“Now that I’ve seen it, it’s probably seen as an offside goal” - David Moyes on Jake O’Brien’s cancelled equaliser

Moyes should have asked the official exactly why was it disallowed.

He was obviously called to the screen to call the foul on the keeper but didn't see it so they went with the offside instead.

Simples.

We could've been 5 down, we are so predictable in our play. Every team has sussed us out. If we don't pick up, and start to score, then it's gonna be a relegation battle again.

The first one is just a good header from O'Brien, the Spurs goal Pickford is weak, he's a goalkeeper, can use his hands, should be making that area his own.

The game has gone mad now,and I don't want to see goals ruled out for such nonsense all the time.

We need a proper sport back with contact involved, there's too much scrutiny on every goal nowadays.

The first one is just a good header from O'Brien. For the Spurs goal, Pickford is weak, he's a goalkeeper, can use his hands, should be making that area his own.

The game has gone mad now, and I don't want to see goals ruled out for such nonsense all the time.

We need a proper sport back with contact involved, there's too much scrutiny on every goal nowadays.

I think Pawson was instructed to check offside, not any foul or nudge on the keeper.

If a goal had been allowed, probably not too many complaints. Gary Neville had it right when he said it was 50/50.

The other shower would be in the media for weeks complaining of injustice. We are far too nice a club for the modern "cheating" game.

Does anyone disagree that there was far less against Jake's goal than there was against Van de Ven pushing Pickford before heading that goal?

And why the hell is nobody talking about Gana Gueye being poleaxed in the penalty area???

Jordan Pickford should man up and I think there's a new interpretation on challenging goalies in the penalty area. Goalies have had far too much protection.

Also, Gana Gueye's incident was a coming together. No foul play involved.

With the first goal surely the holding of Keane was a foul and prevented him from challenging for the initial cross.

Corners and now long throw-ins are just chaos now. Who'd be a ref or VAR these days...

We were outdone on set pieces. Spurs were thinking further ahead than us. Making Ndiaye offside was a deliberate ploy by them, relying on VAR coming to their aid. It did.

We should be thinking more like that: taking advantage of the way the game has changed rather than just whinging about it.

Ndiaye was objectively in an offside position. The subjective bit was whether he was interfering with play. He actually affects the keeper's ability to get to the ball. Not by a huge amount, but he does affect him. It would have been surprising to see the goal stand.

As for Pickford, it's such minimal contact. The issue there is that we should have had a defender on Van de Ven. You never see a keeper left with an opponent like that. Criminal defending.

We should have also had a defender in there protecting our keeper, especially because it doesn't have to be a big nudge, to throw a person who is ready to leap, off balance

I'm going to say Horlicks to your comment on the Gana incident. It was a stonewall penalty.

Honestly, he did not even attempt to get the ball -- just the man.

The Premier League wants certain teams in the Top 4; we ain't one of them.

They have protectors watching over them. Protection? We just don't gotts none.

You examined the replay so carefully but never noticed Pawson come away from the screen, announce the offside to the entire stadium and raise his hand in the offside signal?

Moyes didn't have to ask Pawson why it was disallowed. He listened and looked at him.

Ndiaye and/ or Grealish had to be judged as interfering with the keeper for offside to be called against them, which is the decision VAR batted back to Pawson to have the last say on.

People should note it was given as offside by a player interfering with play (by restricting/ affecting the keeper's ability to make the save) not for actually jostling / fouling the keeper. Van der Ven wasn't offside so his mild interference on Pickford has to be judged against the threshold for a foul not the lower threshold for interfering with play. For instance, you can never have a decision given against you for getting in the keeper's sight-line unless you are offside.

My one real gripe from this game is that I think Gana was clearly fouled by Kudus, if he meant to or not. I really don't get the idea it was a ‘normal' coming together. Anywhere else on the pitch and it's always given.

Tarkowski went down a bit too easily but we've seen those given.

It was bog-standard obvious, as is the case with way too many of our attacks.

Lack of pace, with just one or two exceptions in decades, is the problem.

Re Gana Gueye incident. Fair enough. I'll take another look at it.

Fast, inswinging yorker that took defenders and keeper out. They aren't a massive side, but they'll score goals with that delivery.

In response, our keeper didn't use his arm advantage, no one attacked the front post with conviction, and it was easy to keep the ball alive with nothing from Mykolenko or the markers.

They rarely, if ever, ask the ref to look at the screen for offside. Why this time? If it's for foul play, fair enough. I trust all interfering with keepers will be treated the same?

Can anyone else recall a ref being asked to look at an offside decision? And as for Pawson, remember the Man City incident.