The furore surrounding John Terry since the Queens Park Rangers game has bought into focus a number of issues. They are, perhaps, two sides of the same coin, but they pose a number of questions.

And I for one have no answers, only more questions. So, let’s play Devil’s Advocate.

1. Is He or Isn’t He? or “No man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent.” (Abraham Lincoln)

Amidst all the allegations, the lies, the finger-pointing and the holier-than-thou pontificating in the “is he or isn’t he” witch-hunt surrounding our Captain, there are many who have called for John Terry to be stripped of the captaincy of club and country.

It is said that the first casualty of war is the ‘Truth’. In a similar vein I would suggest that the first casualty of a witch-hunt is ‘Logic’.

To allege that John Terry is racist is to deny logic. Let’s look at the evidence.

There are the character-reference statements boldly made by the likes of Frank Lampard and other players; also those made by AVB and Ray Wilkins. Admittedly they are value judgement made by those who know and respect him, but nevertheless they are also powerful vindications of his character.

We have all read them so I need not go into details here. But in the face of a witch-hunt we need more hard evidence.

He has learned his trade at a multi-cultural club. Chelsea, rather than being an insular English club, has a long history of looking out into wider competition and embracing multi-ethnicity.  This ethos has probably existed at the club since its inception, but certainly from as far back as 1955 when the club should have been the first to compete in European competition.

After winning our first League title, Chelsea were planning a first competitive foreign foray when the ever insular and myopic F.A. and Football League regrettably succeeded in persuading them to withdraw from the competition.  More recently of course Chelsea has been a kaleidoscope of nations – to its obvious benefit.

You do not progress very far in such an organisation if you are inherently racist. And the obvious truth is that he has not only progressed but he has become the figurehead of the club.  The fact is that John Terry is captain of a multi-national, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic team, both on and off the field. He also leads a multi-cultural team at National level, again both on and off the pitch.

Would anyone seriously argue when Terry was breaking into first team football that the likes of Marcel Desailly would have tolerated racist attitudes at the club? And given his obvious admiration for Desailly, that Terry believes he (Desailly) is somehow a lesser player, a lesser person, because of the colour of his skin or his formative culture? Of course not.

Would any England manager hand the armband to anyone remotely racist, with its obvious implications for squad solidarity? The idea is ludicrous and the answer is No.  Similarly, does anyone with an iota of intelligence believe that strong, forceful, and independent characters such as Ashley Cole and Didier Drogba would accept leadership from someone with racist attitudes?

Abraham Lincoln once said “no man is good enough to govern another man without that others consent”. That truism still holds good. The idea of those guys accepting the leadership of a racist is preposterous.  Logically, then, I believe we can put the idea of a racist JT to bed once and for all. Whether the Witchfinder generals amongst the baying masses can grasp that concept is, sadly, another matter.

But of course the question is not about whether Terry is a racist or not, it is about what happened on the pitch. And this is where I start to lose it.

In order to explain why, can I move from the specific race issue to a more general question? The question of behaviour on, and off, the pitch.

2. On and Off. or “We have double standards to live up to” (from Ally McBeal)

The question is “What is acceptable behaviour on the pitch?”

We all know – players, coaches, fans alike – that anything that happens on the pitch in the intensity of the moment is rarely a personal issue. Its motivation and intent can be boiled down to one thing: an effort to gain an advantage over your opponent, an advantage that may win the game. And that surely is the object of sporting competition.

We all know and accept that what happens on the pitch is not a microcosm of society. The rules are changed, barriers broken down, rebuilt: different values emerge.

The customs and mores imitate society, but are not of it. The football pitch is, if you like, a virtual world within a world. To demonstrate the difference in values, let’s look at some of the things that are acceptable on the pitch, but not off it.

Spitting (not at an opponent or anything so crass, just on the ground). It is seen at every match; more, it is seen at almost all sporting occasions. But in the wider world it is considered rude, unhygienic and anti-social.

Swearing loudly and/or aggressively – heard on pitches everywhere, but not acceptable on the street.

Deliberate physical contact with a view to unbalancing or preventing the progress of another. Wholly unacceptable on the street. Unacceptable on the pitch, yet often allowed (Ramos on Walcott anyone?) and condoned as “part of the game”.

Verbal abuse. This can sometimes take the form of racist abuse, but more often consists of disparaging comments about a person’s size or alleged weakness. Tolerated on the pitch, frowned upon off it.

Deliberate ABH – unacceptable, yet often accepted as “part of the game”.

Now I am not suggesting that every football pitch is a lawless zone, nor am I suggesting that the rules of society should be forced onto the field of play. Far from it. The last thing we want is the police prosecuting players left right and centre.  But what if we do impose these external values onto the pitch? The result may be a situation where the following hypothetical questions could be asked.

Why do we accept that in the heat of the moment in a pressurised game a player can attract mild condemnation for a career-threatening tackle; but be subject to a police and FA investigation for an outburst that would be largely ignored on the street?

Why should verbal abuse of any sort be elevated to such a heinous crime that it provokes a police investigation when instances of other anti-social and often violent behaviour do not?  Is it worse to call someone a lanky freak or a midget than to call them black? Or vice versa?

What is the most disparaging insult? And according to whom?

There is also the question of intent. If there is no intent to abuse (and here I mean any form of abuse) is it abuse or is it failed communication?  Has not the victimised player failed to appreciate that the motive behind the statement is not the literal interpretation but an effort to gain advantage?

Moving off the pitch and into the stands for a moment, is it acceptable to tolerate groups of fans making masturbation gestures at a player, thereby condoning their behaviour, while punishing a player for doing the same thing?

Again, how is it that the police intervene in some instances and not others? I understand that if an incident is bought to their attention, they must take action. Yet apparently in 2008 the police themselves urged the FA to take action following complaints of verbal abuse from fans – after which the police decided it was “not feasible” to make arrests (source).

I don’t understand why it is “not feasible” to take action against fans yet it is possible to pursue actions against players.  Is society (and by “society” I mean every one of us) wrong to ignore some issues and elevate the importance of others? Is it right that elevating the importance of an issue should automatically increase the weight of punishment?

Enough. My head is spinning.

So is it possible to find the answers to these questions? Where do we draw the line on these issues?  To be honest, I don’t know. The logic of these hypothetical situations eludes me. Logic appears to have left the room.

It has left because to force outside values – however well-intentioned – onto the football pitch is to create an artificial situation. It creates a dichotomy of values that cannot coexist and is unsustainable. In short, it creates double standards.  And the double standards involved here are staggering, and this is what I find difficult to get my head around.

Returning to the specific John Terry issue, whilst I abhor racism I find very few examples of it on the pitch. In the stand, well, that is another matter.

I find myself in the strange situation of agreeing with Sepp Blatter when he says of the game “There is no racism, there is maybe one of the players [attitude] towards another, he has a word or a gesture which is not the correct one…the one who is affected by that, he should also say that this is a game. We are in a game, and at the end of the game, we shake hands…”

The problem with an outside investigation is that it superimposes the values of the outside onto the football pitch.

Hopefully the investigation into the matter will be based on logic and will focus solely on the facts of what happened on the pitch. It must, logically, also take into account the accepted values of the game rather than external values artificially imposed on it from outside.

Finally I hope that the findings of any investigation are presented clearly and are based on fact and logic.  For in the absence of logic we are left with only one logical conclusion.

Witch hunt.

With the current situation engulfing NewsCorp, you’d think Murdoch’s empire would be taking a little more care in their reporting. Sadly not, it would seem.

Earlier today it was widely reported, with the source being Sky Sports, that John Terry had claimed Luka Modric has been ‘disrespectful’ towards Tottenham in trying to engineer a move to Chelsea.

These quotes quickly spread like wildfire and have been repeated ad nauseum across sites far and wide, however Sky Sports has now been forced to print a retraction, and apologise for their mistake.

The statement read; “At skysports.com we have a reputation for the honesty and integrity of our reporting.” – Not sure where they dreamt this up, but they continue.

“Unfortunately we fell short of those standards with our coverage of John Terry’s interview with Sky Sports News on July 19 during which the Chelsea captain was asked to comment on Luka Modric.”

“We would like to clarify that John Terry did not refer to Luka Modric as being disrespectful to Tottenham Hotspur during the interview. “

“On realising our error we immediately removed the original article and published a corrected version which you can read by clicking here“

“We would like to apologise to John Terry and Chelsea for any inconvenience caused.”

Luckily for Murdoch and Sky, it seems that these comments were taken out of context from an interview conducted by Sky Sports News in Malaysia, and not John Terry’s voicemail.

It’s been a quiet couple of weeks for us here at TheChels, we’re not ones to get over excited with the overblown hype each time the England team plays, especially due to the rank hypocrisy in the media coverage of their star player and his indiscretions with hookers. At least this time they’re not drawing their pension though.

Never mind that Rooney has scored more times off the pitch than on it since March, oh no, Sir Shrek of Salford has been given a far easier ride than our Captain was, and before all you cyber warriors run to the keyboards to tell me how JT shagged a team mates bird and this is ‘somehow’ worse, go and do some research. This interview is a good place to start.

Ok so we had our own little joke at the story when it first broke, however looking at Vanessa’s interview recently, and knowing the way the media work, yes they did make it up.

Two and two often equates to whatever number Fleet Street need, especially if that number also happens to be someone’s voice mail. The News of the World, and indeed any paper owned by the dark overlord; Rupert Murdoch, will make more from lies and sensationalism than they will lose when later sued. As papers are now, in the main loss making, they have to try all they can to increase sales.

So why the easy ride from the media then? Quite simply, they like Rooney as he plays their game, and he is their choice for future England captain. Think Capello picks his main man? Not without coercion. If he did, Terry would still be captain.

The Sun and a vicious hate campaign saw nicely to that, yet with rumours of Gerrard’s infidelity safely locked behind a super injunction that seems to be continually extended, the rank hypocrisy in the media and indeed the England set up as a whole means we at TheChels can’t get excited about it one bit, and we’re glad when our lads don’t play.

So onto other news and it seems the posturing from Marseilles this week about their ‘attempt’ to sign Drogba was nothing more than a load of old tosh, with Carlo stating today that no such bid was forthcoming, and even if it had, or will in January, the answer will be a resounding no.

There may however be moves in the offing for Yuri Zhirkov, the man Carlo once saw as a ‘rib eye steak’, however if you look past the ‘Play me or I leave’ sensationalist headlines from our ‘friends’ in the main stream media, the comments tell a different story; “I’ll certainly get a chance in the next few months and I’ll try to use it completely” said the Russian.

“We are currently in brilliant form and getting past Malouda and Cole is problematic. Everyone understands about the competition: once you are on the bench you can be there for a long time.” He added; ” I will definitely get a chance. The thoughts when you are watching your team play are always the same: you support, worry and your soul wants to be on the pitch to help.” That sounds like he’s leaving, doesn’t it?

So it’s back to the Premiership this weekend with a match against Wet Spam on the cards, Avram Grant will again cross Chelsea’s path and one would hope he’s feeling charitable, as we could do with a few more goals this week as our goal difference could do with a boost, don’t you think?

Lampard is out tomorrow but Kakuta may just play, we at TheChels have been following the developments of the young Frenchman ever since the furore surrounding his transfer and hope that he’ll get the chances his undoubted skills deserve.  In Carlo we trust.

Speaking of the amiable Italian, Ancelotti has just won the Manager of the Month award for August after our fine start to the season, let’s hope it’s not a curse as has so often been the case recently as we must keep the pressure on at the top of the table.

Have you found our NEW Chelsea Supporters Social Network? http://thechels.me

Martin O’Neill isn’t shy of a moan, we all know that. This weekend’s diatribe is aimed at everyone’s favourite man; John Terry, meaning that O’Neill is already very late to an already oversubscribed party.

Yet it’s not the target of his outburst which has goaded a reaction out of me, but rather the nature of it, and the predictable reaction of the wider footballing public.

Apparently, Terry should be publicly apologising to Milner for jeopardising both his and England’s World Cup chances. You see, dear readers, everything goes out of the window in a World Cup year (or a European Championship year) when an England player is involved.

Sure, the tackle was bad, and you won’t find me defending it too vehemently, but let me make one thing perfectly clear. John Terry is a Chelsea footballer, and club comes before country, every single time. No exceptions.

It’s not even a question of who pays their wages. It’s more that for the vast majority of the year, the player represents his club side, and whilst donning those particular colours, should be doing everything within their power to ensure a victory for their team – even if that comes at the expense of a fellow international compatriot.

So when Henry Winter has the audacity to claim that Fabio Capello should be dressing down his former captain for merely carrying out club duties, it evokes a certain reaction.

I’m sure you’ll have noticed, maybe even first hand, the number of fans who’ll tell you today that Terry is a disgrace once again, and was being selfish in not putting his country first. Some of them are probably Manchester United fans.

Ask them how they felt when ITV news, amongst others, questioned whether rushing Wayne Rooney back for a Champions League tie would cost England their World Cup chances. You might find their hypocritical opinions subside a little.

If the year was 2009, or 2011, or any odd-numbered year, such accusations wouldn’t exist because there’s no international summer tournament. If such a tackle happens to a player who isn’t going to the World Cup, or who isn’t English, the headlines would read something completely different.

Unfortunately, in a country where the lowest footballing denominator often seems to represent the majority as far as football fans go, England rules above all. I’m sorry (I’m actually not), but you’re wrong.

A final thought for you – if John Terry is the victim of a tackle which inflicts serious injury over the coming weeks, what will say you then?

I think I already know the answer.

Unless you’ve lived under a rock these past seven days, you can’t have failed to notice the furore surrounding John Terry and the over-reported antics of his John Thomas.

It seems that the world and his wife has an opinion about JT’s JT and its illicit dalliances in a French valley, generating far more column inches than many will feel it deserves.

This is of course, unless you’re not interested in real news such as the legality of mass murder of millions of Iraqi citizens, or how our MP’s are creaming off our taxes to fund their own self serving lifestyles, but hey, our national press knows what’s right, right?

So dear old JT and little JT find themselves in a quagmire of entirely their own making, or do they? A quick flick through the dictionary tells us that a quamire is ‘a difficult, precarious, or entrapping position’.

Given that Vanessa Duracell has allegedly had half the Chelsea squad, and Bridge, one could argue that Terry and Thomas were indeed entrapped and mademoiselle Vanessa knew what she was doing all along.

It’s reported that Vanessa met our boys in blue whilst working as a waitress in a cocktail bar, so her rise from a £150 a role night serving drinks to that of servicing them in entirely different ways, and a reported half a million quid in hush money, means she’s not done too bad out of the whole affair.

All the while poor old John Terry has had his name dragged through the mud, his character assassinated, his relationship put in jeopardy, and his role of captain of England taken from him after just ten minutes with Fabio Capello. Clearly Capello cut straight to the chase, and we assume, ignored the foreplay.

Yes he’s been a very naughty boy, but to us die hard blues supporters, Terry is still the messiah. No amount of NewsCorp indignation or bile from the Daily ‘Hate’ Mail will ever change that.

Tomorrow against Arsenal we’ll need to give him all the support we can give. Although off the pitch his actions have left a lot to be desired, on the pitch he is still our captain, our leader, our legend.

Long may that continue.

As I write this piece, we are at the end of the first month of this World Cup year and the build up is slowly starting to crank up. By June, it will be at fever pitch.

After all, within a month or so, we will be starting to get our free wall charts and some retro football stickers complete with a glossy brochure of the ‘players to watch’ during the tournament.

There will also be that period when we become paranoid whether a player will make the plane to South Africa when we see an England star clutching his hamstring or inspecting his ankle with a pained expression on his face.

We are told that the nation is becoming experts in those medical conditions. The headlines will say, “We are a nation on tenterhooks.” We are meant to be lying awake at night in a sweat for the latest news on Rooney’s foot, Owen’s knee, or Ferdinand’s ribs.

To a certain extent, this nation is expecting fairly great things from the World Cup. Although this is nothing new, I sense that there is something different about these expectations. After all, when the draw was made in December, some pundits believed that England would cruise through the group stages, and we were told to keep the 11th July clear for the final.

That never happened in 2006 (or in 2002.) It would be careless if we booked a holiday on that particular Sunday, and it is largely suggested that England will be there. I am less sure but can not help being quietly confident about the team’s progress. I always try to be rational at a start of a tournament but it all falls apart if England goes past the group stages.

I believe that there is still a group of people who want England to do well in the World Cup. Some people seem to like nothing more than launching into a national rant when the team crashes out at the quarter final stage to a team like Portugal or Germany.

However, I prefer to hope that England goes a few stages further and that I can enjoy those moments like my uncles and Dad in 1966. I am sick of hearing about that Saturday afternoon in July when Colchester was a ghost town and everyone was crammed around their black and white TVs catching a little bit of Kenneth Wolstenholme and ‘they think it’s all over.’

World Cup 2010 is probably the last opportunity for England’s ‘so-called’ golden generation to realise the ultimate prize in English football so how are we beginning the build up to South Africa? Our newspapers are snooping into the private life of the England captain and want to splash with a story that would be suitable for the Jeremy Kyle Show, the water cooler but for little else.

Is this story of national interest? That is debatable unless you are obsessed with knowing everything about a player whether he is on or off the pitch. Is this story going to cement a strong team moral before the plane taxis down the runway to South Africa? This story is not going to help either England, maybe Chelsea (although Terry has not stopped scoring goals) or the image of footballers (which is never in the greatest state).

I am no apologist for John Terry. I am not his PR agent and I am not against silently complaining about the Chelsea and England captain. However, I am interested in about Terry as a footballer and whether he can lead England to World Cup glory and if he can achieve ultimate club success for Chelsea, which has to mean a Champions’ League winners medal.

I am not interested in what Terry gets up to off the pitch including all that weird information that you get in a match day programme about favourite lessons, favourite music or favourite curry. He is a leader on the pitch and we know of certain players that can not remotely lead during a game. Will this sad story change everything? For the sake of the career of a professional at his trade, I hope that this is not the end of John Terry.

What is the point of washing any dirty laundry in public, where everyone is an expert and everyone has an opinion? If the details are true or not, it is best that these problems are resolved in private for the sake of everyone and everything that is stake. That private place could be in the dressing room or somewhere else such as manager’s office.

The media seem to be obsessed with wanting to feast on the various foibles of footballers, and no one really benefits from this episode apart from a possible increase in newspaper sales. After all, some of us who can not cope with some salacious gossip about multi million pound footballers.

Some people will shout about ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘the right to know’ about everything. There could be much rejoicing that the ban on John Terry’s sad story was lifted by a judge so we can feast on the gossip, scandal and innuendo.

They will say that nothing is off limits especially regarding celebrities including ‘filthy rich’ footballers. They will be particularly talking about those players, who have been reported to having strayed away from the straight and narrow from earlier occasions. However, what benefit will this news give to anyone?

Some people will say that it is an occupational hazard for players to have the media on their back at every single opportunity, and that they should behave like vicars throughout the day. If only everyone could lead such perfect lives. Most of us struggle to lead perfect days but have the luxury of avoiding 2010’s version of the medieval stocks.

There has been previous in terms of the occasions when the media have sought a few skeletons in the cupboard of those players who will be going to the World Cup in a couple of months. We now have a situation with the England captaincy in a mess, the idea of a team in sudden disarray and a load of baggage to go to South Africa that can not be placed out of sight in the under carriage of the executive plane.

The story may be able to fill a few gaps in the build up to the World Cup. ‘Slow news days’ may become a little faster but it is difficult to see who in the football world has positively benefited from this sad story during this weekend, the next couple of weeks, or the World Cup in June.

In a week where his personal life dominated the tabloid headlines, John Terry scored the winner against Burnley to send the Blues five points clear at the top of the table. The 2-1 win also saw goals from Nicolas Anelka and Steven Fletcher.

The Christmas tree formation was again on show with Ashley Cole, Yuri Zhirkov and Florent Malouda all present in the same starting side. Alex was also preferred to Ricardo Carvalho in defence.

Chelsea led just before the half hour, couresty of Anelka. A classy break saw Joe Cole pick out Malouda with a diagonal ball, the French winger knocking the ball into the box for Anelka to supply the clinical finish.

However, just four minutes into the second half, Burnley fashioned an equaliser. A long ball was expertly brought down by Fletcher and the forward kept a cool head to flick the ball past Alex and then fire into the back of the net past Petr Cech.

Moments later Chelsea thought they were in front, but Joe Cole’s close range header was ruled out for offside. Then, Lampard forced a decent low save from Brian Jensen with a powerful free kick.

But with eight minutes remaining, John Terry stepped up to score the decisive goal. He rose high and unmarked to meet Lampard’s corner with a powerful header that gave Jensen no chance.

Chris Eagles fired wide late on but Cech seemed to have it covered. A professional performance in chilly Lancashire from Chelsea and one that opens up a decent buffer at the league’s summit.