first, causing the initial contact, and then kicked him afterwards."

"In my opinion, Bruno was the one with the more serious action. Foden was impulsive, but so was Bruno, who needed to do better in that situation."

Chris Richards stated: "If Foden had protested loudly about Fernandes's second action after being kicked, the decision might have changed."

"It was Fernandes who kicked him first. While I don't agree with Foden's subsequent reaction, it was indeed Fernandes who initiated all of this."

"As soon as Foden touched him, Fernandes started shouting and rolling on the ground, so if you're the referee, you naturally think the situation is more serious than it actually was."

There might still be room for discussion regarding this red card decision, but Haaland's winning goal is clear-cut.

The on-field referee at Old Trafford initially made the correct call, but he was asked by VAR to change it. How can that make sense?

AF's PC site is now live! Browse full news, comments, match details and stats on your computer. Visit: www.allfootballapp.com