Kun moves it there, without impediment.
Watch and he'll get no ban, play and get sent off in the first minute for a stamp ... On Rooney's face. ;-)
He looks at Reid first before throwing an elbow, whether or not he landed it or intended to it's still violent conduct, if you throw a punch and miss you would still be sent off or punished by the FA.
Calf and he may not be that injuredHe's out of the derby anyway with a thigh injury.
Where's that from?He's out of the derby anyway with a thigh injury.
He's out of the derby anyway with a thigh injury.
Clear as day the ref saw it. To overrule him or for him to change his mind, whether right or wrong, is setting a precedent for retro refereeing of games. Another new rule made for us. Therefore that would be the argument I would make.
Also if it's a hearing I would refer to felani incidents as well as numerous bad calls we got last season including several penalties not given, penalties against that were given and unreal offsides against us. About time we got something in our favour.
I agree entirely and have asked many times why Kun looks for his man instead of at the ball, as he did in this incident, though he doesn't normally throw his elbow.I think he meant it but in my original post was guessing what City's defence might be, that is ' didn't hit him and didn't intend to'.He looks at Reid first before throwing an elbow, whether or not he landed it or intended to it's still violent conduct, if you throw a punch and miss you would still be sent off or punished by the FA.