John Terry: Racist slur?

[AndersonBLUE 819]

Terry will make all the headlines this weekend (already has). Media loves this guy

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

Embarrassing.

Why?

[terraloon 5]

Whilst we have no idea what the commission are going to say in their written report my guess is they will rule quite simply that Terry, through his own admission made the comments. In truth it would be hard to argue otherwise. I would expect however they will say something along the lines that he said and that’s all they were there to judge whereas in the Suarez case there was much more (the number of times he uttered words of a racial nature and the fact that he admitted to pinching Evra) Hence the difference in the number of games banned.

However if this is the case Terry has immediate grounds for appeal in that Evra told the ref that Suarez had called him a n***o or whatever the translation was and he wasn’t charged. You have to take all such matters in context.

There are two other routes that are possible both, I think, without the need for appeal although it would strengthen any case if he had been through the appeal process.

The first will to be asking for a judicial review. I believe there are three reasons such a review could be granted. 1) The FA failed to adhere to their own rules in that they didn’t rely on both the result or the evidence of the court case and 2) The panel had bias as whilst there clearly was independence at least one of the panels was a FA councillor and 3) Lack of consistency. They didn’t charge Evra!

The second is to go to The Court for Arbitration in Sport. They have the final word in sports disputes. If you remember they were the ones that ruled that UEFAs transfer ban imposed on us following the singing of Gael Kakuta was invalid.

The FA will argue in their rules that they have the final word in all matters but this shouldn’t present any real challenge.

Having said all that I wonder what Chelsea’s position will be if at the end of the day the decision goes un challenged or indeed is up held.

Quite simply JT may be sacrificed if the club are to avoid firstly some of their decisions re previous players being sacked (the club have always argued zero tolerance) being challenged, secondly the bans of supporters who have already or will in the future for making racist comments being challenged in the courts and thirdly to satisfy the wider football community to include worldwide sponsors and dare I say the press.

JT is contracted at Chelsea till 2014. Some would argue his playing influence is declining. Some would argue his presence as captain or as a leader will or has already been damaged by this issue. We will have to face up to life at some point without Terry and I fear that the club may well feel that that time has come.

No doubt many will disagree with my I am suggesting but I fear it is a real possibility

[zolayes 14,489]

an excellent first post . Personally I hope JT just accepts the injustice and moves on.

[Laylabelle 9,534]

Time to accept the charge and move on.Dragged on long enough doesnt need to go on any long.Course when we play United/QPR again no doubt be brought back up again but until then..be nice

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

Whilst we have no idea what the commission are going to say in their written report my guess is they will rule quite simply that Terry, through his own admission made the comments. In truth it would be hard to argue otherwise. I would expect however they will say something along the lines that he said and that’s all they were there to judge whereas in the Suarez case there was much more (the number of times he uttered words of a racial nature and the fact that he admitted to pinching Evra) Hence the difference in the number of games banned.

However if this is the case Terry has immediate grounds for appeal in that Evra told the ref that Suarez had called him a n***o or whatever the translation was and he wasn’t charged. You have to take all such matters in context.

There are two other routes that are possible both, I think, without the need for appeal although it would strengthen any case if he had been through the appeal process.

The first will to be asking for a judicial review. I believe there are three reasons such a review could be granted. 1) The FA failed to adhere to their own rules in that they didn’t rely on both the result or the evidence of the court case and 2) The panel had bias as whilst there clearly was independence at least one of the panels was a FA councillor and 3) Lack of consistency. They didn’t charge Evra!

The second is to go to The Court for Arbitration in Sport. They have the final word in sports disputes. If you remember they were the ones that ruled that UEFAs transfer ban imposed on us following the singing of Gael Kakuta was invalid.

The FA will argue in their rules that they have the final word in all matters but this shouldn’t present any real challenge.

Having said all that I wonder what Chelsea’s position will be if at the end of the day the decision goes un challenged or indeed is up held.

Quite simply JT may be sacrificed if the club are to avoid firstly some of their decisions re previous players being sacked (the club have always argued zero tolerance) being challenged, secondly the bans of supporters who have already or will in the future for making racist comments being challenged in the courts and thirdly to satisfy the wider football community to include worldwide sponsors and dare I say the press.

JT is contracted at Chelsea till 2014. Some would argue his playing influence is declining. Some would argue his presence as captain or as a leader will or has already been damaged by this issue. We will have to face up to life at some point without Terry and I fear that the club may well feel that that time has come.

No doubt many will disagree with my I am suggesting but I fear it is a real possibility

So, You're saying that chelsea can "Sack" JT after 2014?

[zolayes 14,489]

So, You're saying that chelsea can "Sack" JT after 2014?

I believe he is saying we might not renew his contract then ,,,That is a reasonable premise given his age ,,injury problems, salary and possible

alternatives. I don't believe there is any disrespect in suggesting that MIGHT happen

[terraloon 5]

So, You're saying that chelsea can "Sack" JT after 2014?

No far from it.

I am asking will the club sack him now or ride the storm and be prepared, if forced, to re visit some of the sackings/ bans of the past.

JT is a fabulous footballer. A great Chelsea man and had he been 25 the club would be in a far more difficult position but he isnt he is nearly 32 and whilst still a great player how many more years does he have left?

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

No far from it.

I am asking will the club sack him now or ride the storm and be prepared, if forced, to re visit some of the sackings/ bans of the past.

JT is a fabulous footballer. A great Chelsea man and had he been 25 the club would be in a far more difficult position but he isnt he is nearly 32 and whilst still a great player how many more years does he have left?

What do u mean?

[terraloon 5]

What do u mean?

The club advocated in the Jacob Mellis, Adrain Mutu and Bosnich dismissals that the club operate a zero tolerance. Both at appeal and in the Mutu case they argued this at CAS.

The club have argued the same in incidents where supporters are found to have made chants of a racial nature. These supporters receive lifetime bans again through thr club operating a policy of zero tolerance.

The club face a dilemma, (please don’t think I am saying they should sack JT) I fear the club, through the media but also through the need to be able to maintain its zero tolerance stance, may well feel the need to take some sort of action against JT. The problem is he is our best defender, our captain etc. etc. But as we all know Roman is quite ruthless and may well feel the clubs image/ standing will be harmed if JT remains. The suits will be looking at the matter from a business perspective as well as the football perspective. The clubs image and marketing potential will be a major consideration

Please don’t think I am saying it has to happen but we as supporters need to face up to the fact it may well happen. For me if the club can somehow get to the Jan window I would not be at a surprised to see him go somewhere in Europe on loan. Will be a real shame but I don’t expect any let up from the press or indeed pressure groups if the club don’t take some sort of action.

[warnie_666 1,081]

Great Article on Teflon Terry!!

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/the-calvin-report-terrys-white-boots-belie-a-grubby-week-8190960.html

Say what you like about John Terry – and we will – he's a trouper. This was a fist-pumping, badge-kissing, legend-enhancing reaffirmation of character. The man has the durability of a cockroach, the nerve of a test pilot and the chutzpah of a street politician .

[Fulham Broadway 17,311]

In reply to those above asking will the club sack him

The FA Punishment is for him using 'abusive and/or insulting words which made reference to colour and/or race' - He admitted saying the words in court (and again at the FA hearing), so the minute he made the admission he was always going to get found guilty by the FA. The key point is that he's guilty of saying the words, the context is irrelevant in terms of the FA's punishment, but a court of law found him innocent of making a racially abusive remark.

The club would never sack him.

The other good news is that he has 14 days to appeal from when he receives the report so will play against Noriwch all being well

[warnie_666 1,081]

FA chiefs may look to increase John Terry’s punishment for racially abusing Anton Ferdinand.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4568576/John-Terry-ban-FA-may-increase-punishment.html#ixzz28CLwRP8E

I swear if they take that option, then they just stoop down to a whole new level. How more desperate do they wanna be

[zolayes 14,489]

FA chiefs may look to increase John Terry’s punishment for racially abusing Anton Ferdinand.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co...l#ixzz28CLwRP8E

I swear if they take that option, then they just stoop down to a whole new level. How more desperate do they wanna be

can't see that happening ..I think the FA just want it all over ..

[Laylabelle 9,534]

Surley they cant give a said amount match ban then increase it just like that.Just make them look even more twattish really because shows they either made a mistake by giving him only 4 matches or are crumbling under pressure..then again its the Sun bubble world