Not sure how this will go down - but just seen the news about his ban and fine (I'm outside the UK at the minute- just in case anyone thinks I'm up late worrying about the poor man). I'm not a big fan of Terry, although I do admire his spirit in the face of adversity- he has got an exceptional character in the sense he rises to the occasion, regardless of the pressure (although his actions in Barcelona somewhat undermine that opinion). It sounds as though they have applied FA Rule E3 (2) in a very literal sense. He admitted using what is racist language, but the context of it (in his argument) was not racially motivated. I know there is a different 'burden of proof' in an FA hearing- but there is no conclusive evidence of what he actually said- "f.. b.. c..." is on camera, but it's clearly part of a longer sentence, the key part obscured from all angles. The FA has stated it will provide written reasons. My personal opinion, having not seen the reasons yet (and therefore probably posited prematurely) is that they've taken this stance on point of principle- a racist word was used and therefore he must be charged. Given the Suarez affair I can somewhat understand, the next issue is how Ferdinand is treated. If they do think he is guilty, it seems quite a light punishment- one month ban and one weeks wages, essentially. It seems like they've tried to find a 'halfway house' on this one. I think this was always going to be the outcome- what was the point of a three day hearing?
Silks, trust all is well in your tax haven in Monaco? On this one though I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Terry, IMO, is a complete idiot. He was/is captain of Chelsea and England (not sure of England at the time) and calling someone a black c..t is racist in any language. Does context come into it?
Craving. I think context does play a major part in it. Just to be clear I am not racist and do not have an opinion on JT being one. Now that's the legal part out the way. If we use this context. Anton I didn't call you a f**k**g black c**t. Does that make it a racist remark? As opposed to what did you say? You f**k**g black c**t.
Terry says he was repeating what Ferdinand said to him. Why would Ferdinand call Terry a ****ing black ****? Or if Ferdinand had misheard Terry, what did Terry actually say? Two mucking flack punt? Hmmm. This whole debacle is decidedly fishy, IMO.
I'm of the opinion that context is more important than the actual words- it's possible to racially abuse someone without using a word considered to be racist- it's also possible for a person to use a racist word without actually intending to be racist (see all of my grandparents who habitually refer to a Chinese meal in hugely offensive terms, if taken out of context- in reality it's just what they grew up with and do not mean it in a disparaging way).
I read this interview with Stephane Henchoz the other day, which fits in quite nicely here: Lots of things there you could say was racist (although I don't think they are, using silky's context reasoning).
Politician throws in his two pence; MP Damian Collins says the ban presents Terry with an opportunity to acknowledge what he did was "wrong". "He admitted making the remarks," Collins said. "It is unacceptable for a player to make such remarks, so it was hard for the FA to come to any other decision. "John Terry is still a relatively young man. He's got a chance to move on from this and be a role model again. He has to build his own bridges with black players, who were very upset by what happened." I'd be interested to know just how many black players Damian has been speaking with. What a bellend. Why do these guys feel it necessary to comment when it's completely outside of their remit. This is the same guy that spoke about youngsters busking for bus money.
Politician throws in his two pence; MP Damian Collins says the ban presents Terry with an opportunity to acknowledge what he did was "wrong". "He admitted making the remarks," Collins said. "It is unacceptable for a player to make such remarks, so it was hard for the FA to come to any other decision. "John Terry is still a relatively young man. He's got a chance to move on from this and be a role model again. He has to build his own bridges with black players, who were very upset by what happened." I'd be interested to know just how many black players Damian has been speaking with. What a bellend. Why do these guys feel it necessary to comment when it's completely outside of their remit. This is the same guy that spoke about youngsters busking for bus money.
I can actually understand someone saying or do something terrible in the heat of the moment. I'm not excusing what he said, but I think all humans are prone to errors like these. But it's also human to humble yourself, admit you did it and sincerely offer an apology. I'm sure that would have fixed everything, but this is where John Terry and others of his ilk deviate from the rest of us. John Terry is a celebrity football star who, for most of his life, has been worshipped by everyone around him. Well, naturally, anyone who gets that much worship will think he's a god and is, therefore, outside the normal, moral boundries that the rest of us have to contend with. John Terry actually believes that whatever he does is OK, whether it's verbally trashing an opponent or nailing Wayne Bridge's girlfriend. The celebrity world is full of people like this - Woody Allen, Mel Gibson.
Having seen the Sky footage, there's no way he's responding to Ferdinand asking a question whether he said it. Terry called him a ****...***t right from the start. No doubt about it in my mind. I've been wrong before though. As for getting all and sundry to tell everyone of the high moral fibre that runs through his veins, don't get me started!
