Should England have had a penalty for challenge on Kane?

Should England have had a penalty for challenge on Kane?To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.This video can not be playedFigure caption, Should England have been awarded a penalty?BySam DruryBBC Sport journalistPublished3 minutes agoCommentsAs Harry Kane fell in the box, it looked like England were about to have the perfect opportunity to draw level against DR Congo late in the first half of their last-32 tie.The Three Lions captain was played through on goal, knocked the ball past on-rushing goalkeeper Lionel Mpasi and ended up sprawled on the ground.There was certainly contact and Kane was adamant he should have had a penalty, but referee Adham Makhadmeh waved away England's appeals.The Jordanian official gestured the striker had dived, but did not show him a yellow card for the offence.After a check from the video assistant referee (VAR), the on-field decision was upheld and England remained a goal behind at half-time, following a seventh-minute strike from Brian Cipenga - although Kane struck twice in the second half."This is so difficult," former Premier League assistant referee Darren Cann told BBC One."There are four of us here, two think it's a penalty, two think it's not a penalty and therefore it's not clear and obvious in terms of VAR."From live play it looks a penalty, a small touch on Harry Kane's ankle from the goalkeeper and he would be expecting to give away a penalty."From the referee's angle, Kane puts his two feet together, he stumbles and it doesn't look as much of a penalty. There-in lies the difference. For me, I think it's a penalty."The referee's decision would stand if he had given a penalty, the VAR would not have intervened."'Stonewall penalty' or Kane 'dived into him'?As Cann mentioned, the pundits in the BBC TV studio were split on whether a spot-kick should have been awarded with former England striker Wayne Ro...