| Cunha charged 10:32 - Dec 17 with 6601 views | SitfcB |
|  |
| |  |
| Cunha charged on 16:08 - Dec 17 with 1380 views | FrankfurtBlue |
| Cunha charged on 12:37 - Dec 17 by bluearmy4838 |
Had he done that to an opposition player on the pitch it’s violent conduct and at least a 3 game ban. That feels like a minimum in this instance, perhaps with a 4th on top for good measure. |
Never seen an opposition player with glasses.  |  | | |
| Cunha charged on 16:19 - Dec 17 with 1333 views | positivity |
| Cunha charged on 16:08 - Dec 17 by FrankfurtBlue |
Never seen an opposition player with glasses. |
edgar davids? |  |
| |
| I think they did that.... on 16:25 - Dec 17 with 1307 views | Bloots |
| Cunha charged on 15:58 - Dec 17 by Basuco |
The FA could hold the hearing on Friday, I'm sure they have done this in the past when a club tried to get a player to miss a more winnable match, but might be mistaken. |
....with the budgies last week.
They appealed McLean's elbow and the FA told them 5 hours before kick off that the appeal had failed.
That'll learn 'em. |  |
| "....a smegma of a man” - TWTD User (Apr 2026) |
| |
| I think they did that.... on 16:30 - Dec 17 with 1265 views | positivity |
| I think they did that.... on 16:25 - Dec 17 by Bloots |
....with the budgies last week.
They appealed McLean's elbow and the FA told them 5 hours before kick off that the appeal had failed.
That'll learn 'em. |
isn't it a bonus to have mclean unavailable? | |
| |
| Yeah, he got a 5 game ban.... on 17:01 - Dec 17 with 1177 views | Bloots |
| I think they did that.... on 16:30 - Dec 17 by positivity |
isn't it a bonus to have mclean unavailable? |
....the budgies were appealing for 6. | |
| "....a smegma of a man” - TWTD User (Apr 2026) |
| |
| Cunha charged on 18:01 - Dec 17 with 1063 views | Basuco |
| Cunha charged on 16:19 - Dec 17 by positivity |
edgar davids? |
I asked my optician why a Glaucoma sufferer would need to wear glasses, he replied that opticians had asked the same question. |  | | |
| Cunha charged on 20:26 - Dec 17 with 919 views | Suffolktractor |
| Cunha charged on 15:40 - Dec 17 by Metal_Hacker |
How can they appeal an elbow to the back of the head followed by nicking the guy’s glasses ffs ?! |
‘It wasn’t him guvnor what did it, it was someone else in an orange jumper.’
So unlucky they put players names on the back of their shirts now! | | | |
| Cunha charged on 21:02 - Dec 17 with 877 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Cunha charged on 20:26 - Dec 17 by Suffolktractor |
‘It wasn’t him guvnor what did it, it was someone else in an orange jumper.’
So unlucky they put players names on the back of their shirts now! |
They describe it on the radio as "clashed with security staff".
Why cant people say what actually happened. Elbowed a bloke int he back of the head without warning and that swiped his glassess off. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Cunha charged on 21:10 - Dec 17 with 863 views | IpswichTownBlue |
| Cunha charged on 15:35 - Dec 17 by AbujaBlue |
Some reports that they are appealing it, which means he could play against Leicester?
|
Not surprising- but sad if Wolves'appeal. Looking at the footage I can't see any way in which Cunha was provoked? If its your player you accept the rightful ban and teach them a lesson- get that he's an important player for Wolves though and that's all they'll care about.. [Post edited 17 Dec 2024 21:10]
| | | |
| Cunha charged on 22:23 - Dec 17 with 755 views | Exiled2Surrey |
| Cunha charged on 21:10 - Dec 17 by IpswichTownBlue |
Not surprising- but sad if Wolves'appeal. Looking at the footage I can't see any way in which Cunha was provoked? If its your player you accept the rightful ban and teach them a lesson- get that he's an important player for Wolves though and that's all they'll care about.. [Post edited 17 Dec 2024 21:10]
|
Might he be sold in January (given their owners)? Might never play for them again - what a way to go out…. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
