I refuse to get all hot and bothered about diving when defenders repeatedly get away with wrestling practice in the box at set pieces. No-one's ever arsed about diving when defenders do it under pressure either. The only person who should be embarassed by yesterday is the referee.
The same courts that acquitted people involved with Hillsborough, yeah, that court of law. Sounds promising.
If he believed that he was racially abused I highly doubt that he would let the opinion of the court of law sway his emotions given that he was in the thick of the action whereas the court of law were sitting a courtroom.
The court didn't say he was innocent tbf. They just said there wasn't enough evidence to give him a guilty verdict EDIT: Which on the balance of things was probably right imo
Btw, what happened to the FA Charging Terry ? I may have missed it but don't remember reading anything after that ?
Indeed. Not enough evidence to establish intention as the law states. And anyways footballing incidents and personal relations are not dependant on a Court verdict.
What's yours? a) He never said it and; b) the court was never going to find him innocent as he already was innocent
My point that the fact the court acquitted him doesn't actually mean he is innocent, and that was acknowledged by the judge. It was the correct verdict because there was not enough evidence, but Terry's defence is flimsy as fuck, and I (and a large number of others) remain skeptical of his innocence
Ummmm.... it means exactly that in the court. It was never the courts place to find him innocent as he already was, can't be much more clearer.
No it doesn't. I'd bet good money that had he been tried in Scotland, he'd have walked with a 'not proven' verdict.