Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Chelsea' started by fernb8, Oct 29, 2011.
this is great
fern, how does one go about purchasing a share in the CPO? $100 per, right?
I feel like i should do this.... owning a piece of CFC is appealing...
F***it, just emailed them.
Tell us when/if you get a reply and I'll do the same. I emaled them, too.
holla @ u l8r JT
Wonder what over/under on a ten game ban bet would be?
but at the same time, CFC puts up an immediate response, so maybe they think they've got a good chance at an appeal... either way, JT could get the chance to focus on the CL
Agree. But 10 BPL games would be Joey Bartonesque.
Wasn't there also evidence of Ferdinand saying as how JT shagged his mate's missus? That's just peachy I suppose, is it?
Yeah Screw you FA
WTF...??? Who's FA Member's wife did JT screw, ffs!!!
All to be expected, he'll get a 7 match ban, appeal, have it reduced to 5 games and we won't even notice since Cahill and Luiz are more than good enough to cover for JT for a few weeks.
I thought this bullshit was over with
Much lower burden of proof than in a criminal court, along with a subtly worded charge that's almost designed to negate that not guilty verdict. I'm hugely surprised that they haven't also charged Ferdinand, given his own testimony where he admits calling JT every name under the sun and making physical gestures alluding to Terry's *ahem* sexual profligacy.
Exactly. It takes two to tango.
I just shows how absolutely pathetic the FA is. Forget the fact that JT was egged on, but nonetheless, he's a racist because he snapped. The FA is a fecking joke.
Huh? Egged on or not, doesn't really matter. We all knew this was going to happen, it's not a surprise. Not sure "snapped" is really a defense either. Obviously I hope JT is cleared, but some of the defenses here have been...........curious.
It does matter. It doesn't clear what he did. JT isn't a saint, he really isn't that good of a guy. But he was cleared in a criminal court of law. I don't condone what he did. He shouldn't have said what he said. But AF is just as guilty because he started with his insinuating comments.
I really don't give a shit if you agree with me or not. The FA is a joke. It's no different than the NCAA in America. They haven't got a clue when it comes to punishment.
And you are right about something. WE did know that he would get a ban. Doesn't change the fact that I don't like it.
Terry deserves the ban (though probably not quite what they are going to give him). It's just that if JT is facing suspension, Anton Ferdinand should be as well.
The above doesn't make any sense. Terry was cleared in a criminal court, which has a much higher standard of proof. The FA made the right decision to wait, since had he been convicted, they wouldn't have had to do an investigation. Now they're proceeding, as everyone thought they would. Hopefully they clear him. That's all there is to say, really.
There's no "offensive language out of football" campaign. I don't really care whether Anton Ferdinand has to sit for a game. That's as likely to help QPR as to hurt them, anyway.
I know there will be some who think JT and Chelsea are being victimised by the FA and media, but we should note that Chelsea's track record is somewhat appalling in this area. As a club we have been in the headlines for the wrong reasons on several occasions for racist (particularly anti-semetic) behaviour.
I welcome the day we put all that to bed and if JT used such words which is undisputed (even if just parrotting what he thought was said to him, which struggle to buy tbh), it's extremely poor judgement from the club captain and needs to be punished. His court defence created the reasonable doubt necessary there but would be surprised if it stands up with the FA.
Agreed with nice that the court case is largely irrelevant to the FA hearing (unless of course JT would have been guilty in which case the FA hearing would have been a mere formality). Expect 8 games or so (along the lines of the Suarez ban).
Whilst there is no campaign against offensive language (at least that I am aware of), there are absolutely rules around this. I would deem what Anton stated he said under oath as extremely offensive. If the ref had heard it, he was required to dismiss him. The fact that it was later admitted in court suggests that at the very least a retrospective red card (and ban) be applied.
The link below is a clear English version of the FIFA rules around foul play of which language is a part.
If someone being cleared in a criminal court isn't relevant to further punishment from the FA then why hasn't Gerrard been punished for duffing up that DJ in the bar?
This is the problem as far as I can see. They're opening a can of worms with this stuff because, now, EVERYONE will be pushing for further punishment for everything.
The Suarez case isn't relevant because there WAS no criminal court case so the FA were the only arbiters of it. In this case, REGARDLESS of what people think, a criminal court decided he's innocent. For him to be punished after THAT makes a mockery of natural justice.