• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

JT - Captain. Leader. Legend. Qunt

Re: John Terry retires from England duty

The question now should be what action will Chelsea FC take against the player now the FA have made their stance. Yep you guessed it nothing.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

Agreed the court of law argument is nonsense. The judge was fairly damning in his assessment. He said that Terry's story (he was repeating it back) was unlikely but that it couldn't be discounted beyond reasonable doubt. There was a clear implication that a different standard might lead to a different conclusion. I'm sure the FA took note of this when charging him.

But if he is to be found guilty, this is a good tactic. Many people (mainly Chelsea fans) will believe him.

Yep..! In Scotland there is a third option, not proven, which fits perfectly here. Instead Terry gets to word the statement to say he was cleared, sure, he was but not guilty is not the same as innocent. If you look at what the judge says it is clear he didn't buy it but the evidence wasn't quite enough. The whole thing turned into a he said/she said.

Terry is guilty of saying the words, he admits that, but it was the context that was disputed. Under the FA's rulebook of foul and abusive language he is banned and fined. Nothing to do with a court of law when there are different rules.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

The FA go on about how they hate corruption, but they must be corrupt themselves. Terry gets charged just a few days after retiring from England duty. Wow.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

Yep..! In Scotland there is a third option, not proven, which fits perfectly here. Instead Terry gets to word the statement to say he was cleared, sure, he was but not guilty is not the same as innocent. If you look at what the judge says it is clear he didn't buy it but the evidence wasn't quite enough. The whole thing turned into a he said/she said.

Terry is guilty of saying the words, he admits that, but it was the context that was disputed. Under the FA's rulebook of foul and abusive language he is banned and fined. Nothing to do with a court of law when there are different rules.

Here is what the judge said when finding the case "not proven" ... the Scots have it right, too many people in England and the US confuse being found innocent and not guilty:

... in summarizing the Ferdinand evidence:

• There is no doubt the words “fudging black ****” were directed at Mr Ferdinand.
• Overall I found Anton Ferdinand to be a believable witness on the central issue.
• It is inherently unlikely that he should firstly accuse John Terry of calling him a black ****, then shortly after the match completely deny that he had made such a comment, and then maintain that false account throughout the police investigation and throughout this trial. There is no history of animosity between the two men. The supposed motivation is slight.
Mr Terry’s explanation is, certainly under the cold light of forensic examination, unlikely. It is not the most obvious response. It is sandwiched between other undoubted insults.

... in the conclusion:

Weighing all the evidence together, I think it is highly unlikely that Mr Ferdinand accused Mr Terry on the pitch of calling him a black ****. However I accept that it is possible that Mr Terry believed at the time, and believes now, that such an accusation was made. The prosecution evidence as to what was said by Mr Ferdinand at this point is not strong. Mr Cole gives corroborating (although far from compelling corroborating) evidence on this point. It is therefore possible that what he said was not intended as an insult, but rather as a challenge to what he believed had been said to him.

In those circumstances, there being a doubt, the only verdict the court can record is one of not guilty.

So Terry is lying when he says he was found innocent. I think it fairly clear what the judge thought and the press should allow Terry's statement of innocence to go unchallenged.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

The FA go on about how they hate corruption, but they must be corrupt themselves. Terry gets charged just a few days after retiring from England duty. Wow.

I'm sure he retired as a kind of pre-emptive strike against the FA as he and his representatives must have had a reasonable idea what the FA were going to do.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

The FA go on about how they hate corruption, but they must be corrupt themselves. Terry gets charged just a few days after retiring from England duty. Wow.

You are joking, aren't you?
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

Well at least he has been punished for being an ignorant arsehole.

His legal defence is like that of his football, getting weaker with every aiiring.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

I'm sure he retired as a kind of pre-emptive strike against the FA as he and his representatives must have had a reasonable idea what the FA were going to do.

I thought this as well, but if that was the case then surely retiring would have made things worse for him at Chelsea.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

4 games? Better than nothing I suppose, but still too lenient. I reckon the FA have been put off banning him for a longer duration because of the outcome of his court case.
 
If anyone thinks the FA can't charge him...OJ Simpson was found guilty (or liable) in a civil case for the murders he had previously been cleared of.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

Why would you say "I never called you a black ****"? Any normal person would just say "I didn't say that".
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

i'm astounded, to find him guilty then only give him a 4 match ban, lets compare that to some other FA decisions

Eric Cantona got an 8 month ban for kicking a cnut, compare to that 4 games for being one

Paolo Di Canio got twice the Terry ban for shoving a ref

the FA is incompetent and not fit for purpose
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

i'm astounded, to find him guilty then only give him a 4 match ban, lets compare that to some other FA decisions

Eric Cantona got an 8 month ban for kicking a cnut, compare to that 4 games for being one

Paolo Di Canio got twice the Terry ban for shoving a ref

the FA is incompetent and not fit for purpose

Agree with the sentiment, but you need to look at the actual charges, to paraphrase:

1. insulting a player ( 2 match ban)

2. insulting with some words with racial/ethnic connotations (another two matches).

The charges allow for the concept of racially aggravated abuse without the perpetrator being a racist. This is not my view, I'm just stating the position of the authorities. If you read the Suarez verdict it actually states they are not calling him a racist, but finding him guilty of the same charges as Terry (1 and 2 above). The difference in penalty is the different aggravating and mitigating circumstances, mainly Terry just saying it once and not vilifying the victim.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

Why would you say "I never called you a black ****"? Any normal person would just say "I didn't say that".

Perhaps I'm not normal. I would have reacted in exactly the same way JT claims he reacted, I've discussed this elsewhere on the board with someone who while he wouldn't have acted in the same way accepted that I would, I had no agenda apart from just commenting on how I'd have reacted. We all can be fiery characters and in a highly charged situation in front of 20000+ plus fans none of us can be truly sure as to how level headed we'd have remained.

I have several problems with the verdict;

If we accept JT's reason for using the words he used then A) Anton Ferdinand used the same language on the pitch and should have been fined too B) Whoever invented the false allegation and relayed it to AF was mischevious and calculating.

On the other hand, if we don't accept JT's version then he shouldn't have been fined. A life ban pure and simple would have sent out a far stronger message. Fining anybody whether it be a speeding fine or in this particular instance merely undermines your message, when you introduce fines rather than penalties it turns from a punishment to a revenue raising exercise.

My own take on this is that the FA saw an excuse to make money rather than draw a line in the sand to define what kind of behaviour is acceptable and what isn't.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

AVB saying it's a massive loss for England - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19748131

MK sits back to see if the same posters who were hyper critical of a certain previous manager for saying similar things are hyper critical of the new man too. Consistancy in judgement or double standards? We shall see.....

DubaiSpur sits back and shouts 'Terry is a ****, why bring Harry vs. Avb into it?'.

DS likes referring to himself in the third person. DS doesn't think it makes him sound like a **** at all.
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

DubaiSpur sits back and shouts 'Terry is a ****, why bring Harry vs. Avb into it?'.

DS likes referring to himself in the third person. DS doesn't think it makes him sound like a **** at all.

MK would put DS on his ignore list, but MK has to admit that DS's post was quite amusing.....!
 
Re: John Terry retires from England duty

can't say i recall Redknapp getting flack for praising a former player before

i assume it's Chelsea after the Champions League final he is referring to, but im not sure what he's angling at seeings as it's not the least bit comparable
 
Back