Terry & Ferdinand incident rumbles on

"'profanity"

Come on, world, Stop being so sensitive.

He was wrong to say it, based on the fact you're not allowed to criticise the FA, but it's not like he went on a foul mouthed tirade.

When are you gonna put this to bed, how long has this been going on for.

This doesn't help the racist cause at all.

Cole had a moment of typing some feelings and then said sorry, end of story the rest is just ill motivated media rubbish.

@2 shadow warrior

"This doesn't help the racist cause at all."

Why would anyone want to help a racist cause?

In fact, the biggest issue I have with him using that language is that it sets a bad example for any young fans who follow him.

But honestly, if anyone at the FA found that language offensive, they've clearly never been to a football match. The language from supporters in the family stands is often far worse than that - and it amazes me how we pull up the players for abuse or lack of respect for officials but make no attempt to stop the crowds calling the players and referees every abusive word under the sun.

You get worse language and behaviour from fans aimed at players whose only crime is to play for the opposition and happen to be taking a throw in.

@1 "1.
At 17:45 5th окт. 2012, FortressFratton wrote:


"'profanity"

Come on, world, Stop being so sensitive.

He was wrong to say it, based on the fact you're not allowed to criticise the FA, but it's not like he went on a foul mouthed tirade."

How is the definition of the language used even debatable? Regardless of your station in life, upbringing etc. it's foul and immature.

Will Cole face perjury charges now?

Terry/Ferdinand & Cole = Last of the Summer Whine

Anyone noticed the title has changed...It was 'Terry & Ferdinand incident continues to cause problems' and is now 'Terry & Ferdinand incident rumbles on'?

Anyway, It's harly likely to stop 'rumbling on' if you keep blogging about it is it?

*hardly

#5. Probably not but he could face a bringing the game into disrepute charge for abusing the FA.
They may also want to have a look at CFC's behaviour in all this, esp the behaviour of the club secretary (Mr Barnard).
At least Ash Cole was honest enough to apologise for his "in the heat of the moment" outburst within two hours of tweeting it. Had JT done the same after abusing Anton Ferdinand this would all have been put to bed long before the Police, the CPS and everyone else got involved.
Sadly, that is something that JT might spend the rest of his life considering. Somehow I doubt it, as he denies everything until confronted with the images, i.e. the Barcelona red-card!

I don't see how he can continue with England. You simply cannot get away with having a go at essentially your bosses boss. He knew exactly what he was writing, all this 'heat of the moment' nonsense is ridiculous. If the FA are going to reassert themselves again after frankly an embarrassing period they should just end Cole's England career. No more pandering to the 'world class' players egos. How big of a loss are the departures of Ferdinand, Terry and Cole anyway. None of them are exactly the future and all come with baggage. At least this drama can have some good and clear out some of the bad blood in the squad.

Gee, I thought Cole was being incredibly polite.
Over the past year the FA has stumbled from one disaster to the next over this matter.
If it had been dealt with in a timely manner, with just a little common sense, this would all be ancient history by now.
Instead we have an England team riddled with uncertainty, and 3 of the finest footballers that England has produced in recent years with continuing storm clouds over their heads.
I guess common sense is not popular with the fancy folk who run the FA

@9 I too have my doubts about JT being someone who feels remorse over this.

Professional football players on the pitch should do nothing but play.
No need to talk to the opponent - least to use obscenities ...

online where you can type, think, edit, delete, retype and then press enter is not heat of the moment.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#15. So you are saying that if a black, or asian man called you "White trash" or some such expression, you would not feel that you were racially abused. Get real. In this case the term "black" was not used as a description, it was used to belittle and hurt, to score a cheap point!

Ashley Cole is a donut. This is completely predictable. This is what you would expect from adolescence though, not a 30 year old media trained pro athlete!

So anyway this is what I think will happen. FA get the hump but Hodgson will get his own way, unlike Capello. So Ashley Cole will stay in the squad. I think. But who cares anyway? This should not be made into a big deal but it does set a precedent in whatever the FA do. I'm completely turning off football last few years.

jb194. are you unwell?

Anyway... stepping back and looking at this regardless of club affiliation, race, country of origin etc, one thing is certain - Ashley Cole is quite simply a horrible individual as is his partner in insults, John Terry.

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

Respect Yourself...

etc, etc....

anyone at The FA got these on their iPod..?

Cole was silly and was right to (be told to) apologise.

I guess he may be charged by the FA for breaking Rule #38(b)(i)(x)para3 or whatever.

I'm not a Chelsea fan but this tweet is hardly a massive issue, although the FA should maybe look at his & Chelsea's apparent attempt to alter their evidence to help JT's case.

And of course, none of us have ever sworn while playing or watching football.

Let him carry on playing for England if he's good enough. We need all the help we can get.

So the FA report suggests JT doesn't always tell it how it is, AC added things to his statement, and AC been difficult in court decides he wants to mouth off about the FA...

It just shows what horrible people JT and AC are...

16, Of course it is a description it's an adjective, a describing word that's all. It's a description that AF uses to describe himself ,for heaven's sake, as in attending the Black Pro Footballers Dinner. If that group are happy to use the term to describe themselves then so be it. Racism is about superiority (all ....... are lazy, stupid,ignorant) and discrimination (job applications for....only). It's common sense and it's the English language

Phil- Surely someone has to put an end to this issue? Maybe I'm getting too old, but IMO grown men should have better (quieter) way of settling these issues, than slagging one another off in public; where for most of the time they are making themselves look and sound absolutely stupid!

Cole should have never retracted the tweet. The FA called him a liar.

The FA are a PR disaster and need to go - we need a clean sweep and try again.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Terry's failure to be contrite and accept his error, has done a number of things.

It has made him seem even worse a person than he seems to be. He said the wrong thing, was caught on film doing this and should have had the grace to accept this.

The issue of the general behaviour of professional players has been swept aside. Whilst I in no way condone Terrys remarks, they were made on the back of personal provocation by Ferdinand. This cheap, insidious form of sledging is not how adult, responsible players should act, and some form of action should have been brought against Ferdinand, even if it only carried a censure or minor punishment. The message it sends is that you can insult away all you like, but mention the word "black" and then the race card comes into play. Would Terry have been up on a charge if he had simply called Ferdinand a "swear word" "profanity"?

Ashley Cole has had many unfavourable accusations aired about his character. This report seems to reinforce them, and if further proof were needed he then tweets like an angry 13 year old told off by his teachers.

Chelsea initially looked to be acting with restraint and in a manner that was the polar opposite to the attitude of Liverpool last year. This has now all been undermined by the behaviour of one of their own officials. The response by Mr. Abramovich will be interesting.

So, of the three main protagonists, Terry has been rightly punished and castigated. Ferdinand, despite being the instigator of the incident, receives no censure. One has to wonder at a man who can tolerate being called a "swear word" "profanity", but not black. Ashley Cole may well have burnt a bridge with the FA he will come to regret, and confirmed the perception of a rather surly spoilt brat people like to paint him as.

The real loser, English Football which looks as though it is inhabited by a lot of not very nice role models.

Final thought, the FA mention the noise levels at Loftus Road, and how that restricted what each party would have heard from a few feet. How then can the CPS bring a case which was on the instigation of someone not even on the pitch? Nice use of our tax money there I think!

@ 22 perfect example of someone who uses the anonymity afforded to him by the internet to spout rubbish and rationalize it. There is no place for racism in modern society in any shape or form. Ironic that you'd use semantics to infer that the general public doesn't deal well with the language, hence its misapprehension of JT's words.

Not even Monthy Pyton or Benny Hill in their glory days could have written a skit so devoid of any artistic merits, more contrived and in such poor taste as this whole sorry affair. This article quotes the inquiry panel as having reviewed Terry's facial expressions and then proceeding to elucidate a probable set of underlying psychological basis (otherwise known as poppycock) for his conduct but...what about Anton's facial expressions as seen on some photos displayed with this article, I can clearly see his smug demeanor and inner glee at having scored a treble at Terry's expense.
People have lost their perspective on this case to the detriment of the English game both at the national and international level.

If it causes problems, it's the FA's own fault.

This should have been dealt with before the court hearing, on the basis that the committee used to justify trying Terry-it's a different charge and with a different weight of evidence needed. Had they done that about 10 months ago...........!

#28 From past experience, you'd be best advised to ignore anything jb194 says.

He is simply too intellectually challenged to be able to grasp anything, let alone while almost every utterance he makes is complete nonsense :-(

Several of us spent an hour trying to explain the difference between 'beyond reasonable doubt' and 'balance of probability' to him, by the end of which I'm sure even my dog had got the gist but sadly not him...

#27, that should be.

#26 'the noise levels at Loftus Road ...restricted what each party would have heard from a few feet. How then can the CPS bring a case which was on the instigation of someone not even on the pitch'

Because Terry is so stupid he admitted saying it.

The FA Commission were extremely thorough, clear and precise in their arguments and treatment of the case. It really was very damning, and made a convincing argument for finding Terry guilty, even while a criminal court fell short of being able to make the charge stick 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The key difference in the judgements was that the court couldn't get past the 'possibility' that Terry's defence was accurate, while the Commission rightly decided the defence was implausible. That Terry clearly appears to have lied to his back teeth to avoid the consequences of his hot temper is an awful shame. That he seems to have dragged Cole into it is even more contemptious. That he allowed Ferdinand to suffer the abuse that he has over this is the worst aspect though, revealing Terry to be a devious and dishonest character.

This whole saga has carried on for too long, but at least Chelsea have handled it with dignity and respect. Unlike the paranoia-fuelled outrage shown by you know who in the Suarez-Evra spat last year. Those were dark days indeed.

#32 But not as an admission of guilt. The CPS have to have a better than even chance of a successful prosecution, and one wonders how that could be calculated looking at the nature of those providing evidence and in what circumstances!

This is a very simple case of the FA pretty much calling a player a liar, and that player getting mad. The FA does have a lot to answer for, including completely ignoring their own rule requiring them to respect and accept the judgement of a court of law. There should have been no inquiry purely by their own laws.

Why should Terry show remorse if, as he claims, he did not make the comment as an insult? Seriously. He should say "I'm sorry I repeated what I thought I heard you say"?

The FAs findings, once again, based on conjecture and balance of probabilities, and not arrived at in an open and public forum, have created an unacceptable situation where people feel they can call someone a racist, even though nothing presented in the much more stringent court of law was sufficient to bring a conviction. People feel they can now cast their own verdicts on a situation that can NEVER be proven. And the press continue to spread the story, making things worse and worse. This is just a sad indictment of the game, and its governing body in England. They truly deserve no apology, and are lucky to have received one.

I never did like Cashley Tweedy... Arrogant, spoilt, vain. He represents everything that a premiership footballer shouldn't be!

27 I'm using the same medium as you sir. The fact I apply common sense to the English language and have not been caught up in the current 'racist' frenzy to convict anyone who uses the adjective black may be rubbish to you, but I look beyond the Hans Christian Andersen 'King 's invisible clothes' doctrine of politics and media indoctrination to see things as they are and not get caught up in witch-hunts. It was interesting to see how many people participating in the diving debate displayed racist tendencies (superiority of one race to another). a foreigner by definition is someone of a different race or nationality, yet you were happy to go along with the pro-Brit 'foreigners brought diving/cheating to the country' theme applying that Brits were above that sort of thing - but too subtle no doubt for the FA

Why on earth was this Report made public? Cole was unwise to tweet but the FA must have known that releasing the Report would provoke a reaction from the media if no one else and therefore prolong the saga. I am beginning to think the Cole was right!

Also, can we stop the constant supposed statements of fact that a player is a terrible individual, etc.? How many of you are actually fully acquainted with Premier League players? And by acquainted, I mean, have spent time with them in a non-football environment, observed them, talked with them, and not just using what you see in the press as the final word. I have heard that John Terry is actually a pretty nice person to hang around with. Not conclusive, certainly, but it means that there is another side that has to be considered. The constant quips about the alleged affair that, according to Miss Perroncel, never happened, do not help. Let's stop using the press as our means for judging people, as the press has contributed to ruining far too many peoples' lives in the search for stories...

39

After releasing the report on the Suarez case last season they FA had no choice.

What I don't understand is how Rio Ferdinand has avoided any punishment for his tasteless 'choc ice' comments. I'm sure he'd have been happy to see no action taken if that had been...I don't know...say... Terry say it about him.

#35. roddersrugbyref

No, not an admission of guilt, but it wasn't necessary to prove that he said it, so the 'noise levels stopping people hearing' was irrelevant, thus my comment.

The issue was whether Terry's defence was SO unlikely it fell 'beyond reasonable doubt' - probably pretty border-line, so right to let a jury decide.

I do worry about the apologist times we live in. The assumption oftens seems to be that a "sincere" apology greatly mitigates or even pardons the problem behaviour.

It's a good job it wasn't around during Hitler's time or he might have emerged from the bunker waving a white flag with "really VERY sorry chaps" scrawled on it. What on Earth would we have done then !?

This is just getting totally ridiculous. It is all done and dusted now, the press need to stop reporting on this every day. Lets start concentrating on the football! All this negative press will not effect Chelsea or John Terry on the pitch no matter how hard they try. Time to drop it and move on!

@38

The reverse is true, you see an abjective is isolation, not as they really are.


What shocks me is the FA and RH, knowing the case against JT and the view of AC, is outrageous they let them go to the Euro's...

#44 For God's sake don't stop them doing blogs on Terry, or they'll do another five on Pietersen :-(((((

Oh and they seem to have abandoned that stupid rule where you could only post 5 words and then had to wait 10 minutes to finish the sentence :-))))))

If you were accused of lying you would be upset with whoever made that claim. Why when found guilty has Terry not got 8 game ban? Also why has Rio not got 8 game ban for his racist comments?

The FA have made a total mess of this. They will charge Cole and the whole merry go round will start again. And if Cole is good enough for England why shouldn't he be picked? Or is he on trial as well. The FA, you are a joke.

^^ I don't think the rule is abandoned. This is a blog. Commenting on an article the rule still exists I think.
BRING BACK 606

@47

The FA explained that single fact fairly clearly. Suarez supposedly repeated the unacceptable words multiple times, which compounded the sentence, while Terry only said what he said once. Doesn't matter how they said it of course, just that the FA is on a mission to stamp out anything they, as God's arbiter on Earth against racism, determine as remotely racist. Doesn't matter that they blatantly ignored their own rules twice. First, Anton Ferdinand, based on his sworn admissions in court, was guilty of using foul and abusive language and should have been punished, and second, the inquiry should not have taken place, as their own rules require them to accept and honour the court's verdict.

'biggest, best, most hotly debated sport in the world'

Ugliest, most ignorant, I'll educated - all better epithets for the beautiful game

The FA report on the Terry charge does not have as many inconsistencies as their report on the Suarez case but it still includes some huge leaps of faith as well as some completely unsustainable comments on what is likely and what is not!

The most glaring inconsistency however is in the differences between the reports on the test that backs up the whole premise of the respective charges.

In the Suarez report at paragraph 389 the commission states that " It is not necessary for the FA to prove that Mr Suarez intended his words to be abusive".

In the Terry report at paragraph 3.6 the commission states that "The FA accepted that It had to satisfy the commission that The words were spoken by Mr Terry by way of an insult to Mr Ferdinand".

Basically one independent panel said that you have to mean the words to be insulting in order to be guilty while the other one said that you don't! I think it's called making it up as you go along!

When you see completly different tests applied To two similar cases it is not difficult to see why the FA have a 99.5 % success rate where charges are brought.

@ 52 "In the Suarez report at paragraph 389 the commission states that " It is not necessary for the FA to prove that Mr Suarez intended his words to be abusive".

In the Terry report at paragraph 3.6 the commission states that "The FA accepted that It had to satisfy the commission that The words were spoken by Mr Terry by way of an insult to Mr Ferdinand"."

Is it really so hard to understand the difference?
I am sure you know that John Terry's main line of defence is that he was repeating words uttered by Ferdinand, hence the commission's emphasis on the words 'by way of an insult'. Try harder in the future.

jb194-
I suspect this is a lost cause but i'll give it a go. Using the word Black as and adjective in conjunction with an insulting Noun provides context insinuating the skin colour is derogatory.

Using the Black terminology in association with a dinner explains the purpose of said dinner, and no, it's not exclusively for black people, it's for anybody associated with the challenges black footballers face.

If you still disagree of fail to understand why its a racist remark ask yourself this.

Why, if you are calling someone an Insult mention their skin colour/race at all?

Quite frankly Im glad he wasn't convicted on grounds probability in a criminal court but Im glad the FA did act, Only Chelsea fans would believe such a rubbish collection of (altered) excuses. I believe they should of acted sooner and could of done better.

But as somebody who has a young family getting into football I don't them thinking it's ok to do such an ignorant thing wether racist or not

#53. Russeljones

'Is it really so hard to understand the difference?'

No - I think that's what the previous poster is saying - there IS a difference! Either they need to prove racist comments are intended as an insult, or they don't... you can't just decide as you go along!

This all shows that England is divided along deep racial lines! From the serious incidents of Mark Duggan's killing to the flimsy Alan Hansen's gaffe!! Shame

#54... Cotona.... trust me, you are wasting your time. I and others tried too a few days back.

I'd like to give jb194 the benefit of the doubt and think he just likes playing the fool, but nobody is consistently that good at it :-(

John Terry doesn't do apologies. He is so self centered he firmly believes he can do no wrong. It was like "you cant send me off, don't you know who I am" look on his face when he was sent off in the semi final with Barcelona. As long as he has that attitude, he will always be a decisive figure. As for Cole, never liked him since his 55 grand a week insult. What makes him think he can swear as he likes and as long as he says sorry, everything is ok and he can carry on in his own arrogant way. Would love it if Hodgson dropped him although that is unlikely as it seems he nailed his colours firmly to the Terry mast

53

I do understand the difference but the test is the same regardless of the defence. In fact the Terry defence, whether you find it plausible or not, highlights the weakness in the Suarez commission's decision on this test. It would appear ludicrous that a player who was not Intending to insult another player can nonetheless be found guilty of doing so. Both players argued that they did not make the reference to race by way of an insult. The Suarez commission said that this would not make any difference while the Terry commission said that it would.

To be honest I am getting sick and tired of overpaid under performing so called professional sportsmen getting away with things that your average Jo Bloggs would be hung drawn and quartered..sorry to go on about it but I have watched a summer of sporting brilliance, played in a sportsman like way (Phil Mickleson applauding Justin Roses putt in the ryder cup to name one example), and then we return to the football season and every one is diving, swearing cheating and trying every which way to win a game (Robbie Savage's comments on getting "touched" in penalty box and going down just sums up the state of football)...it saddens me when I see youngsters wearing a football shirt and thin is that all you aspire to be...a over paid, unprofessional and the most important a very shallow human being...and yes I am going to change my tag from footie fan...well I am not sure what but my football watching days are well and truly over

@55 the context is that in the latter case the defendant is insinuating that he is not the original source of the racial slurs. All the report is saying is that they don't believe him i.e. "It was you who said it, you weren't repeating what you thought Mr. Ferdinand uttered." or something of that sort.

jerry007 @56
This all shows that England is divided along deep racial lines! From the serious incidents of Mark Duggan's killing to the flimsy Alan Hansen's gaffe!! Shame

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I suggest you start by learning to understand what racism actually is. England is far from divided.

Was Hansen being racist? Never he simply used an outdated word which is now seen as unacceptable to most and the reason for that is political correctness.

Racism once had a clear definition and sadly it, like many over descriptive terms seem to have had a complete makeover.

Hansen certainly showed no sign whatsoever of being a racist.

61

Nowhere in paragraph 3.6 does it say that the commission does not believe Terry. It says that the FA accepts that they must satisfy the commission that the words were went by way of an insult.

Surely Rio's racism deserves the same punishment. He was basically saying because of the colour of Cole's skin he should act in a certain way.

Ashley Cole and John Terry are pondlife.

However, the FA and Media with their politics and xenophobia are far bigger evils.

@63 in the conext of Terry's insistence that he did not originate the words.

The difference in the Suarez and Terry (and the way they have been reported) is that one is a foreigner and the other is a former England captain.

Xenophobia not Racism is the biggest problem in English football and society.

#64

Rio Ferdinand DIDN'T say a thing. All he did was agree with someone else's view of Cole which wasn't even necessarily racist;another idiotic FA charge in itself.

#67

No the difference is Suarez admitted telling Evra I won't respond to you because you are black and then used the word another 7 times.

Terry used it once in response to a barrage of personal insults,no justification for so doing,but let's stick to facts as far as we can.

66

Ok, you may be winding me up but for the mo I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

If what they meant was that the FA had to satisfy the commission that Terry was not merely repeating Ferdinands word why did they not just said that? Yes they were discussing this issue but they specifically said that they had to prove that he said the words by way of an insult. For what it's worth I think they were right but it is completely at variance with the Suarez judgement on the same test.

Is it just me who doesn't understand why for years we had to avoid calling... anybody... 'black' but had to say 'coloured' if they were 'non-white', but now we must call them 'black' and avoid calling them 'coloured'! Why did it change, and why does it matter so long as no insult is intended? Nobody is ACTUALLY black, or white come to that!

And if describing somebody born here of say Indian extraction, what is the PC thing to call them? They aren't 'black', more a sort of 'brown' generally but you can't say 'coloured'; they aren't 'Asian' - they're British; so what the hell can you say to identify somebody without risking causing offence!?

69

Of course Suarez's alleged seven racial insults of Evra were not in response to any personal insults!

Getting worried here ,judging by the FA any evedience given under oath in a court of law isn,t worth nothing,glad they ain,t sitting in the bailey we have more criminals out than in.

@68 Agreeing with a racist comment IS racist. Calling someone a 'Choc Ice' IS racist. It is saying they have no right to 'act' as a white person because they are black. Claiming there is a difference between how white and black people act/think/behave/etc IS racist.

@70 I am not trying to wind anyone up mate, I just thought it was obvious from this saga (that has dragged on for months needlessly imho) what Terry's get-out-of-jail card was.

Hey footiefan (20:24) I'll unreservedly endorse that.

ANY OTHERS OF YOU OUT THERE ??

While Cole's use of words was wrong............his sentiments I agree with. The "independent" decision is not surprising given the FA had decided on Terry's guilt shortly after the game last year.The panels decision today is IMO contrived................look at the facts of the case................only one person knows in what context the words were said, Terry, no one else heard the words and, as a result, the Crown's case was dismissed convincingly by the Court of Law.....................The Panels decision is one of convienence for the FA and the conclusion it comes to is so at odds with what the Chief Magistrate said as to be laughable..........................

I know what body i believe is "Independent" and it is NOT the "indenendent panel".................who convienently called the two witnesses "liars"..............

#73 'evedience given under oath in a court of law isn,t worth nothing'

I am sure they would agree with you. It isn't worth nothing, it is worth something, but it is the level of proof required that differs. Ask jb194, he will explain it to you....

69.At 20:51 5th Oct 2012, kickouthejams wrote:
#67

No the difference is Suarez admitted telling Evra I won't respond to you because you are black and then used the word another 7 times.

Terry used it once in response to a barrage of personal insults,no justification for so doing,but let's stick to facts as far as we can.

------------------
Almost right.

Suarez said go awy negrito because Evra was using vile insults about Suarez sister. As mentioned numerous times el negro, negro and negrito are common terms in the language used and are not insults. Argentina in 78 and 86 had world cup winning players referred as el negrito.

Make no mistake. Suarez was banned due to FA politics and ingrained Xenophobia across all levels of English society.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

78 not agreeing with what JT did or Cole but think that its strange they can say that the evedience was wrong.

This has all gone mental. People whose England careers were at an end behaving like they were 20. Football needs common sense and it is going way out of sight here. JT as a CFC fan just accept then ban and move on. Everyone else STFU its not helping. The insanity was not to say that ALL insults are not on. Beckham had chants about his kids and cancer but it would seem one 'racist' word tops that. The FA could have charged both players with behaviour that was unacceptable. Ban AF for 2 and JT for 4 and some justice may seem to have been done. We are flying back to the 70/80.s and CFC v QPR could be a bad news fixture indeed. TIME TO STOP.

75

I don't disagree with you there at all.

Fwiw, in the Suarez case the commission found that Suarez did mean to insult Evra. However They added that even if they had found that he didn't mean to insult him, they would still have found him guilty. It's this latter bit that I am questioning. It appears ridiculous.

The Terry commission have, in essence, disagreed with that decision and I think they are right.

Well this just gets worse by the second!

Ashley Cole, much as I loathe him, has just been honest. And lets be fair, i'm sure most of us have thought it in regards to the FA at times.

I would always defend myself if called a liar, just as AC has done. I would probably not have done it as a tweet for the whole world to see, but I would still defend myself. Ashley Cole may have been stupid in his reactionary tweet, but he basically only said what the rest of us have thought.

81 - They can say they find it untrue, despite the court decision, because they are finding 'on the balance of probability' - ie. all they are saying is it's more likely not to be true; in a court it must be 'beyond reasonable doubt', ie. almost certainly not true.

But you have a good point; they have gone further and accused Cole effectively of lying, and devoted some time to that accusation. IF Cole was telling the truth - and none of us know - no wonder he was hopping mad. They should have said no more than, on balance, they didn't believe him, and left it at that.

When Tiger Woods was insulted by Steve Williams in a highly derogatory way(with his skin colour used as part of the insult) , the PGA & European Tours showed how you handle a situation like this...............like adults................

The FA's pursuit of some idyllic moral high ground of political correctness, not letting the truth get in their way, is sickening..............................

The outcome of both the Suarez & Terry cases are highly prejudiced IMO............

I abhore racism it all it's forms...................what the FA have done is not going to help any fight against racism............

Now this is EXACTLY what I mean about PC gone mad.

The BBC have removed my post asking when and why things changed on calling people 'what Hansen said' as against 'black', as the opposite used to be the case. And also, how do you describe people of say Indian extraction born in Britain - who are not 'black', or 'Asian'?

It seems that even asking this question is deemed 'racist'! If it is racist to ask what the correct, non-offensive term is, how the xxxx do we avoid offending anybody!

Madness.

@ 82

I disagree that Ferdinand should have been punished in this case. If he had it would have made a mockery of the fact that Evra wasn't punished after admitting to making several comments regarding Suarez's family and nationality. Evra also admitted that he was the first one to make any comment.

If Evra isn't punished for what is apparantly 'what happens on a football pitch' then why should Ferdinand be?

I also disagree with the FA regarding the level of punishment. If you make a racist comment then you should be banned for the same number of games as anyone else who has been banned for the same offence.

I hate Cole for leaving Arsenal in such a dishonourable way, but the guy is allowed a point of view, surely?

#89 yep, but describing the FA as a bunch of xxxxx probably wasn't a very sensible way of expressing it ;-)

The state of footballer's morality, on and off the pitch, greatly depresses me.

The general quality within these exchanges only reinforces what a lost cause it all seems to be - even if we had an FA (generalisation) that convinced us it was capable of running an average whelk stall.

FIFA, UEFA, FA, CPS - they are all a bunch of .............. well paid "individuals"

81 agree they should have just left it but had to make a point,now its getting blown out of proportion which ain,t going to help ,especially the England squad.

#91 'run an average whelk stall' ?

How would you classify such a thing? What would make a whelk stall above average - or below average come to that? Come to that, where would they have to go to run this whelk stall, none in these parts...

Racism is evil, but somehow I do not think Suarez is a racist and I am sure Terry is not one either. As individuals I find them both quite loathsome, but I hardly think what they may or may not have said is worth a column inch.

#93 blue swede.... could you do me a really, really big favour?

And use the ' key instead of the , key and put ' ain't ' instead of ' ain,t '. It would just be so more grammatically correct and less upsetting to those of us sensitive to such things....

If you cannot describe the FA as a bunch of xxxxs, then I would argue you are not allowed to tell the truth, let alone have an opinion. I support Cashley on this one.

I don't think Cole should have apologised "unreservedly". The FA accused him, in a public document, of lying. He quite rightly took exception to this and expressed his anger.

Did I miss the announcement that the right to free speech in this country had been revoked ??

#97 Well then I support Cashley too! Whoever they are and whatever they said ;-)

@ 98

There is a difference between having the right to free speech and making offensive comments.

Would you say Abu Hamza has a right to free speech because he is just sharing an opinion? I certainly wouldn't.