The FA has decided in its infinite wisdom that it knows better than the law of the land! It's this type of action that makes me so angry with the FA! It's nothing to do with supporting JT, I don't particularly like the bloke anyway! It's just those boring old farts at Lancaster Gate, trying to make themselves look important, and they're not, they're just a load of sad old duffers, who need to drag themselves out of the eighteenth century!
Just raking it all up again. They will no doubt reverse the other decision, give him a token punishment and confuse everyone. Are they pissed off as the Olympics is stealing their thunder? And who advises them? Jeremy Hunt?
On the one hand I agree Dave and on the other I don't. John Terry got off on a technicality as do so many guilty people, so if the FA sanction him in some way it's probably no more than he deserves. If any other posters on here have ever done jury service like me and seen it first hand, they will know what I mean
Sorry Dave I couldn't disagree more. Terry was quite plainly shown to have used racially abusive language but got off because it couldn't be proved beyond all reasonable doubt that he had done so in an aggressive way as opposed to supposedly repeating what Ferdinand had already said. The message coming out of that trial is that it's ok to call someone a "f***ing black c***" and I applaud the FA for having the courage to say "if the law can't come to the right conclusion, we will". I hope he's banned for the season.
You may have misunderstood my point! I'm quite happy for Terry to be punished for something he quite obviously did, it just angers me that the FA are saying, "Look, we at the FA are more important than the law-makers, we will punish him instead of you!"
It angers me more than John Terry wasn't charged for a racist remark in the first place. Equally the whole exchange between him and Anton Ferdinand was very unsavoury and frankly they both deserve to be charged for just being totally out of order. Argy-Bargy is fine, and very much a part of football, but for whatever reason these blokes completely lost it with eachother and something should be done.
Speaking of footballers loosing it completely - anyone been keeping up with Leon knight on twitter. Horrible little creature...
Sorry, but I disagree strongly with the person who started this thread. John Terry called someone a '****ing black ****'. He got off because he is rich and he got a top lawyer who argued that it was 0.0001% possible that what Terry said was 'Hey Anton, I didn't call you a ****ing black ****' because of the fortunate fact that a body walked in front of Terry before the '****ing black ****' words were spoken. What kind of message does it send to black players if no further action is taken against Terry? It says 'if you are racially abused, don't say anything because YOU will be the person who is accused and vilified, just as Evra and Ferninand were both vilified'. What Terry said was worse, much worse, than what Suarez said (although Suarez admitted saying it many times). Action must be taken against him if the FA anti-racism campaign is to become anything other than a pathetic joke.
The whole anti racism campaign is a joke. You cannot alter peoples thoughts. There will never be total acceptance or tolerance of peoples race, creed or colour. The majority of us can't believe why someone dislikes or even hates to the degree of causing harm, just like the bastard done this week for shooting an innocent Indian. But as we've discussed on previous threads, we all harbour some prejudices. I got stick for saying I had reasons for hating Germans. Fair dues, most couldn't understand my resentment. But believe me, I think I have my reasons. I believe many are jumping on the bandwagon because its Terry. And he is up there with Barton as despicable. I couldn't care less what happens to him. But how can the FA judge him now? They were happy for the legal system to sort it out and just like OJ Simpson, many people aren't happy with the verdict. That's tough I'm afraid. He was acquitted or whatever the legal term is. He probably still thinks Anton Ferdinand is a black ****. And so do the majority of Chelsea fans. But they only think it but don't utter it when in earshot. Britain is a very racially tolerant country believe me. Knobs like Terry will always exist and probably in all honesty get away with it. You just have to accept it and move on.
Accept it and move on? if only someone had told rosa parks or mlk. And I don't think this is bandwagoning - it's an issue people care about - and care strongly about - i don't care who is at the centre of it. That it is the former England captain means it is even more important to highlight as an example - so that perhaps youngsters without decent parental role models will realise how unacceptable, ugly and unwanted such behavior is in modern society. Many people have racist parents/grandparents etc - and will mock such their relatives ridiculous views - and that is an eg of people's thoughts changing. I'm not naive enough to think there won't ever be racists or prejudice in this world, but I do believe these are behaviours that can be altered over time and that the percentage of such people will decrease further over time This whole case is important for our country, not just football. What are we saying if this goes without punishment? What example is that? As a country we have come quite a way in overcoming prejudice - however slow that progress might be - but equally there is a very long way to go. Accept it and move on is absolutely not an option.
I got pasted before when I posted that the original court decison was wrong because thanks to youtube and all that we could all plainly see what he said and he was totally guilty. I hate the FA but on this one occasion they have actually got something right. I have to add that I still think Ferdinand is also a total knob and shouldm also have been fined or banned as well.
I'm glad you don't work for the crown prosecution service then. Your misunderstanding of my post is just one of the reasons this was the wrong case. Civil rights were not gained by isolated incidents and they weren't gained by asking people to take sides either. The Terry case was adequately summed up during the verdict by the opinion that Terry was not a natural racist. To be one your opinion would have to be that because of that persons colour or nationality that made them inferior to you. Terry called him a black ****. He didn't say shine my shoes or pick my cotton. So save your indignation for the next time you hear that some thug who thinks he is superior to someone because of their skin tone or where they are from and takes action and conspires with others to do the same. Believe me, I have experience. My father in law in from Mauritius and looks like an Indian and I have seen the look on peoples faces when they have looked at him like he was **** on the soles of their shoes. The have felt the lash of my tongue or seen the icy stare that means if you don't fcuk off you'll regret it. So there is need to quote Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks at me. So if you want to be rid of bigotry and racism, forget this one and move on. Stand outside the court protesting the next time someone stabs a coloured lad. Protest outside a BNP meeting. If you really mean it that is.
if i have misunderstood your previous post, please expound. i usually find myself nodding in agreement with a lot of what you write redruth - but on the previous, i am strongly opposed. if i have got the wrong end of the stick, apologies - but i dont believe in a these-people-will-always-exist-just-move-on attitude. nor do i think this is about taking sides. i find it somewhat insulting and presumptuous that you would imply that this subject matter isnt something i am passionate about, or have experience of. it is a subject very close to my heart, hence for the previous post. without the need for swapping family history, my mother is trinidadian. she is black, loud, dresses louder, and extremely proud of who she is and where she comes from - you couldn't miss her if you tried (nor would she let you). growing up in rural norfolk some 30 years ago, i would imagine my experiences mirror some of your own, if not vasty exceed them. at 7 years old, glaring at your neighbours or some idiot in the street probably doesnt have the same effect - regardless the ****-you-stare is something i am equally well versed in. thing is, i have seen attitudes change over these 30 years - massively... i wasnt comparing mlk or miss parks to the terry case particularly, it was a bit of a flippant remark, but then equally i'm unsure whether our country would ever experience anything comparible, simply because of how far we have come. i believe something as public as this case could affect future attitudes (kids who think the sun shines out of his backside) which is why i would like to have seen it dealt with in the correct manner.
I hope and pray I'm not racist! For example, I despise Rio Ferdinand! Not because he is black, but because he's a tosser who just happens to be black! I had a poor example in my home=life, my late Mother was so racist, she would not watch News at Ten in case Trevor McDonald came onscreen, I used to laugh at her and ask for an explanation, which she was unable to give!
Accept my apologies if you feel offended. I had no wish to do so. You and I are on the same side. Racism is despicable and needs eradicating. But you won't do it by taking Terry to court over it. There is no proof that he is a racist by calling someone a black ****. He plays alongside other black players and Ashley Cole spoke up on his behalf. I think there is proof that Nick Griffin and his cohorts are racist. These are the guys who are the targets to aim at. They are hiding behind the legitimacy of a political party. The friends and associates of the murderers of Stephen Lawrence are racist. They protected them. They should be investigated. The FA only makes laws pertaining to football and they have no power outside of the game. And I can well see Terry appealing if they find him guilty and hand down a punishment. Then it would develop into a farce and the real issues of racism would become a target for all the wrong reasons. I believe pursuing this case would set the issue back years. It would force mates to make choices over a pint or a game of cards. And the issue is not about choices, its about eradicating evil.
Surely this is the difference between Criminal Law and Civil Law. In Criminal Law there has to be ' no reasonable doubt ' or 95% certain - in Civil Law it has to be balance of probablilities or 55%. It often happens that people found not guilty in a Criminal Court are ordered to pay damages in a Civil Court. The action by the FA comes under the heading of Civil Law and is quite lawful and reasonable.
