FA release explanation of Evans spitting verdict

Only Jonny Evans will know whether he intended to spit at Papiss Cisse, the independent commission who judged the incident has said.

The Independent Regulatory Commission that found Jonny Evans guilty of spitting at Papiss Cisse earlier this month has said only the Manchester United defender will know his level of intent.

Evans and Newcastle United striker Cisse each received suspensions after spitting at each other during Manchester United's visit to St James' Park on March 4.

Both players received a six-game ban, with an extra game added to Cisse's suspension due to a previous violent conduct charge against the forward this season.

While Cisse swiftly admitted his guilt and apologised, Evans maintained his innocence, only to be found guilty by an independent panel.

On Thursday, the Football Association (FA) released the written reasons for the commission's verdict, which explained that Evans had "failed in his duty of care" by spitting at Cisse, regardless of his intent.

A section of the judgement read: "The video evidence is crucial. Without doubt it clearly shows what happened.

"The Regulatory Commission has been referred to Mr. Evans' "intent" which in the opinion of Manchester United was not to spit at Mr. Cisse.

"Only one person knows his intent and that is Mr. Evans. The Regulatory Commission, with the best will in the world cannot, and certainly should not, guess at his intent.

"What is clear from the video clips is what actually happened, and then the immediate reaction/response of Mr. Cisse [in spitting at Evans].

"After a long and very detailed and intense discussion the Regulatory Commission came to the unanimous conclusion that on the balance of probability the case against Mr. Evans was proved.

"Mr. Evans had (and has) a duty of care, if spitting for whatever reason, not to direct the same in the general direction of an opponent, or indeed anyone else. The video clips clearly show that he failed in his duty of care.

"There may, in some quarters, be substantial sympathy for Mr. Evans, but the video evidence shows that he did what he did, and the ordinary man in the street will find his action to be simply disgusting and should not be allowed in any walk of life, let alone on any football field.

"The Regulatory Commission did not consider that there are any "truly exceptional" circumstances in this case and therefore the "standard/automatic" punishment of six matches is imposed with immediate effect."