Is There A Public Bias When It Comes To Terry?
I find it very difficult to have a conversation / debate when the topic is John Terry, racism, and his ban. A lot of the time I get shou...
https://www.chelseadaft.org/2012/10/is-there-public-bias-when-it-comes-to.html
I find it very difficult to have a conversation / debate
when the topic is John Terry, racism, and his ban. A lot of the time I get
shouted down, scowled at and accused of being biased when I try and defend
Terry or point out the flaws within the FA disciplinary panel. Perhaps I am a
little biased, indeed as a Chelsea
fan I try and look into the defence of John Terry more than most do. That said
I also take into account all the evidence that stands against him. However,
while I calmly stand back allowing myself to be told I am biased (and sometimes
worse things), I can’t help but think that there is a great deal more bias
coming from the opposite direction.
Some people tell me I am in the minority; that doesn’t mean
I’m wrong. Some people tell me I’m nothing but a typical Chelsea fan; that doesn’t mean I’m wrong
either. The fact of the matter is that John Terry’s defence in court was more
than plausible, something that not many people outside the media or Chelsea fan
base recognise.
Despite the nine month police investigation that examined
every possible accusation and defence, and that eventually found Terry not
guilty, the FA still decided it was right for him to be punished. I’m not here
to talk about the differences in legal procedures between the courts and FA
disciplinary panel. Rather to point out the overwhelming amount of condemnation
Terry has received, without any thought lent to the possibility that maybe, just
maybe, his defence is truthful.
It was Dan Levene that gave me the motivation to write this.
He recently went through the FA reasoning for finding Terry guilty and found,
as he put it, 10 glaring errors / fallacies with their report. If you are
interested, here they are: http://sulia.com/channel/chelsea-fc/f/54c8f580-99c9-40ac-98dc-3f36bdd4620a/?source=twitter
Well, if you look at the points Dan made with his criticism,
you can’t really claim that any of his findings were wrong! Predictably though,
he was immediately met with criticism (not abuse) from fans and fellow
journalists for his perspective on the case. This led him to give this
response, which I would very much recommend you read if you haven’t already: http://sulia.com/channel/chelsea-fc/f/7016863b-9664-4ae6-8852-cce8c62fff5b/?source=twitter
It’s difficult for me to add to what Dan has said here. It
was very brave journalism from him to, as he said, not “follow the pack” and
write what everyone else was writing. How frustrating it must be to be told
that you are wrong because nobody else has written the same thing as you.
I don’t think there is an “agenda” when it comes to Terry,
or anything surrounding Chelsea (although I know
that there are some Chelsea
fans that would think there is). An agenda suggests that the media and public
are intentionally and consciously opposing Terry. What I do think is that over
the years that Terry has been at Chelsea ,
a subconscious disliking of him has grown, to the point that judgement becomes
clouded and logic becomes prejudiced. (This can be put down to his on and off
the pitch drama. That said, he is certainly not the only English international who has failed in his personal
life, yet he is the only one who
seems to have it held against him. Don’t even get me started on Giggs.)
If I, and anyone else who has chosen to examine both sides of the argument, is called
biased, then maybe those making this accusation should look at themselves and
consider whether they have looked at Terry’s side of the story in this saga,
and indeed at mine, Dan’s and anyone else’s alternative perspective on the
matter.
I’m not trying to tell everyone that Terry is innocent with
this blog (he has been found, and may well be, guilty), although naturally with
an article such as this it will seem like that at times. I just want to say
that there is a need for the public to combat there own subconscious bias. I
shall try and do the same with my own.
If anyone is on twitter and not already following Dan
Levene, then you are crazy:
@BluesChronicle
follow me on twitter: @cody_bound
KTBFFH!
follow me on twitter: @cody_bound
KTBFFH!
Fantastic article, I am a Chelsea fan myself and at times too feel that I have no say on what happens on and off the pitch. I think some people see Chelsea through tinted glasses so to speak. I just wish people would see Chelsea for the team that we are like they see others in the league like your arsenals and cities. Everyone has the right to play or watch football can't we just see it for the beautiful game that its supposed to be.
ReplyDelete