Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
NAME_1 manager NAME_2 has reminded NAME_3 and NAME_4 about their professional responsibilities and urged them to learn from a chastening week. NAME_5, the England international who will lead NAME_1's line at Wembley on Sunday in the absence of the injured NAME_6, was exposed for inhaling the legal high nitrous oxide on Monday. Then 24 hours later pictures emerged of NAME_7 NAME_8 with shisha pipes. NAME_3 (right) was pictured smoking a shisha pipe with team-mate NAME_4 earlier this season . NAME_1 NAME_9 (left) hasn't disciplined NAME_5 (pictured) or NAME_8 for the incident . NAME_8 was present among the Reds squad during their training session on Friday ahead of their FA Cup semi . NAME_10, who has NAME_11 available for the FA Cup semi-final with NAME_12, spoke to NAME_7 NAME_8 in his office on Thursday but neither will be disciplined

Summary:
1. NAME_1 face NAME_12 in the FA Cup semi-final on Sunday .
2. NAME_13 has reminded NAME_3 and NAME_4 about their professional responsibilities .
3. NAME_5 was exposed for inhaling legal high nitrous oxide on Monday .
4. 24 hours later pictures emerged of NAME_7 NAME_8 with shisha pipes .

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you answer no, explain which sentence is inconsistent and why.
