September 25th, 2012

John Terry: Going Out With A Bang

Image: Alex Livesey/Getty Images Europe.

Given the eventful nature of John Terry’s England career, it was always unlikely that his parting would be the lump-in-throat, blubber inducing presser moment his predecessor provided.

The Chelsea skipper announced his retirement from international football on Sunday, one day before he was due to appear before an independent panel convened to examine allegations of his using racially charged language towards a fellow player. But instead of an emotional goodbye to the NT, he fired the opening salvo in what looks to be the biggest battle for his career and reputation to date.

Image: REUTERS/Eddie Keogh.

Terry claimed he was making the statement:

… in advance of the hearing of the FA disciplinary charge because I feel the FA, in pursuing charges against me where I have already been cleared in a court of law, have made my position with the national team untenable.

An FA spokesman rejected the assertion, pointing out that:

[the criminal case & the FA case] sit in different compartments and I could separate the two in my mind, but it doesn’t look like he could.

Even the likes of us don’t need to wring the inference out of that one. So we won’t. Instead, we’ll simply ask you this.

Was John Terry right? Would his position in the England team have become untenable whatever the outcome of the hearing, given the nature of the charges against him? Roy Hodgson doesn’t think so.

Or, as some have speculated, is this a political move designed to save his Chelsea career? Given the FA’s current emphasis on kicking racism out of the game, the club’s continuing support of their captain *could* become a PR problem if JT is found guilty.

Offer your thoughts. While all the time keeping our comments moderator’s proclivity towards migraine attacks in mind, please.

 

Related Posts with Thumbnails

20 Responses to “John Terry: Going Out With A Bang”

  1. XaviLover says:

    So after the CL last match there were talks that he would be missing the Euro because he had a court date pending on June 1st or 3rd. I was amazed that it got put on hold because he was to take part og the Euro! I’m sorry but if the court date has been set I don’t think football should be put as priority. I don’t know England’s law on the matter but a small mistake here in the US to miss a court date even if it’s to arrange another court date automatically gets you an arrest warrant. Now, I know he didn’t miss it but why should he get permission to skip it? The matter in my opinion is a serious one. This issue is a recurring one for this team hasn’t it? Their football suffers and if football is this important to the court maybe not allowing him to be part of the NT would have been best. He should straighten out this matter right away.

  2. EvilBean says:

    4 days, hmm.
    I suppose the name Teflon Terry is going to stick to him.

  3. Caro says:

    Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.

    England already has a captain who can play football, be a decent human being and chew gum simultaneously. They'll be OK.

  4. Nicola says:

    Now? Why has he only come to the conclusion his position is untenable now? Why not last October? Why not before the Capello resignation saga? Why not before the Euros and it had to be a choice between him and Rio Ferdinand? Why not in July when the FA announced it's own investigation, which IS unrelated to the criminal case. FFS! Why not 2 weeks ago when England kicked off their 2014 qualifying campaign?

    For a year now, and actually prior to that due to all his other exploits (god, his charge sheet has its own filing cabinet) he has been a dead weight round the NT's neck, the football has been a bit-part compared to the 'what to do about EBJT' starring role. The team that he "loves" and has "broken his heart" has suffered accordingly, which makes you wonder why he didn't consider his position sooner…

    An utterly selfish twat who is quitting before he is kicked to the curb.

  5. savannah says:

    None of this would have happened if he hadn't been caught on camera calling Ferdinand a black c**t. Not sure how the FA is to blame for that.

  6. tammyv says:

    There being a criminal hearing and an FA hearing in no way violates the rules. They are two separate charges, two separate governing bodies and two separate burdens of proof. They are also look at two different things.

    The criminal case was for racial abuse of another person for which the judge said he thought Terry was probably guilty but the evidence was not concert enough. The FA charge is determining if he used racially charged language in his comments. He has admitted that he did, under penalty of perjury in open Court. Because of that admission, he admitted being in violation FA rules. He is now being tried for that conduct.

    As for the FA rules saying that they stand by court decisions, that is true; it is in the rules., HOWEVER, that is a loophole that clearly states if new evidence comes to light, they have a right to move. Because of Terry's admission, he created new evidence for the FA.

    It should also be noted that Terry is a direct and defacto employee of the FA. Both his club and country contracts are with the FA ultimately and state that he agrees to the the FA governing rules. As an employer, they have the right and the responsibility to investigate discrimination and abuse between employees as this is. This is the same thing as the Surez situation now.

    AS for the retiring from International Duty, I think was an attempt to blackmail the FA into dropping the charges out of fear of losing his abilities on the team. The FA has not blinked as I think he expected (yet).

    • April says:

      I'm curious about the admission you mentioned. If there is new evidence, that would mean the criminal case would have some issues…

      I've no problem with him dropping his country duty. I think he should have done it awhile ago. I also wouldn't have an issue with the FA performing the investigation if they didn't opt to wait until after the criminal proceedings to see what came of them. I had presumed that was because of their rule regarding their uptake on the criminal proceedings.

      I honestly believe the FA are stalling because they got themselves into a rock and a hard place. One way or another, they'll be shown for going back on their own word. And there is no reason for his hearing to have taken soooo long.

      • tammyv says:

        they are legally bound to wait until to the criminal case is concluded before they can progress forward. Had they attempted to interview witnesses, conductive evidence prior to the criminal case being concluded they could have been charged with witness/evidence tampering.

        As for what he said, as part of his defense to the racial abuse charges he admitted that he used racial-charged language to deny that he meant them to be racial abuse. The FA is looking into the use of racial-charged language against another player which is not the same thing as racial abuse.

        As for the length of time, it is only a couple of months after the court ruling. They FA still then had to conduct their own investigation and hold the hearings.

        The decision is expected by the end of this week

        • April says:

          I can gather the need to wait for the trial, though I don't think that Terry's admission was new evidence- he had claimed his strange story about repeating an accusation since his press statements after the incident took place. I suppose I also still feel like the FA actually had a strange duality about their relationship with JT to that point. I believe that they had no problem with the trial not happening until after the Euros. It didn't actually do Chelsea any favors to have it wait until that time. I imagine the club would have felt better off having the trial occur following the CL final. I just have trouble believing the FA didn't play some role in that requested timeframe. And if that is true, then they're playing both sides. That could well be where Terry's silly standoff in the form of a retirement comes from. It caused the FA to have to comment on it, and I feel their comments show a lack of conviction in any direction. Especially regarding their supposed stance against racism.

          The decision's been made, and I'm not bothered about it in terms of what he very likely said. I just think that the FA should probably play cleanup in their own rulebook and practices. They just strike me as an organization that isn't on the ball. The delay in removing Terry as captain over this incident is another example. And there are others still with other players and coaches.

          I do think that the hearing took too long- it should have been ready to go the moment the court case finished. Rio Ferdinand had made comments after the trial and had a decision made regarding him by the FA, in record time. The FA could work on their consistency, too.

  7. [...] the original:  John Terry: Going Out With A Bang « Kickette.com – Soccer/football … « Heskey is back! | BoxofficeFootball Soccer Highlights Video News … UEFA president [...]

  8. Lama says:

    The FA's suggestion to "separate the two" is just ridiculous!!!! What were they thinking when they said that? It even contradicts their rules and everything they supposedly stand for.
    I was very sad to see John Terry leave but I think it was a good move. He doesn't really deserve this treatment from the FA and hence the FA don't deserve his loyal services, neither do England fans who boo him in their own matches even when he puts his body on the line for them.

    • EvilBean says:

      For me there’s a difference between those two. The criminal hearing stated that because of lack of evidence, John Terry was found not guilty, but at the FA it’s different.

      I think they should find John Terry guilty, what he did was at least at bad as what Suarez did.

      Weather, it should be taken into account, that John Terry as a captain for Chelsea and England, holds a higher position than Suarez, and the punishment therefore should be more severe, that’s another issue to discuss.

    • Caro says:

      Tammy has already explained this far more eloquently than I ever could. I don't even understand how in the everloving eff Terry's people let him put out that statement. Does he not have a lawyer who can explain to him the difference between criminal and civil proceedings, in the -that he's never heard of OJ Simpson?

      • April says:

        He probably has a team of lawyers that has seen the FA handbook that suggests they would fall upon the evidence provided in any civil or criminal proceedings before their own.

  9. April says:

    The FA says they could separate the club and country, but apparently they couldn't when they twice removed him from the captaincy. Whatever people think about Terry's situations, I think the FA is playing a PR game more than they are playing the part of a competent organization.

    • April says:

      Other articles also suggested that the part in brackets on the FA quote was intended to be "club and country". As actually, the FA have a rule in their very own book that suggests they are to pay attention to criminal or civil proceedings, so they very well shouldn't be separating the two, according to their own instruction.

    • Catie2838 says:

      Totally agree. The fact that the FA seem to muck it up more is actually, in mine opinion, what allows players to get away with this kind of behavior. Have rules, have consequences for breaking them, enforce them across the board in a timely manner. It's not a hard formula, but it doesn't seem to be making it through their thick skulls.

      • April says:

        I love that our suggestion that the FA could be taking much better and stronger actions against racism than this joke of a hearing/proceeding a YEAR later is getting disapproval from readers.

        How about the FA actually take a real interest in bringing an end to racism in the sport… it starts with education. A mediation process between Terry and Ferdinand that saw them trying to come out with Terry maybe understanding the weight of the words he's accused of saying could have been a nice start. Something similar with the Suarez case could have been better, then maybe there wouldn't be all this handshake drama. Simply throwing the book at folks doesn't really change what they might well feel. That said… if you are going to go by the book, then do it efficiently and don't be offended when your former captain decides to walk from the NT because he knows there is a good chance he's going to be made an example of as a PR stunt to have viewers believe the FA actually care to end discrimination in football.

        • Catie2838 says:

          I'm assuming it's a few ardent Terry-can-do-no-wrong fans who are voting us down. Either that or some FA execs decided to check out Kickette ;) . Anyway, I don't hate John Terry, and I think it's quite sad that his national career had to end like this. I also don't think that he is truly a racist person. I think there's a culture, perpetuated by the FA and their nonexistent standards, that allows for one player to belittle another using race. And it's not just in sports. However, the FA is in charge of a sport, and if they keep claiming they're against racism in football they have to actually do something about it. And what people are apparently failing to realize is this wishy washy stance by the FA does a huge disservice to BOTH parties. Not only do they not get a chance to work through this and learn from each other, everyone watching this saga doesn't get the opportunity to learn by example. And this whole cycle of nonsense just starts all over again…

  10. Good write-up, I��m normal visitor of one��s blog, maintain up the excellent operate, and It’s going to be a regular visitor for a long time.