Hull striker George Boyd has been hit with a Football Association misconduct charge for spitting at Manchester City keeper Joe Hart.
Boyd has until 6pm on Wednesday to respond to the charge, which relates to an incident which was not seen by referee Lee Mason during the Tigers' 2-0 Barclays Premier League defeat by City at the KC Stadium on Saturday.
An FA statement said: "Hull City's George Boyd has been charged by the FA following his side's game against Manchester City on March 15, 2014.
"The charge is in relation to an alleged breach of FA Rule E1 [a] in that in or around the 68th minute of the game, Boyd spat at Manchester City's Joe Hart. The incident was not seen by the match officials but caught on video.
"Boyd has until 6pm on March 19, 2014 to respond to the charge.
"Under a new pilot project in Premier League matches this season, if an incident has not been seen by the match officials, a three-man panel of former elite referees will be asked by the FA to review it and advise what, if any action, they believe the match referee should have taken had it been witnessed at the time.
"For an FA charge to follow, all three panel members must agree it is a sending-off offence. In this instance, the panel were of the unanimous decision that it was an act of misconduct."
Boyd and Hart became embroiled in a furious exchange after the striker went to ground under the keeper's challenge inside the City area.
Mr Mason waved away his appeals for a penalty as Hart confronted the Tigers man, intimating that he had dived.
The England international was cautioned after the pair clashed heads, but television replays later suggested Boyd had spat during the bust-up.
Hull boss Steve Bruce later defended his player, but the panel of referees decided there was indeed a case to answer.
Hart was booked for his part in the incident and the FA has confirmed that, as the referee saw and dealt with his conduct, he will face no further action.
However Boyd, who was not cautioned at the time, has not been so fortunate and will face a ban should he either plead or be found guilty.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article