http://www.thestar.co.uk/sportheadlines/Hume-on-the-mend.4948301.jp How exactly was it "a collision"? Does The Star report incidents of assault in the same way? FFS!
RE: Legal reasons? The press have to make sure they don't prejudice any legal proceedings. Is this an example of that?
anyone else see... ...graham poll refer to the incident as an "attack", the other day? bloody FA, FIFA, get rid of 'em both. grr
if it was deemed by the FA as anything more then i think it would have been called something else they dont want to be seen biased and siding to a court procedure which involves so many views
I think the FA would refer to it as "a jolly old sing-a-long" with "gay banter" aplenty.</p> Bunch of fusty old farts who don't know arse from elbow! </p>
They got away with it with the FA. </p> As far as we know preparations for civil action are taking place.</p>
Credit where it's due for sorting it out. Well done Daily Star. </p> As it's been so readily changed I think it's safe to assume the writer wasn't trying to make light of the incident and was guilty only of being less sensitive about the terminology than we are.</p>