MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
That Mail piece reads like wishful thinking and extreme interpretation of notes from the FA.
If there was anything solid from the FA, it would be quoted in full sentences, not two words and insinuation. Points deduction probably is at the top end of scale, but I strongly doubt it's even been thought about.
There's one point where apparently the FA 'claim' City players aggravated the Wigan situation by hassling the ref - I don't think there's an argument that if City players had stayed away, then it would been less of a flashpoint (not denying there was probable cause to do so), and I suspect this was more 'noted' than 'claimed'. 'Claimed' is Mail inflammation to create an image in the hard of thinking.
The piece doesn't absolve Wigan, it just doesn't mention their part much. That's not the same thing - if Wigan were absolved, it would say so.
I can see Ashton to rewrite the piece in the Sun in the next day or two.
If there was anything solid from the FA, it would be quoted in full sentences, not two words and insinuation. Points deduction probably is at the top end of scale, but I strongly doubt it's even been thought about.
There's one point where apparently the FA 'claim' City players aggravated the Wigan situation by hassling the ref - I don't think there's an argument that if City players had stayed away, then it would been less of a flashpoint (not denying there was probable cause to do so), and I suspect this was more 'noted' than 'claimed'. 'Claimed' is Mail inflammation to create an image in the hard of thinking.
The piece doesn't absolve Wigan, it just doesn't mention their part much. That's not the same thing - if Wigan were absolved, it would say so.
I can see Ashton to rewrite the piece in the Sun in the next day or two.