John Terry racism trial to begin

[Peter R]

you have TH on the brain ? You mean JT...anyway, you do not use these terms anymore because you live in Canada where politically correctness in some instances is waay overboard, but that is another issue. maybe you never used them in JA either, but if you didn't back then I would say you were the exception... I remember being called "****** bwoy" many a time and accepted that as the norm... if you called me "****** baboo" diffrant ting, mi wouda vex...

What you are saying JT said is not much diffrerent than what Suarez said... NOTE that BOTH admitted to saying what they were accused of, you seemed to miss that... and both gave an explanation of their context... the FA did not accept Suarez's, the jury or whoever adjudicated found that there was DOUBT that JT was racially abusing AF despite the fact he admitted to using the terms sarcastically... You explain to me what the difference is again, why is one guilty and the other not and I am not talking about the FA or the Court... why does JT seem to get a free pass (on the RBSC forum) and Suarez not? for doing on the surface what appears to be identical infractions?? tell me... and don't tell me he (Suarez) is an idiot, tell me why?

[OJ]

JT is the English golden boy. I did not see him been found guilty. Secondly I think the litmus test is a bit different. Here I think they are saying its not criminally guilty of racial abuse while in the FA they don't have to meet that threshold. They could simply saying you are putting the game in a bad light.

[Gamma]

Yuh have time?

[Assasin]

Peter you see the difference? " "****** baboo" diffrant ting, mi wouda vex" Fully you say that. One of my best friend you could call him "Baboo" but not "******".

In my opinion in any pro sport you have to get rid of all these languages as these players know the art of getting around and cry innocent or may it look "not so bad".

[Paul Marin]

Peter you see the difference? " "****** baboo" diffrant ting, mi wouda vex" Fully you say that. One of my best friend you could call him "Baboo" but not "******".

In my opinion in any pro sport you have to get rid of all these languages as these players know the art of getting around and cry innocent or may it look "not so bad".

Sass, okay that is your opinion, but you still didn't answer Peter's question - why does JT seem to get a "free pass" and Suarez not (on this forum) despite the same circumstances - i.e. both admitted using a racially charged term?

[Paul Marin]

JT is the English golden boy. I did not see him been found guilty. Secondly I think the litmus test is a bit different. Here I think they are saying its not criminally guilty of racial abuse while in the FA they don't have to meet that threshold. They could simply saying you are putting the game in a bad light.

You are right and wrong. Right in that the courts are saying he's not guilty of a crime. However, the FA is not judging whether he is putting the game in a bad light or not, but whether he used a a) racially charged term and b) whether he abused another player. The FA's standard of adjudication is based on a "balance of probability" standard whereas the criminal courts standard is the higher "beyond reasonable doubt" standard.

[Assasin]

I don't think JT get a pass. The difference is you want to make it less of an issue because Suarez is a foriegner. The fact is racism is an issuse and it must be out of soccer. JT case is not done and the FA have to take it up and I wouldn't be surprise if he is suspended. If he is not I will be disappointed.

The big difference is first how Liverpool dealth with it condemning everybody else without even getting the full story.

[Paul Marin]

I don't think JT get a pass. The difference is you want to make it less of an issue because Suarez is a foriegner. The fact is racism is an issuse and it must be out of soccer. JT case is not done and the FA have to take it up and I wouldn't be surprise if he is suspended. If he is not I will be disappointed.

The big difference is first how Liverpool dealth with it condemning everybody else without even getting the full story.

Sorry Sass - I don't want to make it less than an issue at all "because" of anything. I have posted on here that racial abuse is a HUGE issue. However, we have to be clear about what racial abuse IS and IS NOT. I said before the JT trial that he would probably get off because of the standards in criminal court are higher. I also said AFTER the Suarez verdict that the trial was a sham. However, in this latter case, my issue is FAIRNESS. After reading the report cover to cover, it is clear to anyone who asks themselves "What if that were me?" that the tribunal and the process was severely flawed and that Suarez was treated UNFAIRLY. What has me flummoxed about this group - yes, people like Jangle, Lazie, Mo and others who call Suarez a racist is that they are using a highly charged term that even Evra and the FA say is not applicable YET they don't seem to give JT the same level of "abuse" that they so liberally dispense on Suarez. Fair is fair. If Suarez was guilty of racial abuse based on nothing more than his word against Evra's, then it is hard to see JT getting off. HOWEVER, this is the FA, so here's how it's going to go down:

1. Both JT and AF are going to be charged.
2. Both will be found guilty of bringing the game into disrepute.
3. JT will not be charged with racially abusing AF BECAUSE they are going to differ to Anton's testimony, Cole's and the findings of the court. Even if he is, he won't be found guilty on this charge...they are more clever than me at figuring a pathway around that one.
4. JT will be charged - along with Anton - with bringing the game into disrepute.
5. Both will be fined less than the 40K leveled on Suarez, somewhere around 10K pounds.
6. Both will be banned for 2-3 games (max 4), but Anton will get less of a than JT so as not to make "the victim" the criminal, he may get off with as little as a warning. JT won't.

Still, this is an issue of FAIRNESS re: Suarez, nothing more, nothing less. As far as this forum is concerned, it is still FAIRNESS 0-6 HYPOCRISY. If Suarez is a racist, then logic dictates (not my sentiment mind you) that so is JT.

[Assasin]

As I said before I can't judge by one incident who is a racist. Same for Suarez and Terry. How about waiting and seeing what the FA is going to do instead od prejudging everything? The fact is I believe both Suarez and Terry said and I think Terry is a scumbag because this is not the first incident he has had. The first was sleeping with his friend's wife.

The fact is getting racism out of the game is more important to me than Suarez and Terry and if they used those words they should pay and move on. Nothing more nothing less. I have no bias as to who get punished. Both Suarez and Terry need to accept some responsiblity for their actions.

[Paul Marin]

As I said before I can't judge by one incident who is a racist. Same for Suarez and Terry. How about waiting and seeing what the FA is going to do instead od prejudging everything? The fact is I believe both Suarez and Terry said and I think Terry is a scumbag because this is not the first incident he has had. The first was sleeping with his friend's wife.

The fact is getting racism out of the game is more important to me than Suarez and Terry and if they used those words they should pay and move on. Nothing more nothing less. I have no bias as to who get punished. Both Suarez and Terry need to accept some responsiblity for their actions.

Okay - that is clear, and good...too bad others are not as forthcoming. And I couldn't agree more that it takes more than just one incident to brand a man a racist which to me is an extremely serious charge. Just to clarify, I am not "prejudging" the FA. What I am saying is that based on their motivations, my predictions are the outcome I expect. I HOPE I AM WRONG.