It feels wrong to be talking about refereeing decisions and VAR after Liverpool and Manchester City played out an enthralling 90 minutes at Anfield.The two title rivals went head-to-head on Merseyside in a clash that could decide the Premier League title.But it took just six minutes for the controversy to begin.As Bernardo Silva progressed into Liverpool’s penalty area, the ball ricocheted off his hand and onto Trent Alexander-Arnold’s.Appeals for a penalty were waved away by Michael Oliver and, less than 30 seconds later, Fabinho was putting Liverpool 1-0 up.

VAR checked to see if the champions should have been awarded a penalty before Fabinho’s goal.

But it didn’t take them long to decide that Alexander-Arnold’s handball was accidental and that his arm was in a 'natural' position.

That explanation hasn’t satisfied everyone, though, and the conversation over whether it was or wasn’t a penalty continues.

However, one man more qualified than most - Mark Clattenburg - has now spoken and he’s insisted that City should NOT have had a penalty.

"VAR and Michael Oliver made the correct call in allowing Fabinho's early goal to stand, although I disagree with the reasoning the Premier League have provided,” Clattenburg wrote in the Daily Mail.

"There were strong suggestions at the time that the effort should be disallowed and a penalty awarded to Manchester City because Trent Alexander-Arnold had handled at the other end moments before the goal.

However, it is the arm of Manchester City forward Bernardo Silva that deflects the ball onto Alexander-Arnold and that is why, for me, play should not be brought back.

"If Silva's arm does not divert the ball, then yes, I believe a penalty should have been awarded as Alexander-Arnold's arm is in an unnatural position and he is using it to make himself bigger. That is why I do not understand the Premier League explanation that it was not a deliberate handball."

So Clattenburg disagrees with the Premier League’s explanation but agrees with the decision.

Interesting.