Ishmael Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Charged by the FA for racial abuse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely I dunno like, there's a difference between just saying the word and repeating it as many times as Suarez reportedly did. I don't understand how the FA can charge him with this if a court of law couldn't prosecute him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely I dunno like, there's a difference between just saying the word and repeating it as many times as Suarez reportedly did. I don't understand how the FA can charge him with this if a court of law couldn't prosecute him. In court you need 100% proof that he did it, with FA you don't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely I dunno like, there's a difference between just saying the word and repeating it as many times as Suarez reportedly did. I don't understand how the FA can charge him with this if a court of law couldn't prosecute him. much lower burden of proof required by an FA tribunal than a court of law Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 http://www.chelseafc.com/page/LatestNews/0,,10268~2863078,00.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinho lad Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Will miss our clash at Stamford Bridge, perhaps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 that was a quick response Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 The FA shouldn't be an arbiter of moral justice. It's just like the NCAA in the states, way too much power. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely I dunno like, there's a difference between just saying the word and repeating it as many times as Suarez reportedly did. I don't understand how the FA can charge him with this if a court of law couldn't prosecute him. In court you need 100% proof that he did it, with FA you don't. The cheek of you to use that smilie toward anyone. My point was the court's decision should've been the end of it. Not enough evidence to lead to a prosecution, not enough evidence to lead to a ban. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely I dunno like, there's a difference between just saying the word and repeating it as many times as Suarez reportedly did. I don't understand how the FA can charge him with this if a court of law couldn't prosecute him. In court you need 100% proof that he did it, with FA you don't. The cheek of you to use that smilie toward anyone. My point was the court's decision should've been the end of it. Not enough evidence to lead to a prosecution, not enough evidence to lead to a ban. Why wasn't the Suarez case taken to court then... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuneaton Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 because an off duty pig didnt report it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely I dunno like, there's a difference between just saying the word and repeating it as many times as Suarez reportedly did. I don't understand how the FA can charge him with this if a court of law couldn't prosecute him. In court you need 100% proof that he did it, with FA you don't. The cheek of you to use that smilie toward anyone. My point was the court's decision should've been the end of it. Not enough evidence to lead to a prosecution, not enough evidence to lead to a ban. Why wasn't the Suarez case taken to court then... Perhaps because not one member of the public reported the incident to the police? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Because there wasn't enough evidence for a criminal prosecution but enough for the FA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishmael Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 FA only bring charges they expect to win - of 473 cases heard by an Independent Commission in 2011 only 2 resulted in not guilty verdicts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chubby Jason Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Maybe he will sign for Liverpool LOL!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 FA only bring charges they expect to win - of 473 cases heard by an Independent Commission in 2011 only 2 resulted in not guilty verdicts. Wow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Not enough evidence to lead to a prosecution, not enough evidence to lead to a ban. But there was enough evidence to lead to a prosecution, that's why he was prosecuted. There wasn't enough evidence to be convicted because it couldn't be proven that his story was false beyond reasonable doubt, no matter who improbable. The FA don't have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, just on the balance of probabilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuneaton Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 i must say, a jury would probably of convicted him. it just wasnt as serious as the media tried to make it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandamninator Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 8 game minimum so Liverpool can't moan surely I say find him guilty and give him an 5000 pound fine, just so Liverpool can moan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Reading the judgement, if the FA take the same view as the judge did then they have to find him guilty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11668/8178966/Chelsea-refuse-to-confirm-if-John-Terry-remains-club-captain Chelsea manager Roberto Di Matteo has refused to confirm whether John Terry is still the Blues' captain. Terry was banned for four matches and fined £220,000 after an independent Football Association panel found him guilty of racially abusing QPR's Anton Ferdinand. Terry confirmed on Thursday that he will not be appealing against the sanctions, and Chelsea revealed that they would be disciplining the defender separately. The Blues insist however that the nature of their punishment would remain confidential. Speaking at Friday's pre-weekend press conference, boss Roberto Di Matteo was asked if that punishment included being stripped of the club captaincy. He said: "We do not discuss publicly the disciplinary matters we take against our players. They remain confidential. You will have to wait and see. "They are internal matters, the action we take against our players, and we are not going to discuss it. "Over the many years he has been here he has shown a lot of qualities. He has realised that on that day he fell below his standards and the clubs standards. "For that he has received a ban and a fine and more action from the club. He is being punished for what he has said. We have all made mistakes in our life before. "We appreciate he has not appealed the ban and the fine and that he has apologised publicly for the language that he used. "He has apologised generally to everyone, including the Ferdinand family. It wasn't a matter of not apologising directly. It was a matter of apologising to everyone for the language used in that game. "He knows it was not appropriate and he has been banned and fined for that." Although he is banned from domestic matches, Terry can play in the Champions League. Asked if he would captain the side against Shakhtar Donetsk in Ukraine next week, Di Matteo said: "you will have to wait and see." The video link is below. http://www.skysports.com/video/inline/0,,16430_8179204,00.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 Club record fine apparently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 Club record fine apparently. True but its like taking 5p off a normal person. Racism should be a 6 month minimum ban or much longer, akin to drug taking length. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 he's still captain though 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