it doesn't

because the fa took out a court injunction and the times for example have had to redact the offence:

"Swindon captain’s foul play so unpleasant it couldn’t be reported by FA

Ollie Clarke gets seven-game ban for committing ‘highly violating’ act on two opponents in cup game, the details of which were redacted from disciplinary report. The captain of Swindon Town was given a seven-match ban after being found to have committed a “highly violating” act upon two opponents that was so unpleasant that it was redacted from an FA disciplinary report.
Ollie Clarke, 33, was given the ban after indecent behaviour towards two opponents’ “private body parts” during a Carabao Cup game against Cardiff City on August 12.
The 33-year-old midfielder was also fined £2,750 — a week’s wages. He admitted two charges of acting in an improper manner or using indecent behaviour to an opponent, but claimed they were unintentional.
The FA regulatory commission’s written reasons state: “With regard to this extraordinary incident in his match report, the referee, Mr Elliot Bell, stated: ‘Upon blowing the final whistle, XXXX [redacted] of Cardiff came to me and was visibly upset alleging that Ollie Clarke of Swindon had XXXXX [redacted]. He was very emotional and struggled to speak.".

grabbing someone by the goolies is hardly a reason to redact the offence. my five pence is on the amateur proctologist.

Posted By: Tombs, Jan 13, 21:32:43