Tiresias Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 yep lower burden of proof. Anyway this whole saga hardly paints anyone in a good light, footballers seem like school children insulting each other on pitch etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagten Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 If a criminal court couldn't find him to be guilty, I doubt the FA will be able to do anything. They can, the Suarez thing didn't end up in court as that would had been difficult to prove in-court as well. I thought it was because no complaint was made to the police? I'm not sure, in all honesty. I just presumed this would be the end of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
durhamunigeordie Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 The FA handed out a ban to Suarez 'on the balance of probabilities'. The standard used in a criminal court is higher - 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Something can be proven on the balance of probabilities, but not beyond reasonable doubt. If they FA hide behind the criminal acquittal then it is double standards for sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Paul Elliot is a fucking moron. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 The FA handed out a ban to Suarez 'on the balance of probabilities'. The standard used in a criminal court is higher - 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Something can be proven on the balance of probabilities, but not beyond reasonable doubt. If they FA hide behind the criminal acquittal then it is double standards for sure. and no doubt bring around a lot of moaning from liverpool fans Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 The FA handed out a ban to Suarez 'on the balance of probabilities'. The standard used in a criminal court is higher - 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Something can be proven on the balance of probabilities, but not beyond reasonable doubt. If they FA hide behind the criminal acquittal then it is double standards for sure. Agreed, the FA had it's report done into this since November but couldn't do/say anything with a criminal case going on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Geordie Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Paul Elliot is a fucking moron. Ex Chelsea player. What did he say? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 BBC Sport @BBCSport FA statement: "The FA notes the decision in the John Terry case and will now seek to conclude its own enquiries." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 What an odious way Sky are going on about this Gary Cotteril just now: "JT NG" Fuck off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest antz1uk Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 john 'elliot ness' terry i actually despise the man, however i'm not sure he's racist or what he said was his views on race or whatever, imo he's just ignorant and a neanderthol and doesn't give a shit about anything other than himself and shows what is wrong with the modern day footballer. unfortunately these players will do or say anything to wind up a member of an opposing team, the problem is what is classed as racist or just wind up, it's done to get a bite from the opposing player to put him off his game, i'm not saying it's right btw, however they are showing complete double standards as this is the sort of thing we have spent years trying to stamp out of the game from the terraces/stands, for that part he should have been found accountable Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 QC tday asked John Terry how many times he'd been sent off. "Can you say, please? Four times?" JT answered: "Please, please, please, please" Hang on, did this actually happen? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Paul Elliot is a fucking moron. He's a self-important little tosser. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 So John Terrys case was basically "i said to i him "i didn't call you a fucking black cunt"? Is that correct? One guys word against another, i'm amazed it got to court in the first place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aphrodite Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 So John Terrys case was basically "i said to i him "i didn't call you a f***ing black c***"? Is that correct? One guys word against another, i'm amazed it got to court in the first place. That's essentially it. Garth Crooks has come out and said that even if he did say that then he should still be charged by the FA just because nobody should be able to say those words. Even though he Crooks says them himself in the article! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 £2m this trial cost ffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 So John Terrys case was basically "i said to i him "i didn't call you a f***ing black c***"? Is that correct? One guys word against another, i'm amazed it got to court in the first place. That's essentially it. Garth Crooks has come out and said that even if he did say that then he should still be charged by the FA just because nobody should be able to say those words. Even though he Crooks says them himself in the article! And Anton Ferdinand? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Paul Elliot is a fucking moron. He's a self-important little tosser. Quite surprised he never mentioned Dean Saunders. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 John Terry has written a letter of apology to Anton Ferdinand...Good golly Anton, sorry about all this monkey business, it's only a little black humour really and it's all gone bananas. What do you say we call a spade a spade and forget this whole dark episode between us? Feel free to swing by for a drink sometime. JohnT. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 oh dear http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/14/ashley-cole-choc-ice-rio-ferdinand Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 What a non-story. Best bit is this: The fallout from John Terry's court case took a dramatic twist on Saturday when Rio Ferdinand reacted laughingly to the description of Ashley Cole as a "choc ice" on Twitter and the Chelsea left-back's lawyers felt obliged to become involved. Oh wait. "Ashley Cole has been made aware of the discussion following comments appearing on Twitter and wishes to make it clear that he and Rio Ferdinand are good friends and Ashley has no intention of making any sort of complaint. Ashley appreciates that tweeting is so quick it often results in off-hand and stray comments." Dramatic stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I suspect Terry was guilty but you shouldn't be tried twice for the same offence unless something new comes to light. A further trial by the FA feels too much like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I suspect Terry was guilty but you shouldn't be tried twice for the same offence unless something new comes to light. A further trial by the FA feels too much like that. Eh, no it doesn't. A criminal and football investigation are completely different and the fact it happened in a football match means the FA needs to investigate it or it'd bring the whole game disripute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 200 match ban. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I suspect Terry was guilty but you shouldn't be tried twice for the same offence unless something new comes to light. A further trial by the FA feels too much like that. Eh, no it doesn't. A criminal and football investigation are completely different and the fact it happened in a football match means the FA needs to investigate it or it'd bring the whole game disripute. They are different but not 'completely' different. The whole thing has already been investigated in grim detail, and it boils down to whether someone can really say in this case - okay it's not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, but it's okay to punish him on the balance of probabilities. I don't think so. There have been various episodes over the last few years where Terry's character has come into question, and this is yet another. But he does have certain rights, and unless you can stand up for the rights of someone like him, it starts to become difficult to stand up for anyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aphrodite Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 The footage is so inconclusive I don't think even a lower burden of proof would result in Terry being found guilty. A good example of why the courts should stay out of football unless you literally kill someone on the pitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now