At 0-0 on 18 minutes, Foden discovered his method into the field and struck a shot which went broad.

Newcastle defender Schar had come flying throughout and caught the Metropolis midfielder on the left ankle along with his studs, leaving the England playmaker writhing in ache.

Referee Barrott, although, awarded solely a goal-kick for the hosts and video assistant referee (VAR) Craig Pawson agreed with the on-field choice.

In accordance with the Premier League’s handbook, if “contact is inevitable” between defender and attacker then “play ought to sometimes be allowed to proceed”.

Nonetheless, the legislation additionally states that when “contact is both reckless (yellow card) or critical foul play (purple card) then a penalty kick and acceptable sanction is the anticipated end result”.

On this event, Barrott deemed Schar’s problem to not be reckless – however pundits have been cut up on the choice.

“I feel it is a penalty,” former Manchester United and England striker Wayne Rooney advised BBC Sport.

“The referee might need regarded on the truth he has obtained his shot away earlier than the contact, however the Schar problem has impacted Foden’s set-up for the shot after which there’s contact. It is a foul.”

Former Newcastle defender Jonathan Woodgate mentioned on BBC Radio 5 Dwell: “I do not suppose Schar will get the ball, however I do not suppose it is a penalty.

“I do not suppose he does sufficient.”

Ex-Manchester Metropolis defender Micah Richards mentioned on Sky Sports activities “there’s contact” however what had saved Schar is the actual fact Foden had already taken his shot.

“I do not suppose it is sufficient to overturn,” he added.