Rachel Reeves said she will not take Britain "back to austerity" - and promised to "take action to help families with the cost of living". She said she will "push ahead with the biggest drive for growth in a generation", promising investment in infrastructure, housing, security, defence, education, and skills. But following a downgrade in the productivity growth forecast - combined with the U-turns on the winter fuel allowance and benefits cuts, as well as "heightened global uncertainty" - the chancellor is expected to announce a series of tax rises as she tries to plug an estimated £30bn black hole in the public finances. Conservative shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride has said Ms Reeves is "trying to pull the wool over your eyes", having promised last year she would not need to raise taxes again. Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper has accused her and the prime minister of "yet more betrayals". 'Smorgasbord' of tax rises A headline tax-raising measure is expected to be an extension of the freeze on income tax thresholds for another two years beyond 2028, which should raise about £8bn. This move will be seized upon by opposition parties, given that the chancellor said at last year's budget that extending the freeze, first brought in by the Tories in April 2021 to raise revenue amid vast spending during the pandemic, "would hurt working people" and "take more money out of their payslips". What is being described as a "smorgasbord" of tax rises is also expected to be announced, having backed away from a manifesto-breaching income tax rise. Some measures already confirmed by the government include: • Allowing local authorities to impose a levy on tourists staying in their areas • Expanding the sugar tax levy to packaged milkshakes and lattes • Imposing extra taxes on higher-value properties It is being reported that the chancellor will also put a cap on the tax-free allowance for salary sacrifice schemes, raise taxes on gambling firms, and bring in a pay-per-mile scheme for electric vehicles. What could her key spending announcements be? As well as filling the black hole in the public finances, these measures could allow the chancellor to spend money on a key demand of Labour MPs - partially or fully lifting the two-child benefits cap, which they say will have an immediate impact on reducing child poverty. Benefits more broadly will be uprated in line with inflation, at a cost of £6bn, The Times reports. In an attempt to help households with the cost of the living, the paper also reports that the chancellor will seek to cut energy bills by removing some green levies, which could see funding for some energy efficiency measures reduced. Other measures The Times says she will announce include retaining the 5p cut in fuel duty, and extending the Electric Car Grant by an extra year, which gives consumers a £3,750 discount at purchase. The government has already confirmed several key announcements, including: • An above-inflation £550 a year increase in the state pension for 13 million eligible pensioners • A freeze in prescription prices and rail fares • £5m to refresh libraries in secondary schools Extra funding for the NHS will also be announced in a bid to slash waiting lists, including the expansion of the "Neighbourhood Health Service" across the country to bring together GP, nursing, dentistry and pharmacy services - as well as £300m of investment into upgrading technology in the health service. And although the cost of this is borne by businesses, the chancellor will confirm a 4.1% rise to the national living wage - taking it to £12.71 an hour for eligible workers aged 21 and over. For a full-time worker over the age of 21, that means a pay increase of £900 a year. Read more from Sky News:Reeves issues 'pick 'n' mix' warning ahead of budgetAre we set for another astoundingly complex budget? Britons facing 'cost of living permacrisis' However, the Tories have hit out at the chancellor for the impending tax rises, with shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride saying in a statement: "Having already raised taxes by £40bn, Reeves said she had wiped the slate clean, she wouldn't be coming back for more, and it was now on her. A year later and she is set to break that promise." He described her choices as "political weakness" - choosing "higher welfare and higher taxes", and "hardworking families are being handed the bill". The Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper is also not impressed, and warned last night: "The economy is at a standstill. Despite years of promises from the Conservatives and now Labour to kickstart growth and clamp down on crushing household bills, the British people are facing a cost-of-living permacrisis and yet more betrayals from those in charge." She called on the government to negotiate a new customs union with the EU, which she argues would "grow our economy and bring in tens of billions for the Exchequer". Green Party leader Zack Polanski has demanded "bold policies and bold choices that make a real difference to ordinary people".

The 57-year-old comedy writer, who had faced trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court, denied both charges linked to posts made on social media and a confrontation at a conference in London in October 2024. Summarising her judgment, District Judge Briony Clarke started by saying it was not for the court to pick sides in the debate about sex and gender identity. She said she found Linehan was a "generally credible witness" and appeared to be "genuinely frank and honest", and that she was not satisfied his conduct amounted to the criminal standard of harassment. The judge said she accepted some of complainant Sophia Brooks' evidence, but found they were not "entirely truthful" and not "as alarmed or distressed" as they had portrayed themself to be following tweets posted by the comedy writer. While Linehan's comments were "deeply unpleasant, insulting and even unnecessary", they were not "oppressive or unacceptable beyond merely unattractive, annoying or irritating", the judge said, and did not "cross the boundary from the regrettable to the unacceptable". However, she did find him guilty of criminal damage, for throwing Brooks's phone. Having seen footage of the incident, the judge said she found he took the phone because he was "angry and fed up", and that she was "satisfied he was not using reasonable force". The judge said she was "not sure to the criminal standard" that Linehan had demonstrated hostility based on the complainant being transgender, and therefore this did not aggravate his offence. He was ordered to pay a fine of £500, court costs of £650 and a statutory surcharge of £200. The prosecution had asked the judge to consider a restraining order, but she said she did not feel this was necessary. Speaking outside court after the hearing, Linehan said he was pleased with the judge's findings. "The judge found me and the women who gave evidence on my behalf to be credible, honest witnesses, and said that my actions were not criminal and did not constitute harassment," he said, addressing the harassment verdict but not the criminal damage verdict. He said he was grateful to the Free Speech union "for their unwavering support" and protecting those who "speak out", and that he hoped the judgment would mean "people in future won't be subject to those kind of tactics". What happened during the trial? The writer, known for shows including Father Ted, The IT Crowd and Black Books, had flown to the UK from Arizona, where he now lives, to appear in court in person. He denied harassing Brooks on social media between 11 and 27 October last year, as well as a charge of criminal damage of their mobile phone on 19 October outside the Battle of Ideas conference in Westminster. The trial heard Brooks, who was 17 at the time, had begun taking photographs of delegates at the event during a speech by Fiona McAnena, director of campaigns at Sex Matters. Giving evidence during the case, Linehan claimed his "life was made hell" by trans activists and accused Brooks, a trans woman, of being a "young soldier in the trans activist army". He told the court he was "angry" and "threw the phone" after being filmed outside the venue by the complainant, who had asked: "Why do you think it is acceptable to call teenagers domestic terrorists?" Brooks told the court Linehan had called them a "sissy porn-watching scumbag", a "groomer" and a "disgusting incel", to which the complainant had responded: "You're the incel, you're divorced." The prosecution claimed Linehan's social media posts were "repeated, abusive, unreasonable" while his lawyer accused the complainant of following "a course of conduct designed both to provoke and to harass Mr Linehan". Read more from Sky News:BBC board members face MPsWoman wakes up in coffin at crematorium Following the judgment but ahead of sentencing, Linehan's lawyer Sarah Vine KC said the court "would do well to take a conservative approach towards the reading of hostility towards the victim". She said the offence of criminal damage involved a "momentary lapse of control", and was part of the "debate about gender identity, what it means". Vine said it was important "that those who are involved in the debate are allowed to use language that properly expresses their views without fear of excessive state interference for the expression of those views". She also said the cost of the case to Linehan had been "enormous", telling the court: "The damage was minor; the process itself has been highly impactful on Mr Linehan." She requested he be given 28 days to pay the full amount.

Rachel Reeves said she will not take Britain "back to austerity" - and promised to "take action to help families with the cost of living". She said she will "push ahead with the biggest drive for growth in a generation", promising investment in infrastructure, housing, security, defence, education, and skills. But following a downgrade in the productivity growth forecast - combined with the U-turns on the winter fuel allowance and benefits cuts, as well as "heightened global uncertainty" - the chancellor is expected to announce a series of tax rises as she tries to plug an estimated £30bn black hole in the public finances. Conservative shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride has said Ms Reeves is "trying to pull the wool over your eyes", having promised last year she would not need to raise taxes again. Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper has accused her and the prime minister of "yet more betrayals". 'Smorgasbord' of tax rises A headline tax-raising measure is expected to be an extension of the freeze on income tax thresholds for another two years beyond 2028, which should raise about £8bn. This move will be seized upon by opposition parties, given that the chancellor said at last year's budget that extending the freeze, first brought in by the Tories in April 2021 to raise revenue amid vast spending during the pandemic, "would hurt working people" and "take more money out of their payslips". What is being described as a "smorgasbord" of tax rises is also expected to be announced, having backed away from a manifesto-breaching income tax rise. Some measures already confirmed by the government include: • Allowing local authorities to impose a levy on tourists staying in their areas • Expanding the sugar tax levy to packaged milkshakes and lattes • Imposing extra taxes on higher-value properties It is being reported that the chancellor will also put a cap on the tax-free allowance for salary sacrifice schemes, raise taxes on gambling firms, and bring in a pay-per-mile scheme for electric vehicles. What could her key spending announcements be? As well as filling the black hole in the public finances, these measures could allow the chancellor to spend money on a key demand of Labour MPs - partially or fully lifting the two-child benefits cap, which they say will have an immediate impact on reducing child poverty. Benefits more broadly will be uprated in line with inflation, at a cost of £6bn, The Times reports. In an attempt to help households with the cost of the living, the paper also reports that the chancellor will seek to cut energy bills by removing some green levies, which could see funding for some energy efficiency measures reduced. Other measures The Times says she will announce include retaining the 5p cut in fuel duty, and extending the Electric Car Grant by an extra year, which gives consumers a £3,750 discount at purchase. The government has already confirmed several key announcements, including: • An above-inflation £550 a year increase in the state pension for 13 million eligible pensioners • A freeze in prescription prices and rail fares • £5m to refresh libraries in secondary schools Extra funding for the NHS will also be announced in a bid to slash waiting lists, including the expansion of the "Neighbourhood Health Service" across the country to bring together GP, nursing, dentistry and pharmacy services - as well as £300m of investment into upgrading technology in the health service. And although the cost of this is borne by businesses, the chancellor will confirm a 4.1% rise to the national living wage - taking it to £12.71 an hour for eligible workers aged 21 and over. For a full-time worker over the age of 21, that means a pay increase of £900 a year. Read more from Sky News:Reeves issues 'pick 'n' mix' warning ahead of budgetAre we set for another astoundingly complex budget? Britons facing 'cost of living permacrisis' However, the Tories have hit out at the chancellor for the impending tax rises, with shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride saying in a statement: "Having already raised taxes by £40bn, Reeves said she had wiped the slate clean, she wouldn't be coming back for more, and it was now on her. A year later and she is set to break that promise." He described her choices as "political weakness" - choosing "higher welfare and higher taxes", and "hardworking families are being handed the bill". The Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper is also not impressed, and warned last night: "The economy is at a standstill. Despite years of promises from the Conservatives and now Labour to kickstart growth and clamp down on crushing household bills, the British people are facing a cost-of-living permacrisis and yet more betrayals from those in charge." She called on the government to negotiate a new customs union with the EU, which she argues would "grow our economy and bring in tens of billions for the Exchequer". Green Party leader Zack Polanski has demanded "bold policies and bold choices that make a real difference to ordinary people".

The reigning Premier League champions suffered a 3-0 home defeat by Nottingham Forest on Saturday - a sixth loss in seven league matches - leaving them 11th, the first time in more than a decade the club have been in the bottom half of the table. Then then dropped to 12th following Merseyside rivals Everton's win over Man Utd on MNF. Ahead of Wednesday's Champions League home game against PSV Eindhoven, Slot said of their woeful form: "I would describe it as ridiculous, almost. Something I did not expect to be in. Liverpool news & transfers🔴 | Liverpool fixtures & scoresGot Sky? Watch Liverpool games LIVE on your phone📱Not got Sky? Get Sky Sports or stream with no contract on NOW📺 "Not at any club I was going to work at, let alone Liverpool. That is unbelievable. "If you can find an excuse, you will never find enough excuses to make you perform like this. Unexpected for the club, for me and everyone. "But I am working at a club where if you need to face it, this is the best club to face it. The harder it gets at a club like this, the more we are together to achieve the things Liverpool usually achieve." Last season, Liverpool conceded 41 goals as they stormed to the Premier League title. This term, they have already shipped 20 goals in the opening 12 matches. "Conceding far more goals than last season. The amount of goals we have conceded and the amount of goals from set-pieces is close to ridiculous for a club like us. "The biggest one is the goals we concede. From open play, we are still able to generate enough chances to get a result." He added: "I take the responsibility and feel guilty for it." Slot slams 'unacceptable' form Liverpool have suffered eight defeats in their last 11 matches in all competitions, with Saturday's 3-0 home loss to Forest equalling their worst Premier League loss at Anfield. When asked about what his side could learn from the defeats in the build-up to their next fixture, Slot said: "It's difficult to say at this moment. "I have said quite a lot of times, there are certain things that you can do better but this hasn't helped and hasn't been of use. "You can think of quite a lot of reasons why you have lost. From our perspective, at Liverpool Football Club, it is not acceptable. "It is a situation you do not want to have. Now it is time to start winning matches again but you have to do a lot to win a match. "The simple things, they must do better. That is what we are not doing and that is quite easy to solve. Simple football is the most difficult thing." 'We haven't lost fight' Liverpool's players have been criticised for lacking the heart for a battle when the chips are down, and, after the defeat to Forest, captain Virgil van Dijk called for the squad to take more individual responsibility. Slot does not agree that his players are shirking their responsibility but believes the tactics being employed against them are resulting in players lacking concentration at crucial times. Asked whether they had lost the ability to fight, Slot said: "No, no we haven't. But in moments of games we have lost too many duels. "I think the last game we played we had 75 per cent possession, which means you only have to defend 25 per cent of the time and I think in and around our box we only had to defend four times. "If I have to defend for half-an-hour I am in defend mode, so I just throw myself at every ball, but when our defenders and maybe even including the goalkeeper are thinking about ball possession and then in the moment they have to defend, we are not as switched on as we should be." Despite their domestic struggles, Liverpool are eighth in the Champions League table, three points behind leaders Bayern Munich, and in the final spot for automatic qualification for the last 16. Playmaker Florian Wirtz has not recovered from a muscle injury in time to be involved. Robertson: Liverpool criticism is justified but good times will return Andy Robertson says criticism of Liverpool's form is justified and has urged his team-mates to stay off social media, but believes the good times will return. He told Sky Sports' One on One podcast: "The standards of this football club have been set for years and years and years, and when you become below that, then the criticism becomes higher and higher. "We can't have any problems with the criticism that's coming our way at the minute. It's justified because of the position we're in and the results we've been having. But it's up to us to now stay together. "It's up to us to try and bring the best version of ourselves, and if we do that, then we have enough quality in the squad that we'll get better results. "It's important now that people don't lose the belief in their ability, the confidence that they have, and it's important that we all stick together within the training ground. "And if we do that, then that gives us the best possible chance to get out of this. But we obviously need to start showing consistency in our work again. That's been a problem." Gakpo: Forest loss led to honest conversations between us Liverpool forward Cody Gakpo admitted "honest" words had been exchanged among the squad about recent poor performances. "After the game on Saturday it was a kind of embarrassment because we lost 3-0 at home in front of our own fans, which is not good," said the Dutchman, who will face former club PSV Eindhoven for the second successive season in the Champions League. "In the days after that we were, I don't want to say angry, but we tried to speak together and be honest with each other what we have to do to perform better on the pitch. "Everybody is aware we have to take responsibility on and off the pitch. This was a conversation you have with a team-mate. "It wasn't really a 'meeting' meeting but we are aware we have to take responsibility, that we have to do better with certain things on the pitch. That's what we spoke about. "We are honest because otherwise there's no point in speaking. We also know we have to stick together and that's what we will try to do again to put in good performances and get wins. "The coach takes responsibility but the players have a big responsibility to ourselves and the manager and the fans. "We know what we can do but we aren't letting it be seen."

The amount people pay is dependent on how much they earn, with different tax bands kicking in at different income levels. Read more: Chancellor to announce tax rises in budget In the past, these thresholds have been increased in line with inflation. But more recently they have been frozen, leaving people paying more to the exchequer even if actual tax rates stay the same. The Conservative government began the thresholds freeze in 2021. At last year's budget, Rachel Reeves said the Labour government would extend the freeze though not beyond 2028, as to do so would "hurt working people". Sky News looks at what the thresholds are, the implications of freezing them, and how that causes "fiscal drag". Income tax thresholds England, Northern Ireland and Wales all have the same income tax rates, set by the British government. Scotland's income tax bands are set by the Scottish government, so Westminster budget announcements on income tax do not affect workers in Scotland. For England, Northern Ireland and Wales, there is a "personal allowance" of £12,570, under which no income tax is paid. For those earning above £100,000, the personal allowance goes down by £1 for every £2 of income, and can go down to zero, so a person can end up paying income tax on all of their income. What does freezing thresholds do? Thresholds were previously increased annually by consumer price index (CPI) inflation - the estimate of the level of prices of goods and services bought by households. But, because income tax thresholds have been frozen while wages continue to rise, more people are being brought into higher bands and having to pay more income tax. A worker whose earnings just keep up with inflation is paying a larger proportion of their salary in tax due to the freeze. This means more money for the government - a lot more. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates a continuing freeze in thresholds would raise about £42.9bn annually by the 2027/28 tax year. And the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has projected that freezes to the basic and higher rates of income tax alone would raise £39bn a year by 2029-30. That is roughly similar to the amount of revenue that would be raised by increasing all income tax rates by 3.5 percentage points. Fiscal drag Freezing income tax thresholds without tax rates increasing has been branded a "stealth tax", as the government collects more revenue without having to pass a law to raise tax rates. It is also known as fiscal drag, as more people are pulled into paying tax, or into paying tax at a higher rate. The OBR estimates the freeze will bring nearly four million more people into paying income tax, three million more people into the higher rate (40%) and 400,000 more into the additional rate (45%) by 2028-29.

Sir Robbie, whose position on the BBC board has been challenged by critics in recent weeks, was among senior leaders, including the broadcaster's chair, Samir Shah, to face questions from the Culture, Media and Sport committee about the current crisis. The hearing took place in the wake of the fallout over the edit of a speech by US President Donald Trump, which prompted the resignation of the corporation's director-general and the chief executive of BBC News, and the threat of a lawsuit from the US president. Former editorial adviser Michael Prescott, whose leaked memo sparked the recent chain of events, also answered questions from MPs - telling the hearing he felt he kept seeing "incipient problems" that were not being tackled. He also said Mr Trump's reputation had "probably not" been tarnished by the Panorama edit. During his own questioning, Sir Robbie addressed concerns of potential political bias - he left BBC News in 2017 to become then prime minister Theresa May's director of communications, a post he held until 2019, and was appointed to the BBC board in 2021 by Boris Johnson. "I know it's hard to marry the fact that I spent two years as director of communications for the government... and my genuine passion for impartiality," he said. "I want to hear the full range of views... I don't want the BBC to be partisan or favour any particular way." Asked about reports and speculation that there has been a "board-level orchestrated coup", Sir Robbie responded: "It's up there as one of the most ridiculous charges... People had to find some angle. "It's complete nonsense. It's also deeply offensive to fellow board members... people of great standing in different fields." He said his political work has been "weaponised" - and that it was hard as a non-executive member of the BBC to respond to criticism. 'We should have made the decision earlier' Mr Shah admitted the BBC was too slow in responding to the issue of the Panorama edit of Mr Trump, which had been flagged long before the leaked memo. "Looking back, I think we should have made the decision earlier," he said. "I think in May, as it happens. "I think there is an issue about how quickly we respond, the speed of our response. Why do we not do it quickly enough? Why do we take so much time? And this was another illustration of that." Following reports of the leaked memo, it took nearly a week for the BBC to issue an apology. Mr Shah told the committee he did not think Mr Davie needed to resign over the issue and that he "spent a great deal of time" trying to stop him from doing so. Is director-general role too big for one person? Asked about his own position, Mr Shah said his job now is to "steady the ship", and that he is not someone "who walks away from a problem". A job advert for the BBC director-general role has since gone live on the corporation's careers website. Mr Shah told the hearing his view is that the role is "too big" for one person and that he is "inclined" to restructure roles at the top. He says he believes there should also be a deputy director-general who is "laser-focused on journalism", which is "the most important thing and our greatest vulnerability". Earlier in the hearing, Mr Prescott gave evidence alongside another former BBC editorial adviser, Caroline Daniel. He told the CMS committee that there are "issues of denial" at the BBC and said "the management did not accept there was a problem" with the Panorama episode. Mr Prescott's memo highlighted concerns about the way clips of Mr Trump's speech on January 6 2021 were spliced together so it appeared he had told supporters he was going to walk to the US Capitol with them to "fight like hell". 'I can't think of anything I agree with Trump on' Mr Trump has said he is going to pursue a lawsuit of between $1bn and $5bn against the broadcaster, despite receiving an official public apology. Asked if the documentary had harmed Mr Trump's image, Mr Prescott responded: "I should probably restrain myself a little bit, given that there is a potential legal action. "All I could say is, I can't think of anything I agree with Donald Trump on." He was later pushed on the subject, and asked again if he agreed that the programme tarnished the president's reputation, to which he then replied: "Probably not." Read more:Experts on why Trump might struggle to win lawsuitWhy are people calling for Sir Robbie Gibb to go? Mr Prescott, a former journalist, also told the committee he did not know how his memo was leaked to the Daily Telegraph. "At the most fundamental level, I wrote that memo, let me be clear, because I am a strong supporter of the BBC. "The BBC employs talented professionals across all of its factual and non-factual programmes, and most people in this country, certainly myself included, might go as far as to say that they love the BBC. He said he "never envisaged" the fallout that would occur. "I was hoping the concerns I had could, and would, be addressed privately in the first instance." Asked if he thinks the BBC is institutionally biased, he said: "No, I don't." He said that "tonnes" of the BBC's work is "world class" - but added that there is "real work that needs to be done" to deal with problems. Mr Davie, he said, did a "first-rate job" as director-general but had a "blind spot" toward editorial failings.

The amount people pay is dependent on how much they earn, with different tax bands kicking in at different income levels. Read more: Chancellor to announce tax rises in budget In the past, these thresholds have been increased in line with inflation. But more recently they have been frozen, leaving people paying more to the exchequer even if actual tax rates stay the same. The Conservative government began the thresholds freeze in 2021. At last year's budget, Rachel Reeves said the Labour government would extend the freeze though not beyond 2028, as to do so would "hurt working people". Sky News looks at what the thresholds are, the implications of freezing them, and how that causes "fiscal drag". Income tax thresholds England, Northern Ireland and Wales all have the same income tax rates, set by the British government. Scotland's income tax bands are set by the Scottish government, so Westminster budget announcements on income tax do not affect workers in Scotland. For England, Northern Ireland and Wales, there is a "personal allowance" of £12,570, under which no income tax is paid. For those earning above £100,000, the personal allowance goes down by £1 for every £2 of income, and can go down to zero, so a person can end up paying income tax on all of their income. What does freezing thresholds do? Thresholds were previously increased annually by consumer price index (CPI) inflation - the estimate of the level of prices of goods and services bought by households. But, because income tax thresholds have been frozen while wages continue to rise, more people are being brought into higher bands and having to pay more income tax. A worker whose earnings just keep up with inflation is paying a larger proportion of their salary in tax due to the freeze. This means more money for the government - a lot more. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates a continuing freeze in thresholds would raise about £42.9bn annually by the 2027/28 tax year. And the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has projected that freezes to the basic and higher rates of income tax alone would raise £39bn a year by 2029-30. That is roughly similar to the amount of revenue that would be raised by increasing all income tax rates by 3.5 percentage points. Fiscal drag Freezing income tax thresholds without tax rates increasing has been branded a "stealth tax", as the government collects more revenue without having to pass a law to raise tax rates. It is also known as fiscal drag, as more people are pulled into paying tax, or into paying tax at a higher rate. The OBR estimates the freeze will bring nearly four million more people into paying income tax, three million more people into the higher rate (40%) and 400,000 more into the additional rate (45%) by 2028-29.

The incident was sparked when Gueye - who misplaced a loose pass towards Keane in the penalty area to give the ball away - began berating his team-mate. Gueye then raised his hand to Keane's face before he was sent off for violent conduct by referee Tony Harrington. Follow Man Utd vs Everton LIVE here!Got Sky? Watch now on the Sky Sports app📱Not got Sky? Get instant access with no contract📺 Despite his sending off, Everton went on to win 1-0 thanks to Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall's 29th-minute goal, and afterwards Gueye apologised to his team-mates in the changing room and released a statement on social media. He wrote on Instagram: "I want to apologise first to my team-mate Michael. I take full responsibility for my reaction. "I also apologise to my team-mates, the staff, the fans and the club. What happened does not reflect who I am or the values I stand for. Emotions can run high, but nothing justifies such behaviour. I'll make sure it never happens again." However, Everton boss Moyes said he "likes his players fighting each other" when asked about the incident. Moyes told Sky Sports: "If nothing happened, I don't think anyone in the stadium would have been surprised. "I thought the referee could have taken a bit longer to think about it. I got told that the rules of the game that if you slap your own player, you could be in trouble. "But there's another side to it: I like my players fighting each other if someone didn't do the right action. If you want that toughness and resilience to get a result, you want someone to act on it. "I'm disappointed we got the sending off. But we've all been footballers, we get angry with our team-mates. He's apologised for the sending off, he's praised the players and thanked them for it and apologised for what happened." Man Utd head coach Ruben Amorim also disagreed with the red card and criticised his players for not showing enough fight. He said: "Fighting is not a bad thing. Fighting doesn't mean they don't like each other. Fighting is if you lose the ball, I will fight you because we will suffer a goal. That was my feeling with that red card. "I don't agree with that sending off. We can fight with team-mates. I know it's violent conduct, the referee explained it, I don't agree with that. I hope my players, when they lose the ball, they fight each other. I hope they don't get sent off, but that is a good feeling not a bad feeling. "My players showed in many games we can do it. Today, we didn't. I need to help them. We need to be better in the future." 'Moment of madness' Everton's match-winner, Dewsbury-Hall, called Gueye's red card a "moment of madness". He told Sky Sports: "We started really well - the situation happened. It was a moment of madness, avoidable. "But all I can say is Idrissa has apologised to us at full-time, said his piece, and that's all he can do. We move on from it. "The reaction from us was unbelievable. Top tier. We could have crumbled, but if anything, it made us grow. "He [Moyes, at half-time] just said: that's done now. We'll deal with that another time. It was about keeping to the plan we had. He made sure we do the right things, continue what we're doing. We can't change that now, second half we continued to do that." Nev and Carra question decision to send off Gueye However, the decision to dismiss Gueye was questioned by Sky Sports' Gary Neville on co-commentary. "How much venom was in that slap?" said Neville. "He has been sent off for that. Was it a little slap or a proper whack? "There is no doubt a hand comes out to the face but it didn't look too much. They might have had to send him off purely because there is a strike to the face. "They were not fighting, it wasn't a scrap. It could have been dealt with by a yellow. I don't think it needed to be a red." Jamie Carragher said at half-time in the Monday Night Football studio: "I just think: can a referee manage the situation a bit better? "Can you get the two of them together and say: 'Hey can you behave yourselves?' Just sort of manage the situation, rather than that's the rulebook. "The rulebook gives the referee a bit of an out. He could say: 'I don't think it's over the top' and then you can carry on 11 vs 11." Monday Night Football guest Roberto Martinez, the Portugal head coach, agreed with the red card decision. The ex-Everton boss said: "Clearly, it's a misunderstanding; Gueye is trying to play the ball [to Keane], but it's that reaction, the slap. "The referee has no other choice because the law tells you that any aggression above the neck is a red card." According to the Premier League rules, striking an opponent or any other person on the head or face with their hand or arm represents violent conduct, unless the force used was negligible. "Was it negligible?" pondered Neville. "That's the question. I think it was negligible. I don't think there was much in that at all." Gueye is now set to be suspended for Everton's next three games. The Senegal international became the first Premier League player sent off for striking his own team-mate since Ricardo Fuller for Stoke City against West Ham in 2008. It was only the third time a player has been sent off for striking a team-mate, after Lee Bowyer and Kieron Dyer's infamous double-red card in 2005. IN PICTURES: Gueye's moment of madness! What happened with the Bowyer-Dyer and Fuller incidents? When Bowyer and Dyer clashed in 2005, the former was handed a seven-game ban in total - an initial four games for it being his second red card of the season, before the FA handed an additional three matches to the suspension. Bowyer was also given a £30,000 fine, with the midfielder then leaving for West Ham in the following summer. Meanwhile, in 2008, Stoke striker Fuller was sent off for striking his captain Andy Fuller. The striker claimed the situation actually helped team morale. Fuller stayed at Stoke until 2012. "It's one of those things. It's done and dusted, and it's made us stronger as a unit," Fuller said. "Sometimes in life, negatives can bring about positives, and I'm pleased that we've got by it in a positive way."