That's why I am asking. I don't understand where is the issue? So many are complaining about it, so it does exist, I just can't get it.
It all depends upon how much you are moving the camera after focusing. Generally the dangers of back focus from 'focus and recompose' are way over stated nowadays.
If you want to create the effect for yourself shoot a subject from around three feet away, focus and re compose moving the camera at least six inches ( on the subject ) down/across between focusing and shooting. Then compare this with using an outer point which enables much less movement of the camera plane. You will clearly see the 'focus recompose' is back focused when using f1.2 to f2 or so.
In most situations you are not moving the camera enough to cause a problem, or the depth of field is covering the issue, or both. I'm surprised at the Hasselblad video showing such a tiny movement as a demonstration of it's intelligent focus system; moving from the eye to nose: indeed different focus distances but not plane, which is what their system is about.
Likewise the example always given of woman/camera at waist height/distance/angles. For this to work the camera must be held at waist height and very close; a full length portrait with 'focus/re compose on the eye, a large camera movement. So if you are ever going to take a full length shot filling the frame with a 50mm lens at f1.2-f2. holding the camera at waist height and 'focus/re compose will be a problem. But the point is that in the vast majority of situations you won't be moving the camera this much. This is why many people think the problem doesn't exist; it does, much of the time to a degree, but it can only be seen given the right circumstances.