Who says? Are you getting confused with a fine by the legal courts and a fine that may be imposed by the FA?
Just seen this on SSN Twitter Crown Prosecution Service says John Terry, if found guilty, will face a maximum punishment of a £2,500 fine
So that is the fine from the courts. Suarez fine was from the FA who may also choose to fine Terry once the case has been heard.
That's from the magistrates court The punishment from the FA is still pending. If found guilty of course.
Re: That's from the magistrates court so will he still be found guilty by the FA if they have passed the case for the CPS ?
Suarez/Evra Terry/Ferdinand Hume/Morgan the FA is a disgrace. And makes up it's rules and punishments to suit.
Your forgetting loss of England captaincy and the end of his England career and possibly his Chelsea one too.
was Terrys incident mentioned in the referees report? If so and he's found guilty then punishment should be same.
Re: Suarez/Evra Terry/Ferdinand Hume/Morgan Can you get in trouble for telling the truth? Apparently so!!! Whats the difference between a white man calling someone a n*gger and a black man calling someone a n*gger?
Re: Suarez/Evra Terry/Ferdinand Hume/Morgan The pejorative connotations. There's a big difference in my opinion. Its all about the context, not the actual word that is used. In the Suarez situation it would seem that the word was used in a heated argument and therefore more likely than not as an insult. It matters not that the word has different usage in his native Uruguay in my opinion. He should live by our rules and our cultural norms.
I cannot understand the pig's ear the FA are making of this one. Should Terry be England captain? Should he even play for England while the case is coming to court? If you were in any other walk of life with this sort of issue, you would be suspended pending the outcome of the trial/enquiry. Suspension in this context is a neutral act, which does not prejudge the outcome, but allows for the matter to be thoroughly investigated. That is what the FA should do in Terry's case. He should then be re-instated if found innocent, or banned if found guilty. If it is so straight forward in any other walk of life, why don't these simple, but effective steps seem to be recognised by the FA?