|
Post by eusebio13 on Sept 27, 2012 18:38:04 GMT
This is his real punishment Chelsea captain John Terry has long-running boot deal with kit supplier Umbro kicked into touch John Terry has been dropped by Umbro following the allegations of racial abuse that culminated in a Football Association disciplinary hearing at Wembley on Monday. All change: John Terry's long-running kit sponsorship deal with Umbro has not been renewed Photo: AFP By Matt Scott10:18PM BST 24 Sep 2012 Terry has been one of the mainstays of the kit supplier’s stable of players endorsing its products, in a long-running deal believed to have been worth £4 million a year to him. However that came to an end last season and, Telegraph Sport can reveal, it has not been renewed. The decision not to extend the deal came following an internal review at Umbro, which took into account matters in the criminal trial over allegations he racially abused Anton Ferdinand during a match against Queens Park Rangers last season. Despite his acquittal in that trial, an Umbro insider confirmed on Monday: “The deal wasn’t renewed. He was wearing Umbro boots at the weekend but I think they were from his old contract.” Umbro, which is now a subsidiary of Nike – though it has been put up for sale by the US sportswear manufacturer – had stood by Terry during previous episodes of scandal and it is believed to be the last commercial deal Terry still had. Terry lost the England captaincy in 2010 after it was alleged he had had an affair with his former Chelsea and international team-mate Wayne Bridge's former partner. But by then it appears his advisers were already trying too hard to boost his commercial profile. Terry had lost his status as the face of Konami Sports’ computer-console game Pro Evolution Soccer and a promotion with King of Shaves proved to be a one-off sponsorship. In late 2009 Terry’s agency, Elite Management, engaged Riviera Entertainment, a public-relations firm, to promote the search for sponsors. In a widely distributed press release to sponsorship agencies and firms active in sports endorsements, it wrote: “Are you looking for a leader to represent your brand? John Terry Captain of England and Chelsea Football Team. “Riviera Entertainment is identifying suitable commercial endorsement opportunities for its client John Terry for the period building up to the [2010 World Cup] finals — and beyond. “If you are looking for a fresh approach for your brand during the time leading up to the World Cup, or feel it would benefit from being associated with a leader – especially relevant in today’s ultra-competitive marketplace – then why not let the nation’s football captain help get your message across.” At the time Terry claimed the email had been sent “without my authority or knowledge and was not approved by me (or those advising me)”. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9564018/Chelsea-captain-John-Terry-has-long-running-boot-deal-with-kit-supplier-Umbro-kicked-into-touch.html
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 27, 2012 19:14:58 GMT
I'm (obviously) glad he was found guilty. I'm (obviously) disappointed he didnt a 100 Year ban. But basically after today, let's Move on - and concentrate on QPR...Because of the two clubs, probably QPR have suffered more from the John Terry Focus. Especially for the Players and people running the club But of course, should there be any hint of an England reinstatement.... Moving on is all bery laudible mac but do you think he will? Unless his legal advisors or his club tell him to leave it, he won't. He can't stand the loss of face alone and leaves him open to ridicule everywhere he goes. Like I said already, he'll appeal. He won't move on and don't forget the talk of a civil case by Ferdinand, this ruling leaves him open to that as well. Nobody will be moving on all that quickly, that is for sure.
|
|
|
Post by mfnc on Sept 27, 2012 19:18:33 GMT
the aliens are coming to get him, i've seen crop circles that told me so.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 27, 2012 19:22:52 GMT
This is his real punishment Chelsea captain John Terry has long-running boot deal with kit supplier Umbro kicked into touch John Terry has been dropped by Umbro following the allegations of racial abuse that culminated in a Football Association disciplinary hearing at Wembley on Monday. All change: John Terry's long-running kit sponsorship deal with Umbro has not been renewed Photo: AFP By Matt Scott10:18PM BST 24 Sep 2012 Terry has been one of the mainstays of the kit supplier’s stable of players endorsing its products, in a long-running deal believed to have been worth £4 million a year to him. However that came to an end last season and, Telegraph Sport can reveal, it has not been renewed. The decision not to extend the deal came following an internal review at Umbro, which took into account matters in the criminal trial over allegations he racially abused Anton Ferdinand during a match against Queens Park Rangers last season. Despite his acquittal in that trial, an Umbro insider confirmed on Monday: “The deal wasn’t renewed. He was wearing Umbro boots at the weekend but I think they were from his old contract.” Umbro, which is now a subsidiary of Nike – though it has been put up for sale by the US sportswear manufacturer – had stood by Terry during previous episodes of scandal and it is believed to be the last commercial deal Terry still had. Terry lost the England captaincy in 2010 after it was alleged he had had an affair with his former Chelsea and international team-mate Wayne Bridge's former partner. But by then it appears his advisers were already trying too hard to boost his commercial profile. Terry had lost his status as the face of Konami Sports’ computer-console game Pro Evolution Soccer and a promotion with King of Shaves proved to be a one-off sponsorship. In late 2009 Terry’s agency, Elite Management, engaged Riviera Entertainment, a public-relations firm, to promote the search for sponsors. In a widely distributed press release to sponsorship agencies and firms active in sports endorsements, it wrote: “Are you looking for a leader to represent your brand? John Terry Captain of England and Chelsea Football Team. “Riviera Entertainment is identifying suitable commercial endorsement opportunities for its client John Terry for the period building up to the [2010 World Cup] finals — and beyond. “If you are looking for a fresh approach for your brand during the time leading up to the World Cup, or feel it would benefit from being associated with a leader – especially relevant in today’s ultra-competitive marketplace – then why not let the nation’s football captain help get your message across.” At the time Terry claimed the email had been sent “without my authority or knowledge and was not approved by me (or those advising me)”. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9564018/Chelsea-captain-John-Terry-has-long-running-boot-deal-with-kit-supplier-Umbro-kicked-into-touch.html Excellent work Umbro you may be going down the pan and if this is your last action you will be remembered with joy and pleasure for all those holding England kits dear! ;D Imagine how much he'll try and charge for ground and training ground tours now!!!!
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 27, 2012 19:24:56 GMT
the aliens are coming to get him, i've seen crop circles that told me so. Why does that not surprise me?
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Sept 27, 2012 20:10:12 GMT
Umbro turn out better kits than Lotto! So what now for Cashley Cole?
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Sept 27, 2012 21:20:12 GMT
John Terry will find the stigma of racism sticks like a tick to a dog The standing of the player once known as Teflon Terry has been considerably damaged by this judgment Share 7 Email Daniel Taylor The Guardian, Thursday 27 September 2012 21.24 BST The stigma of racism will stick to Chelsea's John Terry like a tick on a dog. Photograph: Glyn Kirk/AFP/Getty Images The first thing that hits you between the eyes is that you don't get much for the odd bit of racial abuse, do you? Four games, to be precise. Just one more than the usual ban for a bad tackle and red card. Or, to put it another way, half the punishment Luis Suárez received when another of the Football Association's independent commissions decided he had repeatedly called Patrice Evra "negro" during an argument when Manchester United played at Anfield last season. Fewer, too, than the case of Ruesha Littlejohn, a Liverpool Ladies player who made some comments on her Twitter account that the FA deemed in May as "including a reference to sexual orientation". The chances are you have never heard of this case. Littlejohn, now of Glasgow City, got six games. In Suárez's case it is because the FA ruled he had said the offending word not just once but seven times. Yet it still seems strange that the FA can decide John Terry directed a stream of vile abuse – we all know the words by now – in the direction of an opponent and that it is barely more serious than the average red-card offence, with a fine of not much more than a week's wages thrown in. Terry, naturally, will cling to his warped belief that he is the victim, not Anton Ferdinand, and we have already witnessed from the Suárez case how inside the football bubble there will be a stampede of people reassuring him that they believe every word and it is all a witch hunt – for no other reason, very often, than because they happen to follow his football team. Yet the truth, unmistakably, is that Terry has been fortunate. The FA's commission had the chance to impose the kind of sanction that does justice to the idea that racism is, to use Terry's own words earlier this summer, as deplorable as it gets and that football won't tolerate it. It went for leniency instead. That is not the way Terry will see it, of course, when the FA's investigators have not been deterred by the verdict from Westminster magistrates court in July and, true, the damage will be considerable in other ways, in terms of his standing, the way he is judged and what it means for him over the rest of his career. Men of supreme arrogance have a tendency never to admit wrongdoing but, from here, it does not matter how many people his lawyers produce to talk about what a nice guy he really is and how, again, it is all one big misunderstanding. His reputation has suffered potentially irreparable damage with this judgment. Chelsea's captain used to be nicknamed "Teflon Terry" because of the way nothing ever stuck and every accusation of potentially dodgy behaviour – allegedly charging £10,000 for a training-ground tour, the apparent touting of his executive box at Wembley, and all the rest – was explained away as crossed wires or some innocent mistake. No more. The stigma of racism is attached to Terry like a tick on the side of a dog. The people who want to believe he is somehow the victim may like to ponder what the mood must be like in football when an organisation as eminently sensible as Kick It Out has aligned itself to Ferdinand, its representatives even sitting with his parents in court, on the basis that it considered Terry's account flimsy in the extreme. Terry's camp has not been short of character references, involving some of the great and good of Chelsea. José Mourinho signed. So did the bloke who supplies cars for Chelsea's players. Avram Grant, who has experienced racism and should know better, argued this week that the case should never have been brought. "Nobody thinks John Terry is a racist," he said. "The FA needs to leave it." What Terry's sympathisers have never explained is why, inside football, it was known well before the trial began that Didier Drogba, Nicolas Anelka, Mikel John Obi and Chelsea's Kick It Out ambassador, Florent Malouda, were not among those from Stamford Bridge who had signed statements supporting their colleague. Contrary to what Grant says, there has actually been a great sense of anger and revulsion within the game about what Terry said to Ferdinand when Chelsea played at QPR last season. Some of Terry's England colleagues have had to blank it out. At least one is understood to have confronted him. Fitz Hall is another example – a player Terry talked about during the trial as if they were old mates, going back years. Hall was a QPR player when Terry and Ferdinand started their row. The message Hall put on Twitter on 13 July, the day of Terry's acquittal, was short and to the point: "F***ing joke." He was far from alone. "Thanks football – you set entire country back a decade," John Amaechi, the former NBA basketball player, said. "Madness" was the word used by Anthony Gerrard, a Cardiff City player at the time. Except it actually was not madness. If Terry said he heard Ferdinand shouting the offending words first, and that he was merely repeating them back out of surprise, who could say definitively he was wrong? It may seem unusual, far-fetched even, but a court needs proof beyond a reasonable doubt whereas the FA's disciplinary arm rules on the basis of probability. If nothing else, that disparity gives Chelsea the get-out clause they will almost certainly take to avoid investigating Terry themselves. At a normal company, he would have been suspended as soon as the allegation surfaced. The young reserve who let off a smoke bomb at the club's training ground was. So were the security staff who accidentally damaged the Champions League trophy. Chelsea have a strong and successful anti-racism campaign and, if they turn a blind eye now, when the football authorities are telling them Terry is guilty, it would send out completely the wrong message. As it is, a ban of only four matches has done that itself. Comments will be turned on for this story at 8am on Friday 28 September www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/sep/27/john-terry-racism-fa-ban?newsfeed=true
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 27, 2012 21:52:59 GMT
That's an excellent piece
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 28, 2012 7:38:52 GMT
At least three times on BBC Breakfast, the female presenting the sports news says "despite being cleared in a court of law". I sent in an email just after 6:30 and yet, two hours later, she is repeatnig it!!!
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 28, 2012 8:17:03 GMT
TELEGRAPH
Premier League chief Richard Scudamore says delay in John Terry verdict damaged football's reputation Richard Scudamore has urged the Football Association to move more quickly in dealing with issues involving the criminal justice system after claiming that the John Terry-Anton Ferdinand racism case has tarnished the reputation of the Premier League.By Mark Ogden 11:00PM BST 27 Sep 2012 Chelsea captain Terry was suspended for four matches and fined £220,000 by the FA on Thursday after being found guilty of using racially abusive language towards Queens Park Rangers defender Ferdinand during a Premier League fixture at Loftus Road 11 months ago. The delay in the FA’s action centred on Terry being charged last December with racially abusing Ferdinand by the Crown Prosecution Service. Terry was cleared in July of a racially aggravated public order offence at Westminster Magistrates Court, but the FA subsequently brought disciplinary charges under its own rules. However, with the process taking almost a year, Premier League chief executive Scudamore insists that any future joint actions should be dealt with more swiftly by the football authorities. “Of course, reputationally, it [the Terry case] is not good for the Premier League,” Scudamore said. “But we also know that these incidents come along from time to time and they have to be dealt with and dealt with properly. “The fact is, the criminal justice system has had a look at it and decided and the football system, which is a different test and I respect the fact the FA has to look at it, has also decided. “It is very difficult, but my concern is the length of time that this takes because we have been sitting here, unable to move on and unable to get clarity. We have to work out a way of doing these things earlier. “If the argument is that these things [charges] are completely separate, irrespective of what the courts decide, if football’s test is different, why can’t we decide [the outcome] if it is a completely different test? “I don’t quite know why one has to wait for the other if the tests are completely different. “It would have been much better for everybody, whether the outcome is positive or negative, if it was done quickly.” Terry’s punishment at the hands of the FA comes nine months after Liverpool’s Luis Suarez was suspended for eight games and fined £40,000 for racially abusing Manchester United’s Patrice Evra in a Premier League clash at Anfield last October. And despite insisting that the game is committed to driving racism out of football, Scudamore concedes that more can be done following a government report stating that the sport has to do more. “We could all do more.” Scudamore said. “Your readers could donate more to charity, we could all spend more time with our local communities, so of course we can all do more. “That’s not a flippant answer. The report also said football has done an awful lot and I would put football’s record alongside any other area of society and say we have done more to combat racism than any other group you could point to. “But is there more we can do? Of course we can and we will continue to do that. The whole equality agenda, we will continue to strive to be at the leading edge of that.” With the build-up to last Sunday’s Liverpool-Manchester United fixture overshadowed by concerns over the airing of chants mocking the victims of the Munich and Hillsborough disasters, Scudamore admits that the scourge of such chants is an issue which requires a broad-minded approach. He said: “We reached a bit of a watershed last week with the Hillsborough and Munich chants and I think, universally, we agree that they are not acceptable. “But it is a difficult one. There is a continuum of very tame chanting to those at the other end, but when you get towards the middle, everybody’s degree of offence is different. “Our referees clearly have a very high threshold in terms of what they have take, but if you put ten people in a room and played 20 chants, we’d all have a different view on where the line is. “Those chants at the extreme end, we all want eradicated, but those towards the middle get to the essence of why the game is popular, because it is noisy, tribal, visceral, emotional and irrational.” www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/9572169/Premier-League-chief-Richard-Scudamore-says-delay-in-John-Terry-verdict-damaged-footballs-reputation.html
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 28, 2012 8:18:20 GMT
TELEGRAPH John Terry has been found guilty but key questions remain over Football Association verdict Chelsea captain John Terry has been handed a four-game ban and fined £220,000 but there are key questions over the Football Association's verdict. John Terry leaves Wembley after the second day of his FA hearing Questions still to answer: John Terry has the right to appeal the FA verdict Photo: AP Paul Kelso By Paul Kelso 10:27PM BST 27 Sep 2012 What will happen if Terry appeals, and can he take his fight on anywhere else if his appeal fails? Terry has 14 days from receipt of the written judgment in which to lodge an appeal. The appeal would be heard by a new panel, and would consider only legal arguments unless there an application to admit new evidence is granted. The Football Association can also appeal against the length of the sanction, but that is unlikely. If the appeal fails there are limited options as the FA regulations state its disciplinary processes are binding and final. Why has a court found Terry not guilty, and this panel found him guilty? There are different standards of proof and the charges are subtly different. While the criminal prosecution had to prove Terry intended to offend Ferdinand, the FA charge only had to establish he used offensive language. Terry admitted using the phrase “f------ black c---” but told the court he was repeating an allegation made to him by Ferdinand, and rejecting it. District Judge Howard Riddle said, “Mr Terry’s explanation is, certainly under the cold light of forensic examination, unlikely.” Despite this he said it was possible that the words were not intended as an insult. “In those circumstances, there being a doubt, the only verdict the court can record is one of not guilty,” he concluded. Why a four-game ban when Suarez was given eight? Related Articles Elliott: Terry needs to say sorry 28 Sep 2012 Terry considers appeal over FA racism ban 27 Sep 2012 Scudamore: we could do more to beat racism 27 Sep 2012 Right to ban Terry for toxic language 27 Sep 2012 Chelsea games Terry could miss 27 Sep 2012 Jim White: FA right to ban Terry over toxic language 27 Sep 2012 It is impossible to say until the panel publishes its full judgment, but the panel in the Luis Suárez case ruled that his ban was extended because he had used the offensive phrase repeatedly. Terry may have benefited from using the words only once. Why was the fine (£220,000) so much more than Suarez’s (£40,000)? Fines are linked to weekly net wages. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9572516/John-Terry-has-been-found-guilty-but-key-questions-remain-over-Football-Association-verdict.html
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 28, 2012 8:19:32 GMT
Henry Winter/Telegraph ome» Sport» Football» Teams» Chelsea It will hurt but now is the time for John Terry to see the error of his ways And that is why John Terry’s England career had to be over. Terry pre-empted the inevitable with his decision to retire internationally before the Independent Regulatory Commission ruled he made a racist comment towards Anton Ferdinand. Terry could not represent his country with such a stain on his reputation. John Terry with Anton Ferdinand at Loftus Road last season Guilty of racism: John Terry with Anton Ferdinand at Loftus Road last season Photo: PA Henry Winter By Henry Winter 11:20PM BST 27 Sep 2012 Comments28 Comments Even if Roy Hodgson naively thought he could pick a tainted player, however talented, then the England manager would have been advised to think again. By the Football Assocation. By right-minded observers. By the public outside SW6. After his deserved spell in Purdah, Terry can continue turning out for Chelsea, assuming they still value his footballing worth above any damage inflicted on the club’s image. But England? That is still an honour and certain standards should apply. Those found guilty of racism need not apply. So what should Terry do now? “JT” is a toxic brand in football currently, in wider society too, a reality he and his advisers must address quickly and shrewdly. Does he want to spend the rest of his life stigmatised, not just him but his family? So adept at the art of tackling, one of England’s finest centre-halves will never face a greater challenge than this. Terry needs to set off down the road to contrition, never an easy step for the confident Londoner, but a crucial journey none the less. Related Articles Elliott: Terry needs to say sorry 28 Sep 2012 Questions remain over FA verdict 27 Sep 2012 Terry will find way to get in the picture 28 Sep 2012 Villas-Boas: Terry is 'massive' loss 27 Sep 2012 Terry considers appeal over FA racism ban 27 Sep 2012 It’s time for some mea culpa, for an apology to Anton Ferdinand, and a public acceptance that he has erred. Anyone familiar with such a proud, tough character as Terry will know such a humbling course of action will be painful but he must show some rare self-awareness, some remorse. Penitence is an appealing feature. The alternative is pig-headed ignorance of his shame, of a guarantee of condemnatory whispers wherever he goes. It’s Terry’s call. If he goes ahead with an appeal, an option he is considering and is also his right, the 31 year-old will simply delay the inevitable day of reckoning. He’s been found guilty. Two trained lawyers, Craig Moore and Stuart Ripley, were on the three-man Independent Regulatory Commission examining events of Oct 23, 2011. The FA was leaving nothing to chance. This judgment will stick. The understanding is that Terry will not have his ban increased if he appeals and fails. The FA is not that vindictive. What Terry should also be aware of is that the governing body can also appeal the IRC’s decision, arguing that four games is insufficient for an offence containing a racial element. Toxteth is in forment, enraged that Liverpool’s Luis Suárez received twice the sanction, although ignoring the Uruguayan’s repeated use of the word “negro” towards Manchester United’s Patrice Evra. The FA, quite rightly, cannot and will not be steered by outraged outpourings across social-media networks. Trial by Twitter is not here just yet. If the FA did appeal, however unlikely a development, it would highlight the independent nature of the tribunal and underline further the FA’s strong stance on racism. David Bernstein’s organisation is putting deeds to fine words, disciplinary action to all the talk and T-shirts. Hodgson’s support for Terry was always a misguided gamble. Thursday’s verdict echoed Bernstein’s statement to the players at the start of the season that they are role models, that language in the heat of sporting battle should still never cross certain lines. Terry crossed that line, according to the IRC. The written reasons of Moore, Ripley and FA councillor Maurice Armstrong will clarify exactly why Terry was punished only with four games but clearly the element of provocation was taken into account. Chelsea’s cocky captain receives abuse from opponents, more than the usual competitive banter, straying into personal details. He hears relentless heckling from opposing fans, some of it pernicious and tasteless about his mother. But let us step back from the cordite and focus on exactly who is the victim here. Anton Ferdinand, according to the FA, endured a comment from Terry, whether in or out of context, that was degrading. Ferdinand is hoping that now Terry has been punished that this is the end of the matter, although he understandably wants to read through the IRC’s written reasons. Terry should think about all these factors. He must base his decision about an appeal on the temperature outside Stamford Bridge. Inside, it is warm and loving and filled with banners declaring: “Captain, Leader, Legend”. Outside, it is full of Manchester United fans laughing and chanting “Viva John Terry” at his missed penalty in Moscow, full of Kopites making ribald comments about his mother, ultimately full of people who think Terry is a serially unpleasant individual. Terry risks being deemed the Exxon Valdez of English football, an oil spill polluting the game. The public knows all about Terry’s assorted embarrassments, the allegations of affairs, the tours of the training ground, the parking issues, and the footballing offences such as cynically kneeing Barcelona’s Alexis Sanchez at the Nou Camp last season. That crass act summed up Terry; he thought he could get away with it. When caught, Terry initially claimed that he was not the type to commit such an offence. Laughable. It’s him. Shakespeare would have gone through countless quills with Terry, the warrior riddled with human failings. Yet a frustration needs flagging up here. Anyone who has spent time with Terry will find him agreeable company, partly because of his chatty nature. It needs stating that some of the younger generation could do with acquiring Terry’s will to win. He’s patriotic, he’s given everything for England, including suffering a sequence of injuries. Terry’s not all bad. But he’s lucky to escape with only four games in the stands for a racist remark, only 90 minutes more than those who rearrange an opponent’s shin pads. Terry should open his eyes and see his flaws. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9572582/It-will-hurt-but-now-is-the-time-for-John-Terry-to-see-the-error-of-his-ways.html
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 28, 2012 8:21:20 GMT
TELEGRAPH » Sport» Football» Teams» Chelsea Chelsea captain John Terry considers appeal over four-match ban and fine for racial abuse John Terry will take legal advice before deciding whether to appeal against the four-match ban for racially abusing Anton Ferdinand handed down by a Football Association disciplinary commission yesterday. Chelsea captain John Terry considers appeal over four-match ban and fine for racial abuse Disappointed: John Terry has asked to see detailed written reports on the FA verdict before considering an appeal on legal grounds Photo: GETTY IMAGES By Paul Kelso, Chief Sports Reporter 11:00PM BST 27 Sep 2012 Comments112 Comments The Chelsea defender was banned and fined £220,000 after being found guilty of misconduct in a Premier League match against Queens Park Rangers last season, in which he admits he directed the words “f------ black c---” towards Ferdinand. Terry was acquitted of criminal charges arising form the same incident in July, but the FA disciplinary arm pursued the case despite the not-guilty verdict at Westminster Magistrates’ Court. The Chelsea captain was found guilty of using “abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour, which included a reference to ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race” by an Independent Regulatory Commission convened by the FA. The Telegraph can reveal that the IRC was chaired by barrister Craig Moore, and also included FA councillor Maurice Armstrong. Stuart Ripley, the former Blackburn Rovers winger, was a third member of the panel. The FA prosecution case was led by Matthew Johnson, its head of Regulatory Legal Advice. Terry’s ban is half the length of the eight-match suspension handed to Liverpool striker Luis Suárez, who was also fined £40,000 after being found to have repeatedly used the word “negro” towards Patrice Evra last season. Related Articles Questions remain over FA verdict 27 Sep 2012 Scudamore: we could do more to beat racism 27 Sep 2012 Villas-Boas: Terry is 'massive' loss 27 Sep 2012 The length of Terry’s ban is sure to attract comment, being just one match more than players receive for violent conduct, and at the lower end of the scale for misconduct with racially aggravated circumstances. The FA is likely to counter any criticism by arguing that its pursuit of charges against such a high-profile player demonstrates both a determination to combat racism, and the independence of its disciplinary procedures. Labour shadow sports minister Clive Efford MP welcomed the decision: “The FA is right to take action over John Terry’s remarks,” he said. “It is unfortunate that John Terry’s England career has come to an end surrounded by controversy but racism cannot be tolerated and it has to be confronted no matter who is involved.” The FA’s pursuit of charges despite the criminal acquittal may also remain contentious. Terry’s lawyers attempted to have the case thrown out, claiming the FA’s own rules effectively banned double jeopardy where the case has been examined by a criminal court. The FA argued that its regulations require only that a player is proved to have uttered offensive language, with intent only considered in the sentencing. Terry admits using the words, but claims he used them because he thought Ferdinand was accusing him of using them in an abusive way earlier in the game. The panel’s reasoning should becoming clear in the full written judgment that will trigger a 14-day period in which Terry can appeal, but it is understood he will not challenge the decision unless he is advised he has legal grounds. The appeal can only address the legal basis of the decision and Terry is prepared to be guided by his legal team, led by George Carter-Stephenson QC. The verdict did not come as a shock to Terry, who was resigned to losing the case and prepared the ground for defeat by announcing his retirement from international football on the eve of the three-day hearing. Terry said the FA’s decision to pursue the charges following his acquittal made his position with the England team “untenable”, despite support from manager Roy Hodgson. In reality the decision has spared the FA and its chairman David Bernstein the task of deciding whether he could be selected for the national team again. Bernstein has already stripped Terry of the captaincy, ruling he could not lead the side into Euro 2012 when it was clear the criminal trial would not be concluded before the tournament. Terry returned to Wembley on Thursday morning to hear Moore announce that he was guilty. Terry then listened as Carter-Stephenson offered arguments in mitigation. Terry and his lawyers left Wembley around midday, leaving Moore and fellow panellists Armstrong, a member of the FA judiciary committee, and Ripley, to consider the sanction. Their verdict was announced at 3pm. In a statement released by his management company Terry said he was disappointed at the verdict. “Mr. Terry is disappointed that the FA Regulatory Commission has reached a different conclusion to the clear not guilty verdict of a court of law,” it said. “He has asked for the detailed written reasons of the decision and will consider them carefully before deciding whether to lodge an appeal.” Chelsea issued a short statement saying they respected the decision, but would not comment until a decision was made over an appeal. Terry remains available for selection and will expect to feature in the squad for this weekend’s game against Arsenal. The club’s support for Terry has clear from the presence of chairman Bruce Buck in court throughout the criminal trial, and at Wembley during the disciplinary hearing. Manager Roberto Di Matteo is giving a press conference on Friday but will be instructed not to answer questions on Terry in line with the club’s policy. Terry has paid his own legal fees. The IRC heard evidence from both Terry and Ferdinand, as well as supportive testimony from Ashley Cole, Ray Wilkins, Fabio Capello and his assistant as England manager Franco Baldini, who both provided character references for the former England captain. The FA disciplinary panel Craig Moore (chairman) A Leeds-based barrister who last year chaired a panel that fined Alex Ferguson £30,000 and banned him from the touchline for five games for "undermining the FA's respect campaign" with criticism of referee Martin Atkinson. Maurice Armstrong Head of the Huntingdonshire FA who sits on the FA's judicial and referees committees, as well as being a vice-president of the FA Council. Chaired the panel that banned Joey Barton for 12 games. Stuart Ripley Former Blackburn and England winger who qualified as a sports lawyer in 2010 and advises players and clubs on disciplinary matters. Based in Manchester. Prosecutor: Matthew Johnson The case against Terry was put by the FA's Head of Regulatory Legal Advice, an Everton fan who angered the club's supporters in 2009 when he emailed FA colleagues asking to buy their FA Cup Final tickets, having already been given two comlimentary seats. Terry's QC: George Carter-Stephenson The QC who successfully defended Terry at Westminster Magistrates Court in July. A specialist defence advocate whose website lists his experience in murder, terrorism and all areas of commercial, corporate and financial crime. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9572243/Chelsea-captain-John-Terry-considers-appeal-over-four-match-ban-and-fine-for-racial-abuse.html
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 28, 2012 8:43:34 GMT
As quoted above, the most damning words are these. “Mr Terry’s explanation is, certainly under the cold light of forensic examination, unlikely.” Hence he was not "cleared" he did not leave the court without a stain on his character, he was not exhonerated. “In those circumstances, there being a doubt, the only verdict the court can record is one of not guilty,” That is hardly being "cleared" is it ffs!!!
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 28, 2012 8:44:46 GMT
Although I must say, in my opinion, the judge's doubt was not a reasonable one. The explantion is beyond all reason!!!
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 28, 2012 8:48:18 GMT
Will, captain, liar, racist lead his boys out live on Sky tomorrow though?
Why has nobody asked Mikel what he said?
In both the cup game and the recent league game, he has hugged Ferdinand, not just shook his hand.
|
|
|
Post by sharky on Sept 28, 2012 9:13:13 GMT
Terry has 14 days in which to lodge an appeal. What's the bet he lodges an appeal on the 14th day!!
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 28, 2012 9:26:51 GMT
Terry has 14 days in which to lodge an appeal. What's the bet he lodges an appeal on the 14th day!! Mustn't be forgotten that the 14 days do not start until he has received the full report.
|
|
|
Post by twohalfs on Sept 28, 2012 10:30:36 GMT
I doubt that an appeal is in Terry's interests. Now that he has been found guilty by the FA there is very little support for him, perhaps even behind the scenes within his own club, and Chelsea will certainly not want this dragging on. The embarassment to them and pressure for them to ban him would only grow.
So expect a lot of rumblings of unjust treatment but no appeal. Apart from anything else the punishment was exactly in accordance with FA rules. Terry's England retirement was based on knowing that this was the almost certain outcome. In effect he pre-empted the decision and played the 'martyr' card which is all he had.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2012 13:03:09 GMT
I doubt that an appeal is in Terry's interests. Now that he has been found guilty by the FA there is very little support for him, perhaps even behind the scenes within his own club, and Chelsea will certainly not want this dragging on. The embarassment to them and pressure for them to ban him would only grow. So expect a lot of rumblings of unjust treatment but no appeal. Apart from anything else the punishment was exactly in accordance with FA rules. Terry's England retirement was based on knowing that this was the almost certain outcome. In effect he pre-empted the decision and played the 'martyr' card which is all he had. It will be interesting to see where racist scum Terry & his equally scum club go from here!!!........Seems like all kinds of things are starting to come out now!!! Other players (Even one from Chelski it seems) being disgusted by his actions........Nice to know that not all players are lying scum like Cole!! Now people are remembering what the judge said at the court case as well!!! IE that Terry more than likely said what he said but because of his lying excuse they couldn't prove beyond reasonable doubt!!! I myself hope this destroys him as a footballer as that will destroy him totally as he's a man chav who can't do anything else!! As much as I welcome the FA's charge I really think they screwed this up time wise!! Should have been done before the end of last year & should never have gone to a normal court as its proved time & time again you can get off with slimy team of lawyers!!! Then we wouldn't have the farce of him being found not guilty on a technical issue & people saying he was Innocent by not reading the judgment correctly & then WOY England suck up manager wouldn't have been able to even consider him for an England call up!!
|
|
|
Post by sharky on Sept 28, 2012 15:35:00 GMT
From Queens Park Rangers mad
Ferdinand speaks out over Terry ban By PA Updated Friday, 28th September 2012 Queens Park Rangers RSS Feed
Anton Ferdinand has broken his silence after John Terry was found guilty of using racist language towards him, declaring: "Footage don't lie!"
Ferdinand hit out at abuse he claimed to have received on Twitter since Terry was handed a four-match ban and ?220,000 fine by an independent Football Association panel over the pair's altercation almost a year ago. The QPR defender tweeted: "On a serious note people need 2 read the facts before they send stupid tweets 2 me with liar and grass in it footage don't lie!" Ferdinand's comment seemed to refer to the video footage that appeared to show Chelsea captain Terry using the words "f****** black c***" towards him during last October's west London derby at Loftus Road. Terry was cleared in July by Westminster Magistrates Court of uttering the words as an insult, but that did not prevent him being found guilty under FA rules on Thursday. Terry, who has always denied all charges against him, is still deciding whether to appeal that verdict and he has indicated he will wait until he has received the written judgment before making that decision. Chelsea refused to answer questions on Terry's ban at their press conference to preview Saturday's Barclays Premier League game at Arsenal. Head of communications Steve Atkins made that clear in a statement beforehand, insisting the club did not want to prejudice any appeal. That did not prevent manager Roberto Di Matteo being quizzed on the subject, but Atkins repeatedly interjected, most notably when the Italian was asked about the club's policy on players found guilty of using racist language. Di Matteo did confirm that Terry was fit and available for the match and would continue to captain the club if picked. He said he had no fears about the player's mental state or how he would react to abuse he might suffer. "He's an experienced player who has played many difficult games before, in difficult circumstances and environments," Di Matteo said. "If selected, I don't think there will be a problem."
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Sept 28, 2012 15:58:54 GMT
"He's an experienced tosser who has played many difficult games before, in difficult circumstances and environments, because he is such a tosser, I mean you only have to ask Wayne Bridge his former team mate and best friend, what he's like" Di Matteo should have said. Followed by "If selected, I don't think there will be a problem, as it's like water off a duck's arse to him"
|
|
|
Post by superckat on Sept 28, 2012 16:09:14 GMT
At least three times on BBC Breakfast, the female presenting the sports news says "despite being cleared in a court of law". I sent in an email just after 6:30 and yet, two hours later, she is repeatnig it!!! I heard it said on Sky a few times yesterday. At least they're not saying that he was found innocent as I heard said more than once after the court case.
|
|
|
Post by superckat on Sept 28, 2012 16:15:53 GMT
Will, captain, liar, racist lead his boys out live on Sky tomorrow though? Why has nobody asked Mikel what he said? In both the cup game and the recent league game, he has hugged Ferdinand, not just shook his hand. Was that Mikel in the clips who was right in front of Terry? When Terry said it. He turned around and looked at him? He definitely heard him.
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Sept 28, 2012 19:26:43 GMT
Why John Terry's four game ban shows it's time football rejoined the real world If you or I had had a similar exchange where we work, the outcome would have been very different Let's try a little experiment. Wherever you are - the office, an internet cafe, your own living room - go and find the nearest member of an ethnic minority and shout "F***ING BLACK ****" at them. Then see what happens. The chances are the person in question will be extremely upset. The police may be called. If other people overhear they'll almost certainly say your behaviour is unacceptable, and if it happens at work you'll be hauled before Human Remains to explain yourself. Try telling them you said it with a question mark at the end rather than an exclamation, claim it was "banter", accuse them of engaging in a "vendetta" and point out you haven't been convicted by a court of law. Chances are you won't be docked 10 days' pay and told to take four days off work. Chances are you'll be either sacked, thrown out, or otherwise made to feel by the people who witnessed it that you are an appalling, ignorant jerk who they don't want to know. You wouldn't find many people claiming it's all a bit unfair, excusing you as being nice to children or saying it's time to move on. But then that only happens if you're a weasel-faced ratbag who can spunk close to a million pounds on digging yourself out of the hole you plonked yourself in due to your own crass stupidity, and you're prepared to ask someone nicknamed Cashley Cole to give you a character reference.
There's a lot of guff being spouted about John Terry's long-awaited punishment for using those three words at mixed-race rival Anton Ferdinand last year, but then that's sport for you. Whether it's discussed in the pub, on the telly or in newspapers it's all opinion and analysing details at an almost atomic level. But whether Terry is a racist or not is neither here nor there; there is a bigger issue. The problem is not whether he said the words as a question or an insult. The problem is that he said them at all. He thought it right to say them during a game broadcast live to millions of fans in the middle of the afternoon. He thought it right to say them in front of 18,360 fans at the Loftus Road stadium, the travelling section of whom worship him. He didn't think it right to say "whoops, sorry, my fault" when he was proved after days of newspaper headlines to have said it. Wembley way: John Terry arrives for his hearing Phil Harris He thought it right to wriggle and writhe through a series of hearings with different bodies with his lawyers trying to get lip readers' evidence thrown out as unreliable, and he thought it right to flounce out of the England squad he swore he'd never leave because everyone was being so mean . And more shockingly he thought it right to excuse his saying something there can be very little excuse for by saying he was defending the fact he hadn't said it in the first place. If someone accused me of shouting "F***ING BLACK ****" at them when I hadn't, my response would be something along the lines of "Eh? What? Wasn't me, mate." Because if you're the kind of person who wouldn't say it in the first place, you don't normally say it in the second place either. It wouldn't be all right to say it in a war, never mind a game, and I wonder whether Terry would have admitted saying the words if they hadn't been irrefutably captured on camera. There's nothing wrong with a good swear, but it's not cricket to do it in front of children, people who pay your wages, or somebody else's mum sitting at home watching it on the box pre-watershed. If Gary Lineker doesn't drop the C-bomb on afternoon telly while making mention of people's skin colour, why should Terry think it's right? He's on-screen more often than any presenter in the studio. But then presenters in the studio have rules to follow, and Terry has rules he likes to ignore. Whether it's parking in disabled bays, getting in scraps or cheating on the mother of his children, John Terry is fundamentally unlikeable, capable of setting only a bad example to either players or fans. What he thinks is right seems to be, almost without exception, wrong in anyone else's eyes. Why did anyone see fit to give him a captain's armband in the first place? I wouldn't let him captain a dinghy, never mind the national squad or a Premiership side. The job involves leading people and showing them what to do, and all Terry's capable of is showing how to make an already-appalling reputation even worse. Football fans pay through the nose to sit in the freezing cold eating bad meat pies and be treated like an unwelcome mass of humanity by police and clubs while funding gambling, girls and gallivanting by a team of half-witted embarrassments they wouldn't invite over to tea. Stay there: Rules are strict for fans Getty There are lots of rules for fans to follow - stand here, go there, line up, pay up, don't complain, buy another shirt. But those rules stop at the pitch where a new set take over, where so long as you don't handle the ball or pass through a line of defenders, you can do much as you please. So although we don't know the FA's explanation yet for their punishment, their rules have somehow handed Terry a four-match ban and £220,000 fine while Luis Suarez who did much the same was banned for twice as long and fined a sixth of that. Their rules allow a player in the lower league to get a 35-day ban for a red card, while someone who makes a 50-50 challenge is out for three matches. When they're so screwy, those aren't 'rules' at all. They're bespoke, archaic, inexplicable and pointless. That's why Terry thought it was all right to behave as he did - no-one's made it clear to him that it's not. So let's try a little experiment, and make all the rules which apply to the rest of the country apply equally to people who kick around a ball in return for money. You don't say c*** on television. Unkind reference to anyone's skin colour, sexuality or faith will be red carded, fined and suspended for a set period and, what's more, treated the same as it is in any other workplace. If you're caught doing something you shouldn't, you say sorry. Anyone who does those things is automatically disqualified from representing their country in the national side and barred from assuming the captaincy of anything other than a dodgem. And more importantly than anything else, it will be absolutely illegal for anyone anywhere to make excuses for things which, in every other walk of life, would be utterly inexcusable. www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/why-john-terrys-four-game-ban-1348708?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
|
|
|
Post by mfnc on Sept 28, 2012 19:43:05 GMT
Why John Terry's four game ban shows it's time football rejoined the real world If you or I had had a similar exchange where we work, the outcome would have been very different Let's try a little experiment. Wherever you are - the office, an internet cafe, your own living room - go and find the nearest member of an ethnic minority and shout "F***ING BLACK ****" at them. Then see what happens. The chances are the person in question will be extremely upset. The police may be called. If other people overhear they'll almost certainly say your behaviour is unacceptable, and if it happens at work you'll be hauled before Human Remains to explain yourself. Try telling them you said it with a question mark at the end rather than an exclamation, claim it was "banter", accuse them of engaging in a "vendetta" and point out you haven't been convicted by a court of law. Chances are you won't be docked 10 days' pay and told to take four days off work. Chances are you'll be either sacked, thrown out, or otherwise made to feel by the people who witnessed it that you are an appalling, ignorant jerk who they don't want to know. You wouldn't find many people claiming it's all a bit unfair, excusing you as being nice to children or saying it's time to move on. But then that only happens if you're a weasel-faced ratbag who can spunk close to a million pounds on digging yourself out of the hole you plonked yourself in due to your own crass stupidity, and you're prepared to ask someone nicknamed Cashley Cole to give you a character reference.
There's a lot of guff being spouted about John Terry's long-awaited punishment for using those three words at mixed-race rival Anton Ferdinand last year, but then that's sport for you. Whether it's discussed in the pub, on the telly or in newspapers it's all opinion and analysing details at an almost atomic level. But whether Terry is a racist or not is neither here nor there; there is a bigger issue. The problem is not whether he said the words as a question or an insult. The problem is that he said them at all. He thought it right to say them during a game broadcast live to millions of fans in the middle of the afternoon. He thought it right to say them in front of 18,360 fans at the Loftus Road stadium, the travelling section of whom worship him. He didn't think it right to say "whoops, sorry, my fault" when he was proved after days of newspaper headlines to have said it. Wembley way: John Terry arrives for his hearing Phil Harris He thought it right to wriggle and writhe through a series of hearings with different bodies with his lawyers trying to get lip readers' evidence thrown out as unreliable, and he thought it right to flounce out of the England squad he swore he'd never leave because everyone was being so mean . And more shockingly he thought it right to excuse his saying something there can be very little excuse for by saying he was defending the fact he hadn't said it in the first place. If someone accused me of shouting "F***ING BLACK ****" at them when I hadn't, my response would be something along the lines of "Eh? What? Wasn't me, mate." Because if you're the kind of person who wouldn't say it in the first place, you don't normally say it in the second place either. It wouldn't be all right to say it in a war, never mind a game, and I wonder whether Terry would have admitted saying the words if they hadn't been irrefutably captured on camera. There's nothing wrong with a good swear, but it's not cricket to do it in front of children, people who pay your wages, or somebody else's mum sitting at home watching it on the box pre-watershed. If Gary Lineker doesn't drop the C-bomb on afternoon telly while making mention of people's skin colour, why should Terry think it's right? He's on-screen more often than any presenter in the studio. But then presenters in the studio have rules to follow, and Terry has rules he likes to ignore. Whether it's parking in disabled bays, getting in scraps or cheating on the mother of his children, John Terry is fundamentally unlikeable, capable of setting only a bad example to either players or fans. What he thinks is right seems to be, almost without exception, wrong in anyone else's eyes. Why did anyone see fit to give him a captain's armband in the first place? I wouldn't let him captain a dinghy, never mind the national squad or a Premiership side. The job involves leading people and showing them what to do, and all Terry's capable of is showing how to make an already-appalling reputation even worse. Football fans pay through the nose to sit in the freezing cold eating bad meat pies and be treated like an unwelcome mass of humanity by police and clubs while funding gambling, girls and gallivanting by a team of half-witted embarrassments they wouldn't invite over to tea. Stay there: Rules are strict for fans Getty There are lots of rules for fans to follow - stand here, go there, line up, pay up, don't complain, buy another shirt. But those rules stop at the pitch where a new set take over, where so long as you don't handle the ball or pass through a line of defenders, you can do much as you please. So although we don't know the FA's explanation yet for their punishment, their rules have somehow handed Terry a four-match ban and £220,000 fine while Luis Suarez who did much the same was banned for twice as long and fined a sixth of that. Their rules allow a player in the lower league to get a 35-day ban for a red card, while someone who makes a 50-50 challenge is out for three matches. When they're so screwy, those aren't 'rules' at all. They're bespoke, archaic, inexplicable and pointless. That's why Terry thought it was all right to behave as he did - no-one's made it clear to him that it's not. So let's try a little experiment, and make all the rules which apply to the rest of the country apply equally to people who kick around a ball in return for money. You don't say c*** on television. Unkind reference to anyone's skin colour, sexuality or faith will be red carded, fined and suspended for a set period and, what's more, treated the same as it is in any other workplace. If you're caught doing something you shouldn't, you say sorry. Anyone who does those things is automatically disqualified from representing their country in the national side and barred from assuming the captaincy of anything other than a dodgem. And more importantly than anything else, it will be absolutely illegal for anyone anywhere to make excuses for things which, in every other walk of life, would be utterly inexcusable. www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/why-john-terrys-four-game-ban-1348708?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitterthat is worryingly so true. cheers eus
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 28, 2012 20:27:05 GMT
Can't believe that was in the mirror, great article.
On a corporate note, liked the Human Remains comment, wonder if it was meant.
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Sept 28, 2012 21:23:34 GMT
Can't believe that was in the mirror, great article. That was my first thought also. Good piece.
|
|
|
Post by sharky on Sept 29, 2012 0:27:51 GMT
Great article by the Mirror (surprisingly).
Backs up what posters to this board have been saying for ages
JOHN TERRY WE KNOW WHAT YOU SAID
......and it's unacceptable
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 29, 2012 6:47:41 GMT
Meanwhile.... The Star
FANS PILE MORE ABUSE ON RACE VICTIM ANTON FERDINAND!ABOVE: QPR defender Anton Ferdinand with Chelsea captain John Terry “ On a serious note people need 2 read the facts before they send stupid tweets 2 me with liar and grass in it footage don’t lie! ” QPR defender Anton Ferdinand on Twitter 29th September 2012 By Steve Hughes RACISM victim Anton Ferdinand has been blasted by football fans for “grassing” on disgraced Chelsea star John Terry. The QPR defender was bombarded with abuse on Twitter from supporters of Terry. They claimed he was a “liar” and “jealous” of the ex-England skipper. Ferdinand, 27, was forced to break his silence last night saying: “Footage don’t lie.” The taunts began shortly after Terry, 31, was found guilty at an FA hearing of using racist language against Ferdinand during QPR’s Premier League match with Chelsea at Loftus Road last October. He was banned for four matches and fined £220,000, a punishment many fans thought was too soft. But despite Terry being found guilty, hundreds of fans took to the social networking site to lay into Ferdinand. @aidanhughes19, said: “you destroyed the career of one of England’s greatest defenders, your just jealous he’s better than you and always will be.” @magpie5toz said: “cheers for costing England any hope of winning the world cup with your lies... Innocent in a court of law.” @ayupduck said: “not guilty in a court of law the fa are no judges so yeah you are a lying grass.” Ferdinand tweeted: “On a serious note people need 2 read the facts before they send stupid tweets 2 me with liar and grass in it footage don’t lie!” Many fans condemned the abuse Ferdinand received, saying the younger brother of Manchester United star Rio Ferdinand, 33, had suffered enough. QPR midfielder Joey Barton, 30, now on loan to Marseille, called the punishment a “farce”. He received a 12-match ban for violent conduct at Manchester City last season. He said by the “FA’s perverse reckoning” he would have “got less of a ban for racially abusing the Man City players than tickling them like I did”. He added: “In what circumstances can that be right?” Match Of The Day’s Gary Lineker, 51, tweeted: “The FA find John Terry guilty and give him a four-match ban and 220K fine. Just one game more than a regular red card?” • IN our latest poll, 60% of Daily Star readers believe Terry’s punishment was too soft. www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/274478/Fans-pile-more-abuse-on-race-victim-Anton-Ferdinand-
|
|