FA report on Terry case.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
CPofL JFT#26 said:
I thought this was the opinion of the commission actually. Oh wait,that's exactly what they say it is actually.

By your logic though it means that Suarez was actually guilty too.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Comical that they're picking up on Cole's changed statement, yet Evra changed his statement THREE TIMES and lied under oath about why he couldn't repeat the word '******' because of his ingrained distaste for it. None of these subsequent revelations were allowed to effect their original judgement and justification that he banned for a further four games totally on the word of a witness who provably lied under oath.
 
donga darko said:
Agreed. Comical that they're picking up on Cole's changed statement, yet Evra changed his statement THREE TIMES and lied under oath about why he couldn't repeat the word '******' because of his ingrained distaste for it. None of these subsequent revelations were allowed to effect their original judgement and justification that he banned for a further four games totally on the word of a witness who provably lied under oath.
Click to expand...

That's because Evra is a bigger knobhead than Anton.

Also worthy of note is that Evra was punished in falsely attempting to accuse the Chelsea groundsman of racially abusing him during a post match altercation.<ok>
 
I've read it all.

Firstly, Cole never changed his statement. What happened was he gave an interview to the FA, he recieved a draft on November 2nd, request for its amendment was made on 3rd. Rather, it was a correction.

This is symptomatic of the whole flawed system.

A large section of the report is given over to regulation 6.8.
The upshot of this regulation is that the FA are allowed to twist and manipulate any circumstance as they see fit in the absence of anything resembling fact.

What I did find strange though, was that Terry went to the trouble of requesting a personal hearing but then chose not to defend himself. Why do I get the feeling his lawyers were just gathering evidence?

Ultimately, my opinion hasn't changed.
It was a kangaroo court and the FA is completely incapable of handling issues as sensitive as racism.
 
This was an interesting read! However I am of the opinion that this childish spat on the pitch, which I suspect is similar to things that happen in a fair few matches through the Prem season has now become the big bore! There's been more press coverage of this than Hitlers invasion of Poland and I think for the good of football and race relations things should now move on!
 
The FA have shown over and over what a useless pile of garbage they are. JT, who I personally can't stand a bar of, was dead in the water as soon as these clowns decided to charge him. The whole think is such a farce, you honestly couldn't make it up.
Further, there was a golden opportunity for the FA to issue an edict banning ALL the foul vilification that our heroic footballers use as a matter of course. Naturally, they did nothing. Hopeless, useless bunch of absolute dopes.
Hope JT goes to the International Court for Sport and appeals in a proper, unbiased and professional venue. Only then will any verdict have any credibility.
 
Above all, it goes to show wot I've allwayz siad:

"The English, the Egnlish, the Englihs are best.
I woulnd'n't give towpence
For all of the rest!"

Too rithg. Respect!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back