Why is there any debate about yesterday's handball incident? Surely the ruling should leave no doubt either way. If a rule is open to interpretation, you will get controversy.

I'd have thought the rule book there to provide clear instructions for any given incident.

FWIW I'm not an expert on the rules myself

I have now sufficient funds to last me the rest of my life. Provided I don't buy anything.

There are a few rules which can be differently interpreted - active/non-active players, interfering with play, non-goalscoring body parts at offsides, obstruction, hand to ball or ball to hand, shirtsleeve handball, what constitutes a clear scoring opportunity, how much extra time should be played, etc.
Trying to avoid paranoia it's notable how some clubs seem to get the benefit of the doubt.

I thought the rule was a deliberate hand ball was a red card no matter where on the pitch it was . Did it change ?

Its been quite obvious since VAR was brought in that the first thing it does is check the club badge .

to be fair now I have calmed down a bit, its the goal scoring opportunity bit, think a bit further up the pitch it would have been a red, think silva with his experience expected to only get yellow.....

Sometimes I set out for Ludlow
Sometimes I end up in Chepstow

I would have gone more down the line of the fact that he handled the ball twice. Or that he fouled Ayew and then handled the ball just in case the referee played advantage.
I think it should have been a red card as it was fact-he was the last defender.
You cannot say whether Ayew would have scored or not but he sure deserved the opportunity to do so.
Didn't mean we would have won the game but Chelsea would have worked harder to hang on!
Cheating deserves to be punished!