please log in to view this image John Terry's defence against claims he racially abused Anton Ferdinand was "improbable, implausible, contrived", according to the Football Association panel which found him guilty. A 63-page report explaining why he was banned for four games and fined £220,000 has been published. The document says it is not the FA's case the Chelsea captain and former England international is racist. Terry, 31, cleared of abusing the QPR player in court, has 14 days to appeal. The incident between Terry and Ferdinand occurred during QPR's 1-0 victory over Chelsea at Loftus Road on 23 October 2011. It was alleged Terry described Ferdinand as "black" and used extreme sexual swear words. Terry's case was that he used the word "black" and swore at Ferdinand but insisted he had only been repeating words he thought the Rangers defender had accused him of saying. But the report says parts of Terry's defence were "improbable, implausible and contrived", which "serve to underline and reinforce our decision". It added: "His repetition of words that Mr Terry claims were said to him first by Mr Ferdinand is implausible if they were really intended to be a robust denial. "A much more plausible and likely explanation is that Mr Terry was angry; angry at Mr Ferdinand's taunting and provocation of him, angry at the way the match had gone, and angry at the way in which it seemed likely to end. "The much more likely explanation for what he said is that all of this provoked him into saying [the words]." Terry was cleared at court where the criminal burden of proof is "beyond all reasonable doubt". The independent FA Commission which investigated the case used the lesser civil test, that of on the "balance of probabilities". In court, Chief Magistrate Howard Riddle said it was "highly unlikely" Ferdinand accused Terry of racially abusing him, but it was possible Terry believed at the time that an accusation had been made. Mr Riddle went on: "In those circumstances, there being a doubt, the only verdict the court can record is one of not guilty." But in explaining its decision, the FA report says: "The commission is quite satisfied that there is no credible basis for Mr Terry's defence that his use of the words were directed at Ferdinand by way of forceful rejection and/or inquiry. "Instead, we are quite satisfied, and find on the balance of probabilities, that the offending words were said by way of insult." The report also questions Terry's demeanour if he had been accused of making racist comments. "The commission is entitled to use its collective experience of life and people to judge demeanour," it states. "We have watched the film footage many times. In the critical phase, during which he uses the words, Mr Terry can be seen to be smiling initially, before his facial expression changes to disdainful and contemptuous. "At no point is his demeanour and facial expression that of someone who is imploring, injured, or even quizzical in the face of an unfounded allegation by Mr Ferdinand that he had just been racially abusive towards him. "Anger is a conceivable reaction to such an accusation, but at no time does Mr Terry convey any sense of 'no, I didn't' with his facial expression, or body language." The report adds: "It is not the FA‟s case that Mr Terry is a racist. There is a large body of testimonial evidence, including statements from black footballers, to say that he is not." Analysis Gordon Farquhar BBC sports news correspondent "It is now completely clear the use of the word "black" led to misconduct charge. "Terry used "black" only once so that appears why it was only a four-match ban rather than Luis Suarez's eight games. "What we are seeing here is the FA drilling down on the most serious cases of misconduct." More to follow. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19842795
so he is a racist scumbag c#*t then? only took them a year to figure out what everyone has known for years
After reading the report itself on the FA website, it clearly shows that neither Anton or JT covered themselves in any glory whatsoever. Was JT's behaviour acceptable? No. Was Anton's behaviour acceptable? Again, no. JT should clearly have not have brought race into what was a petty quarrel on the pitch, but is he racist? Probably not. I just hope we can finally move on from all this nonsense and concentrate on the real issue - getting some points tomorrow. I'm sick of the JT/Chelsea sideshow to our season.
Basically they believe that Terry intentionally lied to save his skin. ... just like he did to the court.
Both he and Cole are perjurers. Id love it if some kind of evidence came up that proved they lied and both of them went inside. The thing is, Cole would love that although he would have to find a substitute for the mobile.
I to am now very bored by the whole thing - i look forward to it finally being put to bed, but I know every time Terry and Ferdinand play its going to raise its ugly head again. It does make me ask though when is a racist a racist? Is it possible to make a racist comment and not be a racist... I would of thought not but if I understand the FA correctly this is what they seem to be saying. Maybe as the song suggests we all need to accept the fact that we are ALL a little bit racist and this is OK, it does not mean we all hate each other. If we accept this then at the very least the blood sucking parasitical lawyers might get less rich, and responses to posts on forums such as this might be taken less to heart. For the record - i ****ing hate Monsters, those hairy bastards. [video=youtube;RovF1zsDoeM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RovF1zsDoeM[/video]
Who knows, he might change, like Albie did.......[video=youtube;g9Qu3iP3RYA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9Qu3iP3RYA&sns=em[/video]
although Mr. Terry himself admits that he directed the words “F***ing black c**t” at Mr. Ferdinand, that fact alone is not enough for him to be found guilty of Misconduct in this particular case. The FA accepted that it had to satisfy the 9 Commission that the words were spoken by Mr. Terry by way of an insult to Mr. Ferdinand. "(vi) Where a disciplinary charge is subject to the civil standard of proof, there can be no objection in principle to a professional body bringing disciplinary proceedings against one of its members following an acquittal 15 of an identical, or similar, criminal charge (e.g. proceedings before the General Medical Council). Such disciplinary proceedings will be subject to the rules and regulations of the professional body. " Rejection of Terry's counsel's argument regarding his magistrates court acquittal (i.e. the FA dismissing the argument that a criminal court acquittal does not render a professional body enquiry pointless). (ii) His repetition of words that Mr. Terry claims were said to him first by Mr. Ferdinand is implausible if they were really intended to be a robust denial. A much more likely reaction would have been „I didn‟t‟ call you a black c**t‟, or at least to have prefaced the words “F***ing black c**t” with „are you saying that I called you?‟, or something similar. Instead, the words “black c**t” are simply repeated on Mr. Terry‟s case, with the word “F***ing” added at the beginning, and a question-mark at the end to be inferred. A much more plausible and likely explanation is that Mr. Terry was angry; angry at Mr. Ferdinand‟s taunting and provocation of him, angry at the way the match had gone, and angry at the way in which it seemed likely to end. The much more likely explanation for what he said is that all of this provoked him into saying “F***ing black c**t” as an insult, which is consistent with the fact that insults preceded and followed those words. This is one of the main bits of MEAT of the argument. Pretty damning. The quote we've probably all been waiting for: 7.9 In the light of those findings, the Commission is quite satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that there is no credible basis for Mr. Terry‟s defence that his use of the words “F***ing black c**t” were directed at Ferdinand by way of forceful rejection and/or inquiry. Instead, we are quite satisfied, and find on the balance of probabilities, that the offending words were said by way of insult Section 7 sheds light on Ashley Cole's testimony and goes only slightly short of accusing him of altering his witness statements to make Terry's case seem more believable: "Like the Commission, the issues that have arisen would have informed his view as to whether Mr. Cole‟s evidence was capable of providing reliable corroboration for Mr. Terry‟s case. On the evidence before us, the Commission has considerable doubts in that regard" Essentially what the FA concludes, yes, sort of. The key findings by the FA are: 1. Terry said the words deliberately as an insult to Ferdinand 2. That they believe that whilst he did take part in deliberate racist abuse, he is not de facto "a racist" - or rather, you don't have to be "a racist" to say racist things. 3. That Bernard and Cole's testimony is highly debatable due to seemingly selective memory and changing of testimony to suit Terry's case, and therefore should not be taken into account. 4. That the magistrate's court case was not set up to regulate football and has a different burden of proof and is therefore useful and relevant but not a reason not to proceed - particularly due to the FA having new evidence that the court did not. BowRanger on report
Er... yes, you probably did Ashley. Just because you get away with it in one place doesn't mean that forever after that lie becomes the truth.
He never even mentioned the word "black" in his original statement, that was only put in after they made up the story at a later date.
Hahahahaa!!!! That tweet comes from the rich tradition of forties and fifties cops and robbers melodrama, in which when the culprit is caught red-handed he owns up and says 'Fair cop, guv!' ......except in this case he's done everything except own up.
If that's really sent by him the FA should ****ing crucify the little ****. What is it with that arsehole and phones?
Hes on 98 caps, it would be great if he never got to 100. Its pretty funny, they keep on digging a bigger hole for themselves. I suppose next up would be an appeal and an even bigger ban for Terry. It really is him, its a confirmed account.
