I sent in a comment to BBC which was not published TL:

"Don't particularly like Everton, Lampard even more so, plus it suits my team for City to win here. However, had that penalty, and it was a penalty, been given, the question would not have been 'Why has the referee made that decision?', it would have been 'Why did Rodri do that?'. Inconsistent, bizarre and baffling decision making once again. Does make you wonder how much the officials are being paid for these decisions?"

Even though it benefits us it is absolutely corrupt.
There are no reasons bar that for decisions such as this.
Anyone with an ounce of football knowledge knows that it was a penalty and yet the same as Jota's - it wasn't according to Stockley Park.
Outrageous

Certainly caused a great deal of controversy with VAR suffering from fustigation and on the receiving end of unrelenting invective.

There is now the element of green zones, red zones, sleeve line etc etc and the VAR having looked at the incident several times, adjudged that the evidence was inconclusive.

Maybe the VAR felt it was possible that the ball made contact with arm and sleeve but it was inclusive.
I am interested in what Dermot Gallagher says on 'Ref Watch'.

All fine until you got to the last sentence. BBC???? Really? No way those PC wokes would ever consider it. Even though 99% of football fans must be asking the same question tonight.
In my book that decision has completely destroyed the point of having VAR. That was so blatant a penalty. It begs your question, yet our national public sector tv won’t go there. Shocking.

Hold on a bit. I know I'd had a few drinks when MOTD came on, but that's on BBC isn't it? And didn't all three guys in the studio say it was a penalty? Am I missing something?