|
Crouch
Jan 24, 2012 18:34:08 GMT
Post by terryb on Jan 24, 2012 18:34:08 GMT
Please could someone explain how the FA have decided not to charge Peter Crouch over his actions against West Brom?
I accept that he may not have aimed for the players eye but there can be no dispute that planting his hand into their face looked intentional.
It may not be the case but the FA do seem to be more lenient to English players than to players of different nationalities.
|
|
|
Crouch
Jan 24, 2012 18:57:52 GMT
Post by maudesfishnchips on Jan 24, 2012 18:57:52 GMT
not barton
|
|
|
Crouch
Jan 24, 2012 19:01:19 GMT
Post by gramps on Jan 24, 2012 19:01:19 GMT
Please could someone explain how the FA have decided not to charge Peter Crouch over his actions against West Brom? I accept that he may not have aimed for the players eye but there can be no dispute that planting his hand into their face looked intentional. It may not be the case but the FA do seem to be more lenient to English players than to players of different nationalities. I was appalled to see what crouch did and I can't understand the FA either. Crouch could have done that guy a serious injury.
|
|
|
Crouch
Jan 24, 2012 20:19:45 GMT
Post by cowleyhoop on Jan 24, 2012 20:19:45 GMT
Come on i was laughing at his pathetic effort at poking the fella in the eye the fa probably took pity on him thinking he made himself look stupid enough.
|
|
|
Crouch
Jan 24, 2012 20:33:47 GMT
Post by harlowranger on Jan 24, 2012 20:33:47 GMT
Well it was out of character for Crouch , not normally a dirty player !
|
|