EXCLUSIVE: Race row deepens for Terry as three QPR players g

[Sir X]

EXCLUSIVE: Race row deepens for Terry as three QPR players give evidence backing Ferdinand

By MATT LAWTON and SAMI MOKBEL

Last updated at 11:15 PM on 26th October 2011

• Comments (0)
• Add to My Stories
• Share

John Terry will be confronted by evidence from three QPR players who have backed Anton Ferdinand in the FA’s race row inquiry.

Sportsmail understands that Clint Hill, Paddy Kenny and Shaun Derry have provided statements that point to a serious flaw in Terry’s version of events at Loftus Road on Sunday.

Ferdinand was baffled by the statement the England and Chelsea captain issued on Sunday night, particularly his claim that YouTube footage showed him responding to an accusation from Ferdinand that Terry had just called him ‘a black ****’.


Heated: Ferdinand (left) and Terry

Kenny, Derry and Hill — an active players’ union representative — question whether any such exchange took place, given that Ferdinand had no knowledge of a racial element to what was said until after the game.

Terry does not deny that the video shows him using the phrase ‘black ****’ but argues that it was said in the context of Ferdinand’s accusation — an accusation Ferdinand and his team-mates will say was never made.
Terry strenuously denies any accusation of racism and has said he welcomes the FA inquiry. He is eager to clear his name amid fears that he could lose the England captaincy for a second time, as well as the armband at Chelsea.

Support: Shaun Derry is one of three QPR players to have backed up Ferdinand's version of events

He has tried to contact both Anton and Rio Ferdinand to resolve the situation.

But both brothers have refused to take Terry’s calls, further underlining the fact that — contrary to Terry’s claim — Anton Ferdinand does not consider the matter to be ‘finished’.

Quite the opposite, in fact, and Sportsmail can reveal that the Terry camp were told as much before releasing their statement on Sunday night. They were informed things were ‘not cool’ between the two players.

Rio Ferdinand’s very obvious support for his brother — the two spent Wednesday together at a commercial launch with Pele in London’s West End — could have serious ramifications for Fabio Capello and his England squad.


Different views: Terry and Ferdinand have differing view about what happened

That is why the FA’s disciplinary and governance unit, led by director Darren Bailey, are keen to complete their inquiry before Capello names his squad on November 5 for next month’s friendlies against Spain and Sweden.

That said, the FA have made it clear that Terry will be Capello’s captain for the two games at Wembley should the inquiry remain ongoing.

FA disciplinary and governance officials have moved quickly, though. They were at QPR’s west London training ground on Tuesday to take statements from the three players.


Getting his point across: Ferdinand is expected to submit his evidence on Friday

Manager Neil Warnock sat in on the interviews, as he did when Anton Ferdinand gave his evidence. Ferdinand’s final submission is not expected to be completed until Friday.

Terry is still hoping to secure the backing of Ashley Cole in a witness statement, as well as other members of the Chelsea dressing room.

On Wednesday night, however, there was a suggestion that this was not proving to be easy.


Communication breakdown: Rio Ferdinand is not taking England colleague Terry's calls

According to sources, there were very few witnesses to the conversation that took place with Ferdinand in the dressing room after the game. Only Florent Malouda and the Chelsea kit man were there in addition to Terry, Ferdinand and Cole.

Terry also remains the subject of a separate police investigation into the incident after officers responded to a complaint they received accusing the 30-year-old defender of making a racial slur at Ferdinand.


Witness: Terry is hoping on the support of Florent Malouda who was one of a few players who saw the exchange in the changing room

The Metropolitan Police said last night that they were still ‘assessing’ the complaint from a member of the public against Terry.
At the same time the FA are also trying to reach a conclusion in their inquiry into Patrice Evra’s allegations of racial abuse against Luis Suarez.





Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1bwKN78SN

[Sir X]

We've come so far since grim days of constant racial abuse

By LUTHER BLISSETT

Last updated at 10:45 PM on 26th October 2011

• Comments (0)
• Add to My Stories
• Share

The allegations surrounding John Terry and Anton Ferdinand have not been proven, but it’s disappointing these things still happen from time to time, when football has done so much to rid the game of this scourge.
We’ve come so far from when I first joined Watford and one of the coaches said I could only play with the sun on my back. When it got cold I wouldn’t fancy it.
Where did that come from? If you look at my record you would see I scored goals throughout the season. It was printed in the local newspaper but I couldn’t do anything about it.

Speaking out: Former England striker Luther Blissett (left) with John Barnes

It was just accepted that people would call you names and throw bananas at you. There was nobody and nowhere you could complain. But black footballers now have a voice. Not for them the careers that were pretty much over once the complaint went in or had to leave the game because they couldn’t deal with the constant abuse.
I think we’ve got away from the idea black players can only play at centre forward because they’re quick, but white players have to play in central midfield because they’re the ones clever enough to dictate the play.
Managers now just look at a player’s attributes and how best they can utilise his ability. It doesn’t matter whether he’s black or white.

Race row: John Terry (right) and QPR's Anton Ferdinand clashed

Until the early 1980s the abuse was constant. But you soon learned that if you let it get to you, you wouldn’t be able to do your job.
Through the educational work I do with kids through Kick It Out, I ask them how it feels when somebody calls you a name.
I ask them about that feeling you get in the pit of your stomach. It stays with you for a very long time — much longer than a kick or a punch.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1bwKWfENf

[Sir X]

Farther to go

Man U ites , isnt it odd Evra hasnt found one Man U ite to support his claims after alleging being called the N word 10 times ?

[Paul Marin]

Man U ites , isnt it odd Evra hasnt found one Man U ite to support his claims after alleging being called the N word 10 times ?

I don't read much into this. Manu** don't want to get embroiled in this allegation. Slurgie must be seh something like "that'll do lads...we've made the point". That's my *guess* as he's smart enough to realise that no one will win -- especially manu** - with a distraction like this. Little clubs like QPR get their name in the headlines and leverage this to their advantage.

[Sir X]

Terry inquiry: you could call it progress


Email
Print
Wed Oct 26 11:14AM


When he was 17, Earl Barrett made his first appearance for Manchester City reserves, in an away game. So traumatised was he by what followed, he now cannot remember exactly where it was. But in those days, reserve games were played in the main stadium.

There were about 100 people watching the match, at least half of whom spent the 90 minutes shouting racist insults at Barrett. Every time he touched the ball, the stadium echoed to a chorus of monkey chants. And in case he didn't get the point, someone chucked a banana at him when he went near the touchline.

What he chills him most about the memory, however, is that nobody did or said anything about it.

"They must have heard, they couldn't have not heard, it was just so obvious," he recalls.

"Yet nobody even mentioned it. So I didn't mention it. I was 17, I wanted to make a career in the game, I didn't want to get a reputation as a trouble maker, so I just said nothing and got on with it. That's what you did then."

Nearly 30 years on, things have changed. This month every manager in league football will be wearing a Kick It Out badge at matches. Players will warm up in Kick It Out t-shirts. There are adverts on perimeter fences at grounds encouraging us all to kick racism out of the game. Meanwhile the FA has complained to UEFA about the abuse some England players suffered from fans during a recent fixture in Bulgaria. When they did so, there was much preening in the media of how English football had sorted itself out, rid itself of this sort of thing, cleaned up its act.

And yet this week the England captain has been reported for allegedly uttering racial abuse to a fellow player. He is not the only one under investigation: Liverpool's Luis Suarez has been accused by Manchester United's Patrice Evra of continually taunting him during a recent match. That claim too is being looked at.

The two incidents were all the more surprising because they were so unexpected. Jason Roberts, the Blackburn striker, revealed on the radio on Tuesday that he had not heard any racially derisive comments on a pitch for the past five years.

On that occasion, Roberts decided not to say anything about it. That was what black players were obliged to do. Roberts' uncle Cyrille Regis was a pioneer black player in this country, turning out for West Brom in the seventies. Like Barrett, he was subjected to serial abuse. The received wisdom at the time that the best way to respond to such nonsense was to ignore it. Managers would say to him, "go out and score a goal, that will shut them up". Regis's dignity under fire was remarkable.

Roberts, however, now regrets that, when he was abused in a Premier League game five years ago, he was silent. He thinks he ought to have brought the remark to someone's attention. He didn't because he accepted the received wisdom; he had watched his uncle's quiet resolve and thought that was the best way to deal with abuse. Ignore it and it will go away.

Barrett, though, believes there was a more pervasive reason for the manner in which cheeks were routinely turned in those early days.

"The thing is, if I had have done something, if I'd have made a fuss, there is no way I'd have had the career I did," he said.

"I'd have been thrown out as a trouble maker. Word would have got round I had the wrong attitude, a chip on my shoulder. Besides, who could I have talked to? There just wasn't the structure there is now, in which complaints get properly investigated. As far as I remember, everyone just used to pretend it hadn't happened."

And that is largely the reason these recent incidents have been drawn to our attention. According to Roberts, abuse between players is so rare in this country nowadays that when it happens it is really shocking. Players no longer think they have to accept it, no longer have to get their head down and get on with things. They issue formal complaints. Whatever the reason behind the abuse.

"I've heard the theory that it's just a form of deliberate wind-up, to undermine an opponent, that these people aren't racist, they're just using words to get under the other guy's skin," says Barrett.

"But I'm sorry, I'm not having that. I accept that football is a hard game and there is a psychological element to it. But nobody in this country cannot be aware of the implications of the language. We have spent 20 years educating everyone about it. Maybe in Bulgaria they could plead ignorance. But here, you know what you're saying."

Which is probably why we have this odd position in which abuse from the stands - frequently more virulent than ever before, often disparaging tragedy and death - rarely if ever involves race these days. And it is why players who do use racist language are no longer met by a conspiracy of silence. You could call it progress. Though Earl Barrett, who these days is building a promising coaching career at Stoke City, does not believe we can be complacent.

"It has got better and better, of course it has," he says. "But I still think it's ridiculous that we're even talking about it 20 years on. All the work that has been done to raise awareness and it's still an issue? Really we ought to have reached a position by now where it simply doesn't happen and we can get on with talking about the important stuff. Like the football."

In a week of obfuscation and back-tracking, that is about as sensible a statement as you will hear

[Lazie]

There was a youtube clip with a translation of what Terry was supposed to have said, the FA has had it removed. What have me wondering is each time Skysports show the clip, they blur Terry's mouth. If he didn't say something offensive, why did they have to do that?

[Lazie]

Man U ites , isnt it odd Evra hasnt found one Man U ite to support his claims after alleging being called the N word 10 times ?

So based on that we're going to dismiss his claim? I read on a blog where a Liverpool fan was mocking Evra saying he speaks french and Suarez speaks spanish, how Evra would understand what was said. Well, PArk and Tevez were best friends at MU, Evra was the translator for both.

I'm not accussing Suarez of anything but is it impossible for Suarez to say something to Evra that only Evra can hear? Funny, Bill Maher and his guests spoke about this on Real Time last Friday.

[Paul Marin]

There was a youtube clip with a translation of what Terry was supposed to have said, the FA has had it removed. What have me wondering is each time Skysports show the clip, they blur Terry's mouth. If he didn't say something offensive, why did they have to do that?

Lazie, the reason is that the clip is "supposedly" out of context. There doesn't seem to be a dispute that Terry used the words "black c**t" but from what I understand, Terry's full sentence went something like "I didn't call you a black c**t, you f-king knobhead". This seems to be the essence of the dispute and you can understand why both Sky and the FA would want to be careful as context is important.

[Mosiah]

I read on a blog where a Liverpool fan was mocking Evra saying he speaks french and Suarez speaks spanish, how Evra would understand what was said.

Oh, you were serious?!?!

[Mosiah]

Ah, now yuh mekking sense. But yuh refuse to mek sense if it have anyting fi do wid ManU.

sigh

[Mosiah]

That's a novel way to explain it away still, if indeed that is what he is doing!