|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 29, 2012 6:53:21 GMT
Great message: John Terry retains the Chelsea Captaincy! GUARDIAN Chelsea's John Terry continues as captain despite racism ruling • Manager Roberto Di Matteo insists Terry retains armband • Di Matteo disappointed disciplinary hearings have 'dragged' Dominic Fifield The Guardian, Friday 28 September 2012 18.02 EDT John Terry will captain Chelsea at Arsenal on Saturday with his manager, Roberto Di Matteo, insistent the squad has not been unsettled by an 11-month process which ended this week with a Football Association independent regulatory commission finding the defender guilty of using abusive language with racial connotations directed at Anton Ferdinand. The former England international is still awaiting the written reasoning behind the four-man panel's decision to ban him for four domestic matches and impose a £220,000 fine, before deciding whether to lodge an appeal, though his instinct is to continue to seek to prove his innocence. His legal team may not receive that documentation until early next week, when Chelsea are in Copenhagen for the Champions League tie against Nordsjaelland, with the 31-year-old available pending the result of any appeal. Terry, who has always denied all charges against him, was found not guilty of a racially aggravated public order offence at Westminster magistrates court in July, and Di Matteo was adamant he had not sensed any unease within his squad after the centre-half had been sanctioned by the FA over the incident, which occurred in the defeat at Loftus Road last October. "Not at all," said the Italian. "I don't think it's unsettled the team. We had a very successful time during the whole process. There isn't any sense [of an adverse reaction from team-mates following the judgment], no. Not as far as I know and as far as I can see. He's going to be available against Arsenal and, from our point of view, there is no change [in terms of his captaincy]." Chelsea moved to deflect questions on the issue at Di Matteo's pre-match media briefing on Friday, making it clear there was no desire to prejudice any potential appeal and reiterating it would be "inappropriate" to comment. The club's head of communications interjected on nine occasions over the course of the press conference, most notably when questions were lodged over whether the club's policy on staff and players found guilty of using racist language was as strict as that applied to supporters who commit such an offence. One fan, Stephen Fitzwater, was banned for life earlier this year for racially abusing Didier Drogba during the FA Cup semi-final victory over Tottenham Hotspur, an incident reported to stewards by fellow Chelsea supporters. The club retain a zero tolerance policy on the issue and do have their own code of conduct, which is given to players and staff, with Di Matteo conceding there is a requirement to project a positive image to the outside world at all times. "We have to set good standards," he said. "I try to set good standards. But, at the end of the day, we won't be liked by our opposition's fans. That, generally speaking, is the same for everybody. So we cannot waste too much energy worrying about what they're thinking. We have to think about ourselves." Asked if he believed people deserve a second chance, the manager added: "Yes, I do. I'm sure you've made some mistakes in your life. Me too." Ferdinand, who had opted against shaking Terry's hand when Chelsea visited Queens Park Rangers a fortnight ago, broke his own silence on the affair on Friday, on Twitter. "On a serious note people need 2 read the facts before they send stupid tweets 2 me with liar and grass in it," he wrote. "Footage don't lie!" That comment seemed to refer to camera shots from the game on 23 October 2011, which appear to show Terry using the language to which he has admitted, even if lip readers brought in for the criminal proceedings could not determine the context in which the words had been uttered. There was frustration acknowledged on Friday by both the Professional Footballers' Association and Di Matteo at the length of time it has taken for the process to reach this stage – it could potentially drag on for some time yet, pending an appeal – with the FA having initially agreed to suspend its own investigation into the incident at the request of the Crown Prosecution Service. The summer's court case was, itself, delayed on the behest of Chelsea and Terry's legal team, with the PFA now intent on speaking with the FA to avoid a similar situation occurring in the future. "It's a process and it has taken a bit long," Di Matteo said. "It has dragged. Everybody would have liked it to have been a bit quicker. The only thing we can do is wait and see what happens." www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/28/chelsea-john-terry-captain-racism
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 29, 2012 6:59:57 GMT
GUARDIAN/DAVID CONN Why did the FA treat John Terry more leniently than Luis Suárez? Amid all the bafflement over John Terry's sentence the FA was nonetheless bold to pursue the charge against him The Guardian, Thursday 27 September 2012 15.38 EDT John Terry's fine was more severe than that meted out to Luis Suaréz but his ban was far shorter. Photograph: Glyn Kirk/AFP/Getty Images The Football Association regulatory panel that found John Terry guilty of using the words "F***ing black c**t" towards Anton Ferdinand may, at least partially, have accepted Terry's defence that he did not use the words as an insult. It is otherwise difficult to understand the panel's apparently lenient sanction, of banning Terry for four matches, while Liverpool's Luis Suárez was hit with an eight-game ban for racially abusing Manchester United's Patrice Evra. Terry, like Suárez, was charged with a breach of the FA's Rule E3(2) which states that football people should not use "abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour". The rule states that if such abuse includes "reference to a person's ethnic origin, colour or race", the panel can consider doubling the penalty it would have imposed had that "aggravating factor" not been present. The panel in the Suárez case specifically said that a four-game ban "is the entry-point" for breaches of E3(2) and it did double that minimum penalty to "reflect the gravity of the misconduct". The fact that Terry has been sanctioned with the minimum penalty suggests that the panel in his case, despite finding him guilty, did not find the reference to Ferdinand's colour or race an aggravating factor such that it would double the ban. The apparently more severe fine, £220,000 for Terry, when Suárez was hit for £40,000, is explained by the fact that regulatory panels take into account a player's weekly wage. To understand how the panel did come to its decision, we must wait for its written reasons, which ran to 113 pages in the Suárez case. The FA emphasises that although the panels of three members chaired by a QC are appointed by the FA, they come to their judgments independently. The FA itself brings the charge and so is in effect the prosecution in the hearing, with the accused presenting his defence. Terry's was marshalled again, as it was at Westminster magistrates court when he faced a racially aggravated public order criminal charge, by his barrister, George Carter-Stephenson QC. Terry was acquitted then of having committed a criminal offence, despite having been caught on camera mouthing those words during his altercation with Ferdinand in the Queens Park Rangers penalty area during Chelsea's match at Loftus Road last 23 October. Terry's defence was to claim that he was not calling Ferdinand a "F***ing black c**t" but repeating the words to deny Ferdinand's accusation that Terry had said them to him. The judgment of Howard Riddle, the chief magistrate said: "Mr Terry's explanation is, certainly under the cold light of forensic examination, unlikely." Yet, after a week of lip-readers, slow‑motion video replays and endless legal rumination of how obscenities were exchanged between two Premier League footballers, Riddle found that Terry's defence was "possible". He said that with "there being a doubt" about whether Terry had used the words as a direct insult to Ferdinand, he had to record a not-guilty verdict. It should not be forgotten, in the head-scratching about Terry's four-game ban, that the FA was bold to pursue the charge against him. The acquittal gave the FA a rational get-out if it wanted to avoid the difficulties of charging a player of Terry's stature. The Chelsea captain has referred to the "not-guilty verdict in a court of law" in both his public statements, on Sunday when retiring from international football, and on Thursday, from his agents, in reaction to the panel's finding of guilt. His agents, Elite, said: "Mr Terry is disappointed that the FA regulatory commission has reached a different conclusion." He will wait for the written reasons before deciding whether to appeal. The FA's charge rested on the distinction, which can be quite narrow, in the standard of proof necessary for an offence according to its rules, as opposed to a criminal charge that must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. In the FA's proceedings, as with civil court cases, the proof required is the balance of probabilities – whether it is more probable Terry used "abusive and/ or insulting words and/or behaviour" towards Ferdinand, than that he did not. Once they charged him, the evidence that Terry said the offending words and the doubts over his explanation, meant a guilty verdict was confidently predicted. However, the leniency of the penalty leaves open the possibility that the panel accepted Terry's explanation that he did not level those words at Ferdinand to racially abuse him. We will not know until the written reasons arrive. www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/27/fa-john-terry-luis-suarez
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 29, 2012 7:00:31 GMT
Guardian John Terry may feel his ban is 'quite lenient', says Sir Alex Ferguson • Manchester United manager surprised at four-game ban • Rio Ferdinand unlikely to return for England, he adds Share 51 Email Jamie Jackson guardian.co.uk, Friday 28 September 2012 05.57 EDT Sir Alex Ferguson does not believe Rio Ferdinand will be recalled for England after being overlooked by Roy Hodgson for the European Championship. Photograph: Michael Regan/Getty Images Sir Alex Ferguson believes John Terry may think his four-match ban is "lenient", and the Manchester United manager feels that Roy Hodgson may find it difficult if he wishes to recall Rio Ferdinand in the Chelsea defender's place for England. Terry is now considering whether to appeal the Football Association's ban and £220,000 fine. "There is a danger of it resurrecting itself because it has been going on so long," Ferguson said. "But the fact he got a four-game ban, he may consider that is quite lenient considering Luis Suárez got eight. It is time to move on and so should the game." Patrice Evra and Suárez shook hands before United's game at Liverpool last Sunday following the Liverpool forward's failure to do so last season, after serving his own eight-match ban for making racial slurs towards the Manchester United left-back. Terry was handed the ban by the FA on Thursday after being found guilty of using racist language towards Anton Ferdinand, Rio's brother, in Chelsea's game at QPR last October. Anton Ferdinand reacted to criticism on Twitter on Friday by saying that the footage of the incident during Chelsea's game at Queens Park Rangers last October 'does not lie'. 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!" Regarding Rio Ferdinand getting another England call-up, Ferguson said: "I wouldn't think he will. Roy Hodgson made his decision before the European Championship and I can't see him changing that. It would be difficult for him now to go back to Rio Ferdinand and welcome him back." www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/28/john-terry-ban-sir-alex-ferguson
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Sept 29, 2012 7:28:49 GMT
Mac, if you stick @anton_ferdinand into twitters search engine you'll find the most outrageous bile being spat at Anton by so called Chelsea fans...often just a racist as Terry's original statement...I hope that if one of our players behaved like Terry, our fans would be honest enough to castigate & disown him not defend him (thinking about Barton I think that's true). Last night even the often intelligent and erudite Pat Nevin was jumping to Terry's defence on Radio 5live, claiming a miscarriage of justice for Terry....shame on you Pat.
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Sept 29, 2012 7:38:36 GMT
Embarrassing Pat
|
|
|
Post by haqpr1963 on Sept 29, 2012 8:05:38 GMT
Mac, if you stick @anton_ferdinand into twitters search engine you'll find the most outrageous bile being spat at Anton by so called Chelsea fans...often just a racist as Terry's original statement...I hope that if one of our players behaved like Terry, our fans would be honest enough to castigate & disown him not defend him (thinking about Barton I think that's true). Last night even the often intelligent and erudite Pat Nevin was jumping to Terry's defence on Radio 5live, claiming a miscarriage of justice for Terry....shame on you Pat. Nevin did the same on Newsnight on Thursday, claiming that since the context was not taken into account it would be impossible for any player to complain about abuse as they would then be banned by the FA for stating what had been said. Obviously fell hook line and sinker for Terrys bollox about only repeating what Anton accused him of saying........
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 29, 2012 8:28:49 GMT
The FA Should publish a transcript of the entire 3-4 Days Proceedings. What was said by whom. And the Defense.
|
|
|
Post by haqpr1963 on Sept 29, 2012 8:34:55 GMT
The FA Should publish a transcript of the entire 3-4 Days Proceedings. What was said by whom. And the Defense. They will. The full report of the Suarez hearing runs to 115 pages and explains a lot about how the ban and fine were arrived at. The Terry one should make interesting reading.....
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 29, 2012 10:05:53 GMT
Would I be right in assuming that captain, liar, racist does not have a twatter account?
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 29, 2012 11:33:10 GMT
Shock result, he's playing today. Comedian on Soccer AM Jack someone said, he'll be as welcome today as a Morris dancer at a blind football match! lol ;D
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 29, 2012 11:48:21 GMT
What an excellent welcome ;D well done Arsenal fans. I even used their full name.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2012 12:18:28 GMT
What an excellent welcome ;D well done Arsenal fans. I even used their full name. Glad the gooners are giving them both stick!!! Amazing that someone like Nevin would back Terry on this issue.........Then again there's a long list of high profiles that have!!! They are all disgusting in my opinion!! Still need reminding like the mindless turds on Twitter HE WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY ON A TECHNICAL ISSUE!!! THE JUDGE DIDN'T DEEM HIS STORY HONEST BUT COULDN'T PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT THAT HIS LIE WAS JUST THAT!!!..........This is thanks to repulsive people like Nevin, Wilkins & more importantly lying turds like COLE!!! Also THE FA ARE NOT A COURT OF LAW! THEY UP HOLD THERE OWN RULES & HE BROKE THEM WITH HIS RACIST COMMENTS!! SO HE GETS PUNISHED LIKE EVERY OTHER PLAYER WOULD!! HE DOESN'T GET OFF JUST BECAUSE HE'S JOHN TERRYAgain people like Nevin, Grant, Capello, Jose & baldie midget turd head Wilkins of all people should at least understand & respect that!!! Can't expect that of Terry Chelski fans because there scum like him!!!
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 30, 2012 6:40:17 GMT
Oh Ian! MIRROR
The Ian Holloway column: I don't like John Terry...but the FA were wrong to take matters into their own hands
PLUS: Why Man City have to get used to being the team to beat, paralympians are an inspiration to us all and never take good health for granted Despicable: John Terry doesn't command respect Richard Heathcote John Terry is someone I don’t particularly like. I have never met the Chelsea captain, but some of the despicable things he has got up to in his personal life make it impossible for me to respect him as a man. But that isn’t going to stop me from arguing that the former England skipper suffered a grave miscarriage of justice when he was hit with a four-game ban and £220,000 fine by the Football Association after being found guilty of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand. Back in July, a magistrate ruled that Terry was not guilty of a racially-aggravated public order offence when he insulted Ferdinand when Chelsea played at QPR last season. I said once the verdict was announced that it would be madness for the FA to charge Terry over the incident. And I was absolutely hammered for it by some people. One gentleman who wrote to me used pretty offensive language himself before calling me a hypocrite. He wanted to know how I could defend someone like Terry and also claim that I hated racism. Well the problem for me was that I believed the player was innocent once he had been tried at Westminster Magistrates’ Court. Because he had been found not guilty. How naïve of me. For the FA to then pursue him, charge him, and find him guilty over the same incident goes against the concept of justice that I think most of us in this great country of ours share. Do the suits at the FA think they are above the law? It seems like they do to me because they have taken the judgement delivered by chief magistrate Howard Riddle and taken absolutely no notice of it. It stinks, and I can understand why Terry decided he could no longer represent England. As a footballer, Terry has given terrific service to club and country throughout his career. He let himself down by getting involved in that ugly row with Ferdinand. Industrial language is commonplace in professional football, but what was said by Terry and Ferdinand at Loftus Road was unacceptable. It was two professional footballers showing absolutely no respect for each other. That’s sad, but it’s not worthy of an FA charge for Terry — or the punishment that followed. Not after it had been proved in a court of law that Terry was not guilty of any racist offence. I am not a John Terry apologist. Any man who is said to have slept with the ex-wife or girlfriend of a friend is the lowest of the low. But there are some footballers who think they are above everything. They believe that just because they earn a small fortune every week, the moral standards most of us live our lives by don’t apply to them. They think they can do or say anything without any negative consequences. For example, I was sickened by Rio Ferdinand’s involvement after Ashley Cole was branded “a choc-ice” because the Chelsea full-back defended his captain in court. It offended me and I was relieved the Manchester United defender was hit with a charge of improper conduct by the FA. But the £45,000 fine was derisory in my opinion. It would have hardly sent a ripple through his bank account. A suspension would have been far more appropriate because it would have sent out the message that the FA will not tolerate racism from anyone. As it is, John Terry has been tried for the same offence twice. He was cleared in an open court of law, but punished behind Wembley’s closed doors. Justice hasn’t been done. Meanwhile, Anti-racism group Kick It Out think John Terry should serve a form of football community service. ..... www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/ian-holloway-column-i-dont-like-1350104
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 30, 2012 6:46:15 GMT
And Sven... SUN Sven raps FA over JT ruling By JAMES CLARKE Published: 29th September 2012 FORMER England manager Sven Goran Eriksson has taken a swipe at the FA for their handling of the John Terry case. The Swede blasted his old employers for taking almost a year to find Chelsea’s skipper guilty of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand. Eriksson, who repeatedly picked Terry during his five years as Three Lions boss, insists the centre-back is not a racist. Eriksson said: “It is obvious John should be punished if he’s expressed himself so inappropriately. “But I refuse to believe he is a racist. What makes me upset is the FA punishment has come after a year. “I honestly think the FA — and civil courts — have handled it in a miserable way.” Terry was fined £220,000 and banned for four games for his clash with QPR’s Ferdinand at Loftus Road last October. The 31-year-old was found guilty by FA chiefs on Thursday having been cleared in court. Eriksson added: “It has obviously had a major impact and he has quit England. “I suppose it was a kind of protest against the FA.” www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4563478/Sven-Goran-Eriksson-raps-FA-over-John-Terry-ruling.html#ixzz27vuIvoP8
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 30, 2012 6:54:15 GMT
OBSERVER EDITORIAL John Terry: the FA has been equivocal in its approach to racism The John Terry case has highlighted a worrying inconsistency Editorial The Observer, Saturday 29 September 2012 John Terry, 31, retired last Sunday from the England football team, ending a formidable international career. The England manager, Roy Hodgson, said that he was "disappointed" to learn of Terry's international retirement but had "reluctantly" accepted his decision. On Thursday, the FA regulatory commission found the Chelsea captain guilty of directing a racial insult at Anton Ferdinand, the Queens Park Rangers defender, at a match at Loftus Road in 2011. Terry was cleared of a criminal charge relating to the same incident at Westminster magistrates' court in July. He responded to the FA's decision last week with a statement from his representatives that he was "disappointed". Stripped of his England captaincy in February, he will consider the commission's written reasons before he makes a decision on whether to appeal. Supporters of Terry say he is no racist. Terry's punishment is a four-match suspension and a £220,000 fine – the equivalent of nine days' pay. That differs considerably from the punishment meted out to the Liverpool player Luis Suárez, found guilty of breaking the same Football Association rules last year. He was given an eight-match ban and a £40,000 fine. The difference between the punishment of Suárez and Terry raises questions about the FA's equivocation on the seriousness of the charge against Terry. To influence the behaviour of others, punishment of racist behaviour must be consistent, clear and sufficient. Following the FA's judgment, Chelsea's management team should take a tough stand. Instead of giving its total support to Terry, it should consider ending his captaincy, as he no longer embodies the values required to merit such a position. Sponsors are reconsidering the substantial amounts they pay Terry to endorse their products. The public does not take kindly to those who persist in rewarding individuals who have been judged to contravene standards of decency and good sportsmanship. Comments will be turned on later www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/30/observer-editorial-john-terry-lose-captaincy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 7:23:33 GMT
One thing for sure is the fact that we have a lot of people split over their opinions Although most of us feel he got off lightly there are plenty who seem to think the F.A should not of took any action against him at all Personally I feel that nobody should be speaking out in defence of Terry even if they are on his side
|
|
|
Post by haqpr1963 on Sept 30, 2012 7:58:00 GMT
OBSERVER EDITORIAL John Terry: the FA has been equivocal in its approach to racism The John Terry case has highlighted a worrying inconsistency Editorial The Observer, Saturday 29 September 2012 John Terry, 31, retired last Sunday from the England football team, ending a formidable international career. The England manager, Roy Hodgson, said that he was "disappointed" to learn of Terry's international retirement but had "reluctantly" accepted his decision. On Thursday, the FA regulatory commission found the Chelsea captain guilty of directing a racial insult at Anton Ferdinand, the Queens Park Rangers defender, at a match at Loftus Road in 2011. Terry was cleared of a criminal charge relating to the same incident at Westminster magistrates' court in July. He responded to the FA's decision last week with a statement from his representatives that he was "disappointed". Stripped of his England captaincy in February, he will consider the commission's written reasons before he makes a decision on whether to appeal. Supporters of Terry say he is no racist. Terry's punishment is a four-match suspension and a £220,000 fine – the equivalent of nine days' pay. That differs considerably from the punishment meted out to the Liverpool player Luis Suárez, found guilty of breaking the same Football Association rules last year. He was given an eight-match ban and a £40,000 fine. The difference between the punishment of Suárez and Terry raises questions about the FA's equivocation on the seriousness of the charge against Terry. To influence the behaviour of others, punishment of racist behaviour must be consistent, clear and sufficient. Following the FA's judgment, Chelsea's management team should take a tough stand. Instead of giving its total support to Terry, it should consider ending his captaincy, as he no longer embodies the values required to merit such a position. Sponsors are reconsidering the substantial amounts they pay Terry to endorse their products. The public does not take kindly to those who persist in rewarding individuals who have been judged to contravene standards of decency and good sportsmanship. Comments will be turned on later www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/30/observer-editorial-john-terry-lose-captaincyI keep seeing mentions of the FAs inconsistancy in the papers and on the web. I wonder if these people have actually looked at the FA rules and the Suarez case before bringing up this so called inconsistancy? This is taken from the written findings of the Suarez hearing. The meaning of Rules E3(1) and E3(2)
48. The Rule pursuant to which Mr Suarez was charged is found in section E of the FA Rules under the general heading "Conduct". Rule E1, with the sub-heading "Misconduct", provides, so far as relevant:
"The Association may act against a Participant in respect of any "Misconduct", which is defined as being a breach of the following:
...
(b) the Rules and regulations of The Association and in particular Rules E3 to 28 below;"
In the FA Rules, a Participant includes a player.
49. Rule E3, with the sub-heading "General Behaviour", provides as follows:
"(1) A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.
(2) In the event of any breach of Rule E3(1) including a reference to any one or more of a person's ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, faith, gender, sexual orientation or disability (an "aggravating factor"), a Regulatory Commission shall consider the imposition of an increased sanction, taking into account the following entry points:
For a first offence, a sanction that is double that which the Regulatory Commission would have applied had the aggravating factor not been present.
For a second offence, a sanction that is treble that which the Regulatory Commission would have applied had the aggravating factor not been present.
Any further such offence(s) shall give rise to consideration of a permanent suspension.
These entry points are intended to guide the Regulatory Commission and are not mandatory.
The Regulatory Commission shall have the discretion to impose a sanction greater or less than the entry point, according to the aggravating or mitigating factors present in each case."Then look at the FAs Standard Penalty Guidelines. Offence: FA Rule E3
STANDARD PENALTY 1 :- CHARGE ADMITTED AND STANDARD PENALTY ACCEPTED
Either 1 match touch line ban for non players or 1 match ban for players
STANDARD PENALTY 2 :- CHARGE DENIED AND SUBSEQUENTLY FOUND PROVED BY A REGULATORY COMMISSION
Either 2 match touch line ban for non players or 2 match ban for playersSuarez was found to have made multiple references to race/colour, I would imagine that Terry was found to have made one. So I would say that the FA in these cases has been consistent and clear. Whether the punishment has been sufficient is another matter all together.....
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 30, 2012 10:47:03 GMT
Sporting Life Triesman: Black players let down Last Updated: September 30 2012, 11:16 BST Former Football Association chairman Lord Triesman believes black players feel let down by the governing body's handling of the John Terry racism case. Chelsea v Norwich. Click here to bet. Terry: Banned for four games Related ContentFootball Transfer CentreThe latest football newsFollow us on TwitterFree £10 bet on football Ex-England skipper Terry was found guilty of using racist language towards QPR defender Anton Ferdinand by an independent FA panel earlier this week, but is awaiting the full written judgment before deciding whether to appeal against a four-match ban and a fine of £220,000. The 31-year-old has always protested his innocence and was found not guilty of a racially-aggravated public order offence in a criminal trial in July. Terry retired from international football last Sunday night ahead of the hearing, claiming the FA's decision to pursue a case against him after he was cleared in court made his position in the national team "untenable". He has represented his country in the 11 months since the incident, though - something which may not have happened had Triesman still been at the FA helm. "I take a fairly hard view and I think we should have zero tolerance," he told BBC Radio Five's Sportsweek programme. Asked if that meant Terry should not have played for England with the case hanging over him, Triesman replied: "Personally, I would have preferred that, yes. "However good he is - and I have no doubt about the quality of the player - I really think as you look around the country and talk to black players, what you will find is they respect him as a player but they really feel let down because they don't feel the line has been drawn clearly enough." Triesman said the fact the punishment was not handed out until 11 months after the altercation was unacceptable. "The delay, the fact it has taken a year, is unconscionable," he said. "You shouldn't have any kind of system which has got a judicial, judgmental element, which takes this long because it gives the impression people are indifferent to the issues. And people shouldn't be indifferent to the issues. "I can't for the life of me see why the FA couldn't have proceeded before the court case. "Sports bodies do have the capacity to act earlier (than the courts), to demonstrate their leadership, and they should have done so. "I know some people will say if you have any hearing it's likely to prejudice the outcome of the court case, but I think the application of the rules of the game are issues for the body that controls the game - and those should be dealt with in a timely way. "I just wonder what impression it gives to the rest of the world, and particularly to those players from ethnic communities who do face abuse, sadly - less than they used to, but still do face abuse - I wonder what it says to them if it takes a year to get to this stage." Piara Powar, executive director of the Football Against Racism in Europe (FARE) network, was in agreement with Triesman that the 11-month span between incident and hearing needed to be addressed. "There are two key issues - one is the sanction itself and the other the time it's taken," he said. "It really is unforgivable for an offence that took place during a game 11 months ago has taken this long to come to a governance hearing. "Of course, the FA will say there was a criminal trial and there was a request from John Terry's lawyers to postpone, but the two processes are entirely different. "The ICC (International Cricket Council), for example, with the spot-fixing trial last year, the criminal trial happened after the hearing by the governing body. There's no reason why the same couldn't have happened. "The almost year-long wait, the drawn-out saga, has done quite a lot of damage." He added: "I don't think the issue is John Terry. The issue is, 'how do we repair the reputation of football? How do we move forward from this in a positive way?"' Liverpool's Luis Suarez was earlier this year given an eight-match suspension for racially abusing Manchester United's Patrice Evra, and Triesman feels the way Chelsea dealt with the Terry situation counted in their favour. "It doesn't sound very consistent - that I'm sure of," he said, comparing Suarez's ban to Terry's. "I suppose we'll all have to wait to see the written reasoning to see if there's a material difference between the two cases. "If I was asked to guess (why the inconsistency), I'd think the dignity with which (chairman) Bruce Buck and the guys at Chelsea have handled this may well be in sharp contrast to the way Liverpool handled the Suarez case, which I thought was a masterclass in how not to do it." www.sportinglife.com/football/news/article/2/8124495/triesman-black-players-let-down
|
|
|
Post by jayrigg on Sept 30, 2012 10:51:15 GMT
The whole JT/AF situation has totally got out of hand.I am not sure if members of this board would be arsed about this situation if the accused did not play for the scum.EVERYONE on this MB knows Terry is low life scum, i have said it before and will sat it again i detest the man. But because of these comments he made in the heat of the moment(which he is not even man enough to apologise for by the way)he has to retire from international football, I DO NOT GET IT.Why have we not moved on from this? I even read the other day that Anton made some comments about Terry's mother earlier on before the alleged incident How come nobody is going on about that? I do appreciate how far we have come since the late sixties/early seventies and the disgraceful rubbish that black guys had to put up with from the crowds, but i do not agree with trying to hound somebody out of the game for something he said in the heat of the moment.I know this will not go down well on this board but i feel it needs to be said. Cheers, Jay
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 30, 2012 10:55:18 GMT
I think what Terry said deserved FA Punishment (and stronger than he got). But I don't think it should have been a criminal case.
I do believe though if it had been a QPR player who had said it to a Chelsea player, there would have been a lot fewer QPR Posters condemning the act; or calling for punishment. That's deeply regrettable. But I think it's true. (Seen that in how some on boards respond to Fan violence when it's undertaken by QPR Fans)
(And of course, if it had been a QPR Player, I think punishment would have come a lot sooner)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 11:22:19 GMT
So we can add Sven & Hollow head (Ollie) to supporters of scumbag Terry.............Although in fairness to Hollow Head its more a dig at the FA than support to Terry!!.....Still amazing how many people seem to think he shouldn't have been charged....Hollow Head included now!!!
The FA have really F##Ked this up time wise!!! I'm sure they would have acted quicker if it was a club like either of the Manc's, Gooners or Chelski themselves who had a player racially abused!!! Totally agree that it shouldn't have gone to court!!! Should have been all sorted by the FA before the end of last year!!! & I'm sure it would have been if it had been a "so called" bigger club making the complaint!!!
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 30, 2012 12:11:05 GMT
Somebody send Holloway the 13 page transcript of the magistrate's verdict.
Mind you, his attention span may not allow him to read and digest it all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 12:35:40 GMT
Somebody send Holloway the 13 page transcript of the magistrate's verdict. Mind you, his attention span may not allow him to read and digest it all. Very disappointed that 2 ex QPR servants that are held in high respect by many like Hollow Head & Ray WANK'ins' have taken it on themselves to make comments in support of Terry!! Oh & Ollie I don't believe that you as a player would never have not given swearing verbal to another to wind him up like Anton did to Terry. I would think you would have made the air blue if it was a Bristol City/Rovers derby?? Seem to recall seeing you on youtube afrer beating City when with Rovers saying "Lets play the game tonight when we are out called Spot the F***ING CITY FAN"............So don't get on a morale high horse!!! You clearly like to wind people up!! Remember it was the racist response that he got from Terry that got him in trouble!!! But hey that's OK in your books is it, because they both went to far!!??............Also its been highlighted that Anton might have said something about Terrys Mum!!!the shop lifter!!!............Well Terry was lucky he didn't say anything about his Dealer Dad!! scumbag cheating on your teammates Brother (Who then killed himself)..........I mean there a class family aren't they!!
|
|
|
Post by superckat on Sept 30, 2012 12:37:41 GMT
The whole JT/AF situation has totally got out of hand.I am not sure if members of this board would be arsed about this situation if the accused did not play for the scum.EVERYONE on this MB knows Terry is low life scum, i have said it before and will sat it again i detest the man. But because of these comments he made in the heat of the moment(which he is not even man enough to apologise for by the way)he has to retire from international football, I DO NOT GET IT.Why have we not moved on from this? I even read the other day that Anton made some comments about Terry's mother earlier on before the alleged incident How come nobody is going on about that? I do appreciate how far we have come since the late sixties/early seventies and the disgraceful rubbish that black guys had to put up with from the crowds, but i do not agree with trying to hound somebody out of the game for something he said in the heat of the moment.I know this will not go down well on this board but i feel it needs to be said. Cheers, Jay I agree with you. It hasn't gone down well. If JT was man enough to admit what he said and apologised and said it was the heat of the moment, it might have been a different story. But he hasn't. He had lied time after time. Accused Anton of saying it. In the process disrespected. Anton, disrespected some of his own team mates, international team mates. Probably cost Rio Ferdinand his place at the Euro's and the England team. disrespected the kick Racism out of Football campaign. and caused Anton to face vile messages and death threats. His act of racism has had a knock on effect because he said what he said and lied about it. He was not found innocent or cleared by the magistrates. His side of events weren't believed. The cameras could clearly pick up what JT said, but not one camera could pick up that AF was supposedly accusing JT of saying it. Yeah AF argued with Terry. But I'm sure Terry wasn't just standing their saying nothing. Remember he made the comment whilst backing away when any arguing from Anton ended. Terry wanted to get a final word in and that was it. The sentence is way too soft. Terry has got off easy. But he still wont accept that and let it all die down. He is trying to make out he has been hard done by with his reasons for retiring from the England team. Which has again meant Anton, the only INNOCENT victim in all this, getting more abuse. Terry shows no remorse or respect for anyone or no regret for anything he has done. If Lying scumbag was a town. He would be Mayor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 12:43:09 GMT
The whole JT/AF situation has totally got out of hand.I am not sure if members of this board would be arsed about this situation if the accused did not play for the scum.EVERYONE on this MB knows Terry is low life scum, i have said it before and will sat it again i detest the man. But because of these comments he made in the heat of the moment(which he is not even man enough to apologise for by the way)he has to retire from international football, I DO NOT GET IT.Why have we not moved on from this? I even read the other day that Anton made some comments about Terry's mother earlier on before the alleged incident How come nobody is going on about that? I do appreciate how far we have come since the late sixties/early seventies and the disgraceful rubbish that black guys had to put up with from the crowds, but i do not agree with trying to hound somebody out of the game for something he said in the heat of the moment.I know this will not go down well on this board but i feel it needs to be said. Cheers, Jay I agree with you. It hasn't gone down well. If JT was man enough to admit what he said and apologised and said it was the heat of the moment, it might have been a different story. But he hasn't. He had lied time after time. Accused Anton of saying it. In the process disrespected. Anton, disrespected some of his own team mates, international team mates. Probably cost Rio Ferdinand his place at the Euro's and the England team. disrespected the kick Racism out of Football campaign. and caused Anton to face vile messages and death threats. His act of racism has had a knock on effect because he said what he said and lied about it. He was not found innocent or cleared by the magistrates. His side of events weren't believed. The cameras could clearly pick up what JT said, but not one camera could pick up that AF was supposedly accusing JT of saying it. Yeah AF argued with Terry. But I'm sure Terry wasn't just standing their saying nothing. Remember he made the comment whilst backing away when any arguing from Anton ended. Terry wanted to get a final word in and that was it. The sentence is way too soft. Terry has got off easy. But he still wont accept that and let it all die down. He is trying to make out he has been hard done with his reasons for retiring from the England team. Which has again meant Anton. The only INNOCENT victim in all this getting more abuse. Terry shows no remorse or respect for anyone or no regret for anything he has done. If Lying scumbag was a town. He would be Mayor. He'll probably become the mayor of Chelski as they love him so much!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 12:45:49 GMT
Somebody send Holloway the 13 page transcript of the magistrate's verdict. Mind you, his attention span may not allow him to read and digest it all. Very disappointed that 2 ex QPR servants that are held in high respect by many like Hollow Head & Ray WANK'ins' have taken it on themselves to make comments in support of Terry!! Oh & Ollie I don't believe that you as a player would never have not given swearing verbal to another to wind him up like Anton did to Terry. I would think you would have made the air blue if it was a Bristol City/Rovers derby?? Seem to recall seeing you on youtube afrer beating City when with Rovers saying "Lets play the game tonight when we are out called Spot the F***ING CITY FAN"............So don't get on a morale high horse!!! You clearly like to wind people up!! Remember it was the racist response that he got from Terry that got him in trouble!!! But hey that's OK in your books is it, because they both went to far!!??............Also its been highlighted that Anton might have said something about Terrys Mum!!!the shop lifter!!!............Well Terry was lucky he didn't say anything about his Dealer Dad!! scumbag cheating on your teammates Brother (Who then killed himself)..........I mean there a class family aren't they!! But before I get belted for being mean to Ollie I would like to point out I have even LESS RESPECT for Ray Baldie over this issue. His head is so far up Terrys arse that Terry craps him out everytime he does a dump!!!
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Sept 30, 2012 20:44:08 GMT
Very disappointed that 2 ex QPR servants that are held in high respect by many like Hollow Head & Ray WANK'ins' have taken it on themselves to make comments in support of Terry!! Oh & Ollie I don't believe that you as a player would never have not given swearing verbal to another to wind him up like Anton did to Terry. I would think you would have made the air blue if it was a Bristol City/Rovers derby?? Seem to recall seeing you on youtube afrer beating City when with Rovers saying "Lets play the game tonight when we are out called Spot the F***ING CITY FAN"............So don't get on a morale high horse!!! You clearly like to wind people up!! Remember it was the racist response that he got from Terry that got him in trouble!!! But hey that's OK in your books is it, because they both went to far!!??............Also its been highlighted that Anton might have said something about Terrys Mum!!!the shop lifter!!!............Well Terry was lucky he didn't say anything about his Dealer Dad!! scumbag cheating on your teammates Brother (Who then killed himself)..........I mean there a class family aren't they!! But before I get belted for being mean to Ollie I would like to point out I have even LESS RESPECT for Ray Baldie over this issue. His head is so far up Terrys arse that Terry craps him out everytime he does a dump!!! Agreed but Wilkins was brought up at the scum as a kid. We all knew then where his loyalty would be back then.
|
|
|
Post by sharky on Oct 1, 2012 0:29:24 GMT
From Joey Barton in twitter
Can't believe I've just seen John Terry with his golf clobber on celebrating with Poulter?? WTF! Had golf shoes on the lot...
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 2, 2012 12:03:08 GMT
And more support for Terry from an ex-manager www.english.rfi.fr/sports/20121002-ancelotti-slams-john-terry-banAncelotti slams John Terry ban By Andy May Former England football captain John Terry's four-match ban and €276,000 fine for misconduct is '”strange” and “unbelievable”,ex-Chelsea manager Carlo Ancelotti has told RFI. Despite being cleared in a criminal court in the United Kingdom of racially abusing Queens Park Rangers' Anton Ferdinand in a Premier League match last season, the English Football Association found Terry guilty of using “abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour, which included a reference to ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race”. "It is unbelievable - John Terry does not deserve this,” Ancelotti said. “The judgement one month ago [in court] was okay so I cannot understand how the FA can make a different decision. I think that it is really strange. "I was really surprised [with this whole situation] because he has a really fantastic relationship with everyone. I am sure he is not racist – 100 per cent." Terry’s ban is half the length of the eight-match suspension handed to Luis Suarez last year. The Liverpool striker was also fined €50,000 after being found to have repeatedly used the word “negro” towards Manchester United's Patrice Evra in a game. Terry, who has always maintained his innocence, has decided to retire from international football with England - a choice Ancelotti believes is the right one: "I do not think he will play for England again and I think that is a good decision. It is a bad thing for England because John Terry did well for the national team." Ancelotti has also spoken to RFI about rumours another one of his former Chelsea players, Ashley Cole, is set to join him at Paris St Germain next summer when his contract in London expires. "This is normal because a lot of players are linked with PSG, maybe 100 players have been linked with the club recently,” he said. “For this season we have a very good squad but for next year I am not sure. "I believe Ashley Cole is the best left back in world football at the moment."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2012 14:52:19 GMT
And more support for Terry from an ex-manager www.english.rfi.fr/sports/20121002-ancelotti-slams-john-terry-banAncelotti slams John Terry ban By Andy May Former England football captain John Terry's four-match ban and €276,000 fine for misconduct is '”strange” and “unbelievable”,ex-Chelsea manager Carlo Ancelotti has told RFI. Despite being cleared in a criminal court in the United Kingdom of racially abusing Queens Park Rangers' Anton Ferdinand in a Premier League match last season, the English Football Association found Terry guilty of using “abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour, which included a reference to ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race”. "It is unbelievable - John Terry does not deserve this,” Ancelotti said. “The judgement one month ago [in court] was okay so I cannot understand how the FA can make a different decision. I think that it is really strange. "I was really surprised [with this whole situation] because he has a really fantastic relationship with everyone. I am sure he is not racist – 100 per cent." Terry’s ban is half the length of the eight-match suspension handed to Luis Suarez last year. The Liverpool striker was also fined €50,000 after being found to have repeatedly used the word “negro” towards Manchester United's Patrice Evra in a game. Terry, who has always maintained his innocence, has decided to retire from international football with England - a choice Ancelotti believes is the right one: "I do not think he will play for England again and I think that is a good decision. It is a bad thing for England because John Terry did well for the national team." Ancelotti has also spoken to RFI about rumours another one of his former Chelsea players, Ashley Cole, is set to join him at Paris St Germain next summer when his contract in London expires. "This is normal because a lot of players are linked with PSG, maybe 100 players have been linked with the club recently,” he said. “For this season we have a very good squad but for next year I am not sure. "I believe Ashley Cole is the best left back in world football at the moment." Just amazing!!! Ex Manager's, players, etc are all basically saying "Well because I know John Terry the usual FA rules don't apply to him.........because he's a good bloke & I know him!!"................Even though he made a racist comment!! Coming from the usual F##k WIT Chelski fans I could understand but from these people who know what the FA do or have to do.............Just beggars belief!!! There just the same type of twats as the fans I just mentioned!!!
|
|