If the ball ricochets off another body part then hits a hand it isn't handball that's clear in the law. In this case his arm was extended (unnatural) and it didn't come off his head onto his arm so clear pen under the law as it is at the moment
Interesting that the home Tv channel was backing the home team would BT have done the same if it had been City?
But this is my main problem with the handball rule, they've taken a common sense approach, which admittedly makes the rule greyer in terms of consistency and application, and tried to apply a series of multiple nested if, but and when clauses that try to legislate for a near infinite amount of possibilities.
Extracted from the fa rule (the whole thing is nearly unreadable);
It is an offence if a player:
even if accidental, immediately:
touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
--Few lines later--
Except for the above offences, it is not an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
So which rule takes precedence?!?! They are in contradiction of each other given last night's incident with Can. For me it's pen all day long and thankfully the ref had interpreted with unnatural body position but the law clearly states for both interpretations. How worrying.