John Terry stripped of England captaincy...again
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 3, 2012 1:40 PM GMT
in England Internationals
Email
Print
The John Terry/Anton Ferdinand saga was drawn out even further earlier in the week when it was announced that his trial would not begin until after the European championships in July. Largely due to that delay, the FA has today released a statement that John Terry will not be captaining the England squad at this summer's tournament. Terry was reportedly notified by phone of the decision this morning and has yet to comment publically on the matter. Fabio Capello was also reportedly informed of the board's decision this morning by phone.
Frankly this decision may be a good thing for both Terry and Chelsea. You have to assume that he's going to have some additional motivation to show his quality now, he certainly seems to play very well every time his life off the pitch sees a little more turmoil. You'd also have to wonder if this is simply a precursor to his being left off the squad, but that decision rests on both the player and Capello. His having the summer off wouldn't be the worst thing to happen to Chelsea though, so maybe that would be for the best.
133 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Why is he out?
Injured
Why isn’t it a great day for him? See article….. and because he is now out dor Sunday :)
by Sweet science on Feb 3, 2012 2:07 PM GMT up reply actions
I did mean why he was injured
Thanks anyway
by RamStamford on Feb 3, 2012 2:20 PM GMT via mobile up reply actions
Now I'm mad.
I thought it was a little out of line for fans to be chanting things about Anton Ferdinand. Now I don’t. Whatever JT said to Ferdinand, he didnt even hear. This is ridiculous.
I agree.
Political correctness gone crazy. Typical FA. I don’t condone racism, in fact I believe calling alleged comments like this racist, actually devalues the true meaning of ‘racism’ when it is actually appropriate for the circumstance. In England, perhaps this is a serious as it gets (though I doubt it).
by Chelsea-Steeler on Feb 3, 2012 4:07 PM GMT up reply actions
That is no excuse to chant at Anton Ferdinand
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 4:16 PM GMT up reply actions
I agree, didn't mean to suggest it was. I just think Terry going to court over this is a sad indictment on the English legal system.
by Chelsea-Steeler on Feb 3, 2012 4:17 PM GMT up reply actions
This is something I've head from a lot of Americans*
*Forgive the assumption.
You have to remember that it’s a completely different legal structure to the one you’re used to, and that means they’ll have some very different responses to certain situations. From the US point of view, this is a heinous breach of free speech rights. From the English point of view, it isn’t, because racially abusing someone is a crime over there.
Is one way better than the other? That’s obviously not for me to see, but different doesn’t necessarily mean wrong.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 4:22 PM GMT up reply actions
I'm actually from Australia!
I do see your point. However, if John Terry’s alleged comments are worthy of criminal punishment for ‘racial abuse’, I think the world has gone crazy. He certainly shouldn’t be treated any differently legally, than any other British citizen (which he certainly is). True prejudice and racism from racist people is what is needed to be stamped out.
by Chelsea-Steeler on Feb 3, 2012 4:29 PM GMT up reply actions
He certainly shouldn’t be treated any differently legally, than any other British citizen
I can guarentee you if I had said that to someone I would be in a lot worse a place than JT. For instance, I would already have stood trial
by Sweet science on Feb 3, 2012 7:51 PM GMT up reply actions
You would not have been booed by thousands of people and removed as the England Captain
So you would have been still better.
If I had called someone that
Im pretty sure people where I live wouldn’t be too happy with me. And anyway, as England Captain you are a role model. You know what is expected of you
That isn’t calling someone a ….. ….!
He has to live with the consequenses
by Sweet science on Feb 4, 2012 2:37 AM GMT up reply actions
I don't understand how serious of a crime this is in England.
I feel as if the punishment here is too severe for the crime. Racism is bad but not bad enough to ruin someone’s career in sports. I understand if a politician or a policeman makes a racist comment how that could ruin their career, but an athlete? Just suspend him for a game or 2 and be done with it. Now this is being dragged out so that we’ll have to hear about it from the commentators during every single match.
by TheColorIsBlue on Feb 3, 2012 5:12 PM GMT up reply actions
Hold up a second
You’re confusing the actual crime and punishment with what the FA is doing. If Terry’s found guilty, he’ll be fined a couple of thousand pounds. That’s the punishment.
The FA would then take further steps (and I’d hope Chelsea would too) to distances themselves from a man convicted of racist abuse. What’s going on right now is that the FA doesn’t want a situation where Terry leads England to the Euros and then is convicted of this a month later.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:16 PM GMT up reply actions
I didn't follow the Suarez situation very closely
but didn’t that all happen for him quickly? was he tried in court also?
by TheColorIsBlue on Feb 3, 2012 5:18 PM GMT up reply actions
Suarez was not tried for a criminal offence
Evra never reported him to the police, he merely reported him to the FA. Terry’s case was brought to the police by a member of the public who claimed to witness the event.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:20 PM GMT up reply actions
So if the FA found Suarez guilty enough to punish him, why wouldnt they report him to the police?
by TheColorIsBlue on Feb 3, 2012 5:22 PM GMT up reply actions
And because the FA's standard of proof is significantly lower than criminal court
From what I understand of the Suarez verdict, I don’t think it would have held up on a real trial
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:24 PM GMT up reply actions
so even if Terry is found not guilty the FA can still punish him?
by TheColorIsBlue on Feb 3, 2012 5:27 PM GMT up reply actions
Even the reverse can happen
But less chance. Whatever the court will do FA will most probably follow.
I dont see why the FA doesnt just do their investigation first
They can get the potential suspension taken care of now and they can then turn their evidence over to the police
by TheColorIsBlue on Feb 3, 2012 5:32 PM GMT up reply actions
What if the court make different decision to them
People will blame FA for not not doing proper investigation. And I think police have told the FA to stop their investigation till the court case but I am not sure about that.
The court wouldn't allow them to do that
Their potential ‘decision’ based on whatever they decide counts as ‘evidence’ could quite conceivably make it very difficult to ensure a fair trial.
Hilariously, Suarez was suspended
But no criminal charges were brought against him.
The opposite is happening with Terry. It’s just ridiculous, and a pretty clear-cut case of hypocrisy.
How is this hypocritical?
Someone reported Terry. Nobody reported Suarez. If someone had reported Suarez, the same process would have been playing out now.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:24 PM GMT up reply actions
The hypocrisy is in the system
It’s poorly configured if one person can be found guilty of charges by the FA, and said charges do not appear in criminal court, while another situation in the same footballing season was brought to criminal court before the FA deems any action is necessary.
Consistency would be for someone in the FA panel that found Suarez guilty to report it to the police. The fact that Terry was pushed into the limelight by ‘a member of the public’ is ludicrous, particularly if we don’t have any actual knowledge of who that person is.
Who else could have witnessed it?
Ferdinand didn’t even hear it. If he doesnt feel like he has to report it to the police then nobody should
by TheColorIsBlue on Feb 3, 2012 5:36 PM GMT up reply actions
AF didn’t know what happened. When he found out he was offended but by that time it had already been reported. That doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have reported it first if he had known it first.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 5:40 PM GMT up reply actions
Well it was happening in a public stadium full of cameras
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 5:47 PM GMT up reply actions
While I see what you are saying
it’s not how it works. It would seem that maybe bystander laws may not exist or may not be quite the same in England as here. Additionally, their investigation was done by a third party that was hearing evidence and then passed a judgement. That may not be admissible as evidence against Suarez in the court of law. Terry’s situation was caught on video, so the court felt there was enough evidence to bring it forth to trial.
I actually think that having a police investigation is better than an FA one
Terry has a significantly lower chance of being convicted in a criminal trial than he does of being found guilty of misconduct by the FA.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:40 PM GMT up reply actions
I don't disagree with that
It’s just crazy to me that the system is so ass-backwards in these two cases.
It seems reasonable to me
If it gets reported to the police, the police investigate. If it doesn’t, the FA investigates. The statements the FA released in the wake of the Suarez ban made it pretty clear that there was no actual evidence involved, so there’s no reason to think that it would have made it to trial anyway.
Here, there was evidence, as weak as it appears to be from our perspective.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:46 PM GMT up reply actions
JT should retire from international football
It has been too much for him.
And England should chose a captain for the future. I personally feel Hart should be given the role. He is the undisputed GK and has leadership skills and has no scandal. But Capello is the manager so it would be Gerrard or Lampad (who I think shouldn’t accept it to show support for Terry).
Same here
I was a bit surprised he went with the squad to South Africa 2010 and accepted to take the armband later when Capello renamed him captain last year. If he’s proven innocent later, this is only ridiculous. Guilty by accusation. Sad
Tor ilisar'thera'nal!
That's the part that bums me out
Is that this FA-enforced strip of the captaincy could be perceived as an implication of guilt, by many. Lots of folks aren’t smart enough to look past the action of removing him as captain, and see that it’s almost more about the FA protecting its interests as an organization against racism, than it is about Terry being guilty of anything.
Sort of makes me wish that he’d elected to step down himself, so it couldnt get played out like this. But then, he’d be equally damned if he did, as that would be considered an admission of guilt. What a clusterfun. :-/
I agree too
He shouldn’t have to take all this crap. Even without a trial,they’ve practically said that they don’t support him. Needless to say that this will blow up in their faces if he’s finally proven innocent in the end. Lampard shouldn’t accept it either considering him and Terry are best mates and they’ve backed each other all through. JT showed he was willing to do anything for the team when he went to WC2010 despite the criticism and allegations and he’s always given his all for the country but they never seem to appreciate his efforts for the team. He should retire. AND what’s even more weird is they didn’t bother to ask Fabio Capello for his opinion,even though he’s the fucking coach. INSANE. I get a feeling Barry might get a shot at the captaincy too…or maybe Scott Parker. Capello wants his captains to be experienced…Hart may get the job in the future but not now.
by Avinash Mohan on Feb 3, 2012 3:10 PM GMT up reply actions
I don't want
Cole, Terry or Lamps playing for England. Waste of time and the rest of the country have constantly under-appreciated their efforts. They were the only players that maintained their form in the WC. Everyone else seemed to flop (especially Rooney). The Chelsea boys maintained their excellent form from the season before.
Yep. I wish that'd happened two years ago.
But I’d take it today.
So sad
Oh well, such is life. Guilty until proven innocent…
The Nigerian Perspective!
by Iced O on Feb 3, 2012 3:43 PM GMT via mobile reply actions
Although, I'm sure Terry is guilty
Why would his legal team and Chelsea ask for a delay of the trial? Chesea may even sack Terry if he is proven guilty. The club has historically punished players that bring disrepute to the name of the club…
Terry and his legal team should have just done the trial sooner.
The Nigerian Perspective!
by Iced O on Feb 3, 2012 3:47 PM GMT via mobile up reply actions
He pretty much implicated himself in his "defense"
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 5:08 PM GMT up reply actions
I think she's saying that he admitted to saying the thing he's accused of saying
If you’re accused saying “blueberry muffin” and your defense is, “No, I said, ‘I didn’t say blueberry muffin” then technically you did say it.
That sentence was confusing.
by FootieFromAfar on Feb 3, 2012 5:24 PM GMT up reply actions
The allegation is racism, though
That doesn’t implicate him of being racist, it implicates him of saying something stupid.
The burden of proof in a case like this must be nigh impossible. How can you ‘prove’ someone is a racist without reasonable doubt? Plus, Terry seems to have worked just fine alongside Drogba, Cole, Mikel, etc. for most of his footballing career without any mention of incident.
This is just so stupid.
No
The allegation is racist abuse. That’s clearly not the same as ‘John Terry is a racist’
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:41 PM GMT up reply actions
Well, that makes the burden of proof even more hilariously difficult
Especially when the supposed target of the racial abuse doesn’t have any knowledge of the alleged abuse taking place
Whether Ferdinand heard it or not is a complete non-issue
This is an admittedly an absurd scenario, but if I racially abuse a blind & deaf person but am caught on camera doing it, does that mean it wasn’t racial abuse?
I don’t think it’s reasonable to say ‘Ferdinand didn’t notice it, so it’s fine’. If someone else noticed it, and it was said, it’s not fine.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:56 PM GMT up reply actions
Really nothing about this is fine
And as good of players as they’ve been, I really can’t wait until we can wave farewell to JT and Ashley. Love them as players but….come ON guys.
I do think the level this has taken is pretty absurd when compared to say…Fabregas’ comments earlier this year where his defense was basically “i have an Arab girlfriend. I can’t be racist.” and what came out of that.
But if he said it, if he’s…brought shame on the family. Commit Seppuku, step down as Captain and retire. Cause I’ll want him gone.
If he’s proven innocent though, I want a John Terry parade thrown and I want to rub it in everyone’s face in as classless of a manner as possible. So I may not be thinking this through too rationally.
Haha
I rather like your last couple of paragraphs.
Fabregas never said anything though
Although his “defence” of the accusations was still pretty dumb. It seems these days, any time two footballers who just happen to be of different race have an argument, it must be a race thing. Sad, really.
I do hate when folks cry wolf
Takes away from those incidences that may actually involve racist remarks, and those victims of racial abuse.
I didn’t read up much on the Fabregas issue, but I have to admit while his response was dumb, I had wondered the same about his relationship before I heard it. Guess I am capable of being just as ridiculous. It sort of goes under the “but I’m friends with _” category (the one Suarez tried using). Guess that defense comes up more frequently than I had thought.
I'm not saying it was okay to say it
I’m simply saying it’s going to be very, very hard to prove that it was said with animosity, disdain, malicious intent, whatever negative connotation you so desire.
Unless he really was saying "I didn't call you a..."
It’s hard to imagine that he used that particular phrase without malice.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:04 PM GMT up reply actions
Unless Anton is lying
which I find less probable, Anton didn’t accuse JT of calling him that therefore JT had no reason to respond “I didn’t call you a…”
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:20 PM GMT up reply actions
Is there a non malicious way of shouting
b***k c**t at someone?
Well considering that Anton hadn't accused JT of racially abusing him,
JT’s defense that he was actually saying he hadn’t called AF what he said doesn’t really hold up. He also said that he spoke to AF about it after the match and everything was supposedly cool but at that point in time AF still had no idea what was allegedly said.
Unless AF is lying about not hearing the alleged insult JT is lying.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 5:36 PM GMT up reply actions
What if Ferdinand was telling the truth about not hearing the alleged insult, and Terry was telling the truth about talking to Ferdinand after the fixture and clearing the air - because there was, from Ferdinand's perspective, no ill will?
Then everyone just wasted a lot of time and energy on something that was brought to the attention of police by a ‘member of the public’, and Terry was once again stripped of his England captaincy over something that didn’t quite happen the way everyone made it out to.
Again, this is all quite unfortunate for Terry.
If that's the case than he still racially abused AF...
And because AF didn’t know it had happened at that point there was no actual reconciliation. It’s still a crime.
I don’t understand why you think that it’s a problem that “a member of the public” brought this to the attention of the authorities.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 5:45 PM GMT up reply actions
The intent behind such an allegation is the concern
If Ferdinand doesn’t think he was abused, then I know this might sound crazy, but he probably wasn’t abused. I know, I’m going out on a real limb there.
Abuse implies that there is another who is being abused. Ferdinand’s confusion over the entire situation shows he’s not exactly a victim of Terry so much as he is a ‘member of the public’. He’s now getting sent bullets in the mail by idiotic football fans because a ‘member of the public’ thrust him in the middle of all this.
I’m sure, if you asked Ferdinand, he probably feels more abused by that ‘member of the public’ then he ever did by Terry.
I doubt Ferdinand's that bright
He’s as swept up in this storm as everyone else (handshakes!)
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:53 PM GMT up reply actions
It's not that AF didn't THINK he was abused he didn't KNOW.
Those are two totally different things and not having knowledge of said abuse until after the fact has no baring on the case. Just because he didn’t know it happened doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. I’m sure he feels “abused” by recieving a bullet in the mail but it isn’t a question of which action is more abusive.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:02 PM GMT up reply actions
JT wanted to clear the air to make sure that AF didn't consider it "racial abuse"
And by all accounts, it sounds like that the air was indeed cleared. But then the QPR brain-trust appeared to not want to let it go. And then the public saw the video clip, which cuts off any and all context and construed racial abuse out of it and made the complaint.
I still do not see how you think that implies guilt of any sort.
How would you have advised JT to handle this then, presuming that he’s innocent and what he said to AF during the match was indeed “I did not call you xyz”? In your mind, what would been a step for JT to take to imply non-guilt? (Other than, you know, continue on insisting that he’s not-guilty.)
Ok
Firstly, from what I’ve read of both statements it wasn’t made clear when JT approached AF after the match what he was trying to clear up. If he really wanted to make sure AF knew he hadn’t called him what he apparently thought AF had heard (assuming he’s telling the truth) he should have been more specific and clear. If he’s willing to shout it in the middle of the pitch he should also be willing to say it privately to Anton after the game “Hey I didn’t call you….”
It doesn’t rule out the possibility that JT simply failed to express himself the right way when trying to clear things up with Anton but I think if he was innocent this is what he should’ve done and that’s what I would advise. At this point it’s difficult to say because he’s already made the initial mistake of not making sure that Anton knew that there was no abuse.
The problem with JT’s defense over all is that it implies that in a previous encounter (to the one in the video clip) Anton had accused JT of saying what he claims he didn’t say in the video clip. Anton claims to not have heard any racial abuse from JT at all so why would JT have to defend him self as he claims he is doing in the clip?
QPR isn’t like ManU in this case. They didn’t hear about this right after the match and run to the ref. The video clip was public already before QPR got involved at that point they can’t really “let it go” because then there is an investigation.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:18 PM GMT up reply actions
What do you think DPeezy?
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:55 PM GMT up reply actions
Eh.
I’m not sure what else he could’ve done besides deny it all (i.e. “I did not call him that”) and I don’t think JT or his legal team or Chelsea as a club could’ve done anything differently in this whole ordeal. To their knowledge, they had cleared the air with Anton. Anything beyond that was and is out of their control.
We do not know what happened before the clip or what prompted JT to say what he said. If there was no prompt, and he just slagged off on Anton, then he should be found guilty of racial abuse and assigned proper punishment, including professional repercussions. If what JT says is true, and the case has been built on limited evidence of a truncated video, then he’ll be found innocent.
But to say that by using a strange defense (which in his version is the TRUTH) implies that he’s guilty…well, that I just don’t see. And you still haven’t answered my question as to how you would’ve thought he could’ve handled it so that his haters didn’t come away with the “implication” that he’s guilty. (And I fully accept the answer of “there was no other way for him to handle it; his haters were going to hate regardless of what he said”.)
I think you misunderstood why I think his defense implicates guilt
I guess the whole thing hinges on the the fact that Anton did not accuse JT of anything. He didn’t report the incident (to the FA the Ref or the police) and according to him he did not know what was being accused until later. If that’s the case, which I am inclined to believe, than JT is either lying or there was some huge misunderstanding where JT had thought Anton had accused him of racial abuse and he responded in the video clip with “I didn’t call you a…”
If that was the case then (as I said in my previous comment) I would’ve advised him to make it clear to Anton after the match that he had thought he accused him of saying something that he didn’t which would’ve cleared this whole mess up. There would be no case to answer for. As for now after this case has been brought up there isn’t a defense that would clear him in the minds of people who are convinced of his guilt or are inclined to believe he’s guilty because of who he is.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 7:52 PM GMT up reply actions
But Anton didn't bring the case; somebody in the public did.
As far as JT and the club were concerned, they cleared the air with him after the match.
I feel like we’re going in circles. I’m done.
Just when you thought the FA couldn't make an even bigger mockery of themselves...
If you’re going to strip him, why do it now? The investigation has been going on since last AUTUMN! The only thing that’s changed is that we now a concrete trial date. So just because that falls after the Euros, the FA couldn’t let it slide anymore? What a joke.
Also, way to usurp Capello’s power.
When the Daily Mail contains more sense than most of the rest of the world combined, you know we’ve reached Apocalypse. Well, I guess it is 2012 though…
I’m surprised JT has not yet been publicly throw in a pool of water with rocks tied around his feet to see if he floated or drowned.
The FA listened to none other than...
RIO FERDINAND, and his twitter account! JK… but I do dislike that toolbag immensely. Let the conspiracy theorists run with that one.
The other twitter account that was brought up on the radio as calling on the FA to do this was Frimpong's
I couldn’t help but just laugh and laugh at that one. I mean, Frimpong, really? A man known for his reserved manner and thoughtful attitude? And he’s not even an English International; why would he care who captain the England side??!
Ohhh
Just caught wind of Barton’s Twitter rant, as well. I don’t follow the ignorant thug, but I’m fairly certain it is a terrible idea for him to speak about that on a social network. I mean, I dunno if he was questioned or will be asked to, but would think that means he can’t now. That is, unless the rules are different in England regarding speaking on the topic prior to and during a trial.
Aha!
I guess he can’t be a witness now (if he ever was supposed to be one). Wouldnt it be a little ironic if that could somehow cause Terry to not have to stand trial due to not being able to get a fair case, or some legal something-or-other along those lines?
Also.. everyone makes typos and stuff, but Barton needs to go back and learn the difference between certain homonyms. I sure hope he wont be teaching his child to read and write.
Oh, Barton has a kid...
he has already reproduced. Terrifying.
Maybe they were hoping it would be resolved, one way or another, before the Euros?
But now that they know for sure it will still be hanging around at that time, they don’t want him to be captain at such a big tournament if this isn’t resolved yet. That makes sense enough to me.
by FootieFromAfar on Feb 3, 2012 6:02 PM GMT up reply actions
Oh, I'm sure they were
But that’s why it’s a joke move.
If you’re going to suspend him or strip him of his captaincy because he’s facing criminal charges – fine. But do it, you know, when the charges are brought against him, not 6 months later when you find yourself with your pants pulled down.
The only thing we’ve ever asked out of the FA is consistency. Yet again, they’ve failed us.
dang I'm black
But really is this really going to court. Wow
by Bmoney556 on Feb 3, 2012 4:37 PM GMT via iPhone app reply actions
You know, if I were accused of, say, sexually harrassing a colleague
I would be suspended on pay until the hearing. Is that a presumption of guilt?
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 4:54 PM GMT up reply actions
Not by the employer
but would most likely lead to it by your colleagues… a sad fact of human nature. :( I do appreciate that their statement goes to the length of saying this does not imply guilt, and can only hope people read and remember that. Of course… hindsight may show it as a more than appropriate decision on their part depending on the outcome of the trial.
Presumption of innocence is not a moral guideline
It’s a legal one. People can think what they want to think, as long as it doesn’t have an impact on legal proceedings.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 3, 2012 5:17 PM GMT up reply actions
I suppose that is true
I probably align my morals too closely with legal procedures at times, given that they are often produced as some social compromise of what is most morally fair. But, again, legal systems are different everywhere, so I guess I can’t rest on my guidelines anyhow.
Doesn’t change that I hope people could wait for the trial before labeling him guilty… regardless of the outcome of Suarez’s FA case, I felt the same about that. Kinda wish this whole thing was dealt with sooner, though.
Moral values change from place to place too
That’s why USers have a higher emphasis on free speech whereas UKers have a higher emphasis on anti-racism. The legal system is reflective of a set of cultural moral values
by FootieFromAfar on Feb 3, 2012 5:37 PM GMT up reply actions
Right
that’s why I mentioned the part about different legal systems, if in fact, legal systems are a reflection of general morals and values in a given territory.
I never understood why they gave him the captaincy back in the first place.
And I agree with Archit that he should probably just retire from England at this point. He’s too old and too disgraced. Just let it go.
I wish he'd retire from England
and I wish the rest of the Chelsea squad would too. I’d have done it in my prime as a fun you to England and how they’ve all been treated. I just hope that everyone remembers that diving block he made in the WC for England last year.
This shows his dedication
Even after getting kicked in his head against Arsenal he still puts it all on the line. I bet no one else would do it even for their club leave alone England.
The asshole part of me
wants Cole to become captain. Just because. I mean, he’s no example, but anything that would piss of Ferdinand all the more. Why I disdain Rio so much, I am not sure, but he just irks me. Of course, it is that absurd kind of dislike, too, if I am being fair. It’s almost that I think he’s such a douche in person, as well as on the pitch, that I can’t bring myself to appreciate about anything of him. I suppose he was once a great defender.
Rio doesn't even want to be captain
Would A. Cole make a good captain?
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:37 PM GMT up reply actions
I nominate Jack Wilshere!
He’s gonna be it eventually anyway…
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:39 PM GMT up reply actions
I'd say Hart too
but Jack is made to be future captain.
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:45 PM GMT up reply actions
Hart makes the most sense to me
Everyone else is either too young / inexperienced, or too Wayne Rooney
by FootieFromAfar on Feb 3, 2012 6:45 PM GMT up reply actions
"Everyone else is either too young / inexperienced"
The captain is gonna be Gerrard or Lampard or Parker or Barry. All are above 30 and if you feel they are young we can bring back Heskey.
Forgot about Barry
don’t see them ever giving it to the other three though.
by FootieFromAfar on Feb 3, 2012 6:56 PM GMT up reply actions
They'd have to think about who is really captain material
I don’t know who that’d be…
Official troll of WAGNH
by Sabrina Dessipe on Feb 3, 2012 6:59 PM GMT up reply actions
John Terry
You can’t find a better captain. As for remaining guys I think Hart shows most leadership qualities. England shouldn’t be giving it to any old player because they need to look forward. I think ig they give it to Gerrard and later if Terry is proven innocent he could be again given the duties and I don’t want that.
I thought Gerrard held it for a time
I mean, again, I don’t follow the England NT, so I have no idea but was sure I’d read that somewhere. It wouldnt be out of his experience, given he captains a club team. But then, Lampard has also co-captained, so if he is selected for the squad, he could be up for it. The trouble is that Capello doesnt seem to like playing him consistently enough for that type of role.
I thought Gerrard held it for a time
I mean, again, I don’t follow the England NT, so I have no idea but was sure I’d read that somewhere. It wouldnt be out of his experience, given he captains a club team. But then, Lampard has also co-captained, so if he is selected for the squad, he could be up for it. The trouble is that Capello doesnt seem to like playing him consistently enough for that type of role.
Fail
I am queen of accidental double-posts today. Bah.
Guys...
joking… Cole would probably be a terrible captain, but what do I know? I support the USMNT and follow the Spanish NT. :P
I still get the impression that Rio has a thing for captain though. Maybe he doesnt want it at this moment, but he’s always seemed spiteful of Terry having it. Maybe I just read too much into it, but I didnt take kindly to his pitch that he was a family-values man, while Terry somehow wasn’t, yet he was caught red-handed himself.
I'm sick of the media trying to portray JT as an evil person.
He is portrayed so negatively to the point that everyone not wearing blue is chanting things at him and booing him constantly.
I just don't understand why Terry is being punished
While Bellamy is not
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlHqAzrIp9M
It’s more clear and it is abuse. If they are against abuse they should be against all forms of it.
You could report it
if you lived in England and felt it as discrimination… I can’t remember if nationality was included in the law, though.
You could make a case that the FA should've come down on it
Hurtful language, improper conduct, etc.
But I do not think it qualifies under racial abuse and thus is not a criminal offense.
The same statute that applies to racism
also applies to a number of other things. Like I said, nationality may not be included, but it could have been. I have no idea where to find that part of the law, and I am much too lazy to Google that right now. That’s what happens after Friday night drinks.
Now, to me, it still seems over the top, but if it is in the law there, I suppose technically it could at least have a complaint filed for it.
It's a shame that it has come to this...
But I think it’s probably a wise decision by the FA; it would be a PR nightmare if he were to lead England to their first ever European title and then be convicted of racial abuse shortly thereafter.
I do find it difficult to believe that JT is ‘a racist’ as that’s a whole viewpoint that would be difficult to conceal for an extended period of time. What I find much easier to believe that in the heat of the moment he said something VERY VERY stupid.
Overall, I don’t see how there can be enough evidence to convict him, even if he did actually say it; although I guess we shall see what happens in the summer.
I disagree...
….that JT picks up his game every time there’s a public commotion about him. He really wasn’t good at all during the Wayne Bridge sort-of-non-affair-affair-with-someone-who-had-used-to-be-his-girlfriend. Well enough I guess not to cost them the title, but….
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on We Ain't Got No History
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
