Offside decisions do not end with the player who touches the ball. An attacker can be penalised for interfering with an opponent or gaining an advantage, making positioning and movement away from the ball central to the decision.
If the officials checked Haaland’s position but failed to assess Fernández’s involvement, the key error was procedural rather than technological. A VAR review should account for every relevant attacker, defender and potential obstruction before an on-field decision is overturned.
The phrase reported by Webb captures a recurring fear among supporters: that reviews can follow the most visible storyline instead of examining the complete phase of play.
VAR is judged not only by its final verdict but also by the consistency of its process. When officials focus on a headline player, they risk resolving one offside question while missing another. That can make the intervention appear selective, even when the technology itself is operating correctly.
The answer is not necessarily a longer review. It is a more disciplined one:
The next major offside controversy will test whether officials can apply that sequence under pressure. For VAR to regain trust, the review must follow the whole passage of play-not simply the player attracting the most attention.