No logical reason for sacking Terry
John Terry has made his way into the headlines again, and now the British public want his head on a pike. His exploits when he was younger have been ignored, as have his mothers and step mothers theft, his fathers supposed drug dealing and his secret tours of Cobham training ground.
Now that the alleged affair with former team mate Wayne Bridge’s girlfriend has come into focus, surely the centre half will be forced to step back from his position. It is entirely foreseeable that the players among the England squad will have lost some of the respect they have for John Terry, and this can only lead to John Terry being stripped of the captaincy with just months to go before the World Cup.
The aforementioned ‘offences’ regarding his family, and other personal exploits in his past have become fuel for the ‘witch-burning’ fire of John Terry by the executioners that are the consumers of the tabloids.
But this has all got to be ignored in the public trial of John Terry for two reasons. Initially because he is not in any way responsible for the actions of his family, or what they do in their own time. And secondly because the ethical judgement of John Terry questions him as a person, and not as a leader or a footballer.
This brings me onto my next point, which questions two factors within the dismissal of John Terry from his role as England captain. The first questioning the legal, and the other questioning the moral elements of the decision.
Legally, there are no grounds in which to demote John Terry. The idea of an affair within football is not a new one, and it is common knowledge that the F.A have admitted in the past to the affairs of Sven Goran Eriksson and chief executive Mark Palios with a secretary within the F.A. Neither of these people received any punishment and because of this to call upon John Terry to step down would be entirely hypocritical, and contradictory to prior precedent, upon which law is based.
So the question as to John Terry’s captaincy is an entirely moral one, and subjective to each individual person. The only question that needs to be asked is that can John Terry (the player, not the person) do the job of organising the England team on the pitch as well as he could before.
When John Terry says ‘step up’ whilst defending a free-kick, are the rest of the team going to do so, or are they going to question John Terry’s judgement of the foreseeable events within that situation because he was unable to judge the foreseeable events within his private life.
When John Terry says, ‘Gareth on Donovan’, is Gareth Barry going to question John Terry’s call as the best defender in the world? Or will he think “hmm, maybe John Terry’s knowledge of football has suddenly taken an obscure and massive downturn because of his inability to control his personal life”. The answers are incredibly obvious, the team will step up, and Gareth Barry will mark Landon Donovan.
So my answer to the original question is that as long as the players that he stands alongside are logical and professional within their concept of John Terry – the footballer, then there is no reason why Terry shouldn’t be as competent as he was before.
If however it was decided that morally John Terry is unfit to captain the England side, because of a lack of respect for him solely due to his moral mistakes within his personal life, and England were required to choose a new, morally just captain, then we would run into problems.
Because the point raised here isn’t the extent to the moral misdemeanours, it’s simply that a moral misdemeanour can lead to an inability to take captaincy. Based on the fact that the players ability to understand football is diminished by events within their social life. Steven Gerrard was involved in a well-publicised court case, Wayne Rooney was involved with prostitutes and Rio Ferdinand was given a substantial ban because of a missed drugs test. If John Terry’s supposed inability to captain a side is based around his social life, then why not of the others?
I have no doubt in my mind that John Terry is the best centre half in England, probably in the world, and that he is the strongest and most influential leader that the England team has. But throughout this article I have assumed a logical and somewhat scientific approach to the situation. There is no ‘logical’ explanation as to why John Terry’s personal life should affect how he leads his team, and how his team reacts to him as a captain, as long as they think of him as a footballer.
But I am not in a football team; I don’t fully understand the relationship between that of a player and of a captain, and if the link that makes John Terry so very influential has been broken because of a loss of respect for him, then maybe Capello should search for a new captain.
Nevertheless this topic is completely subjective to each individual, to the team they support and to the players they prefer. A Liverpool fan might strive to see the prospect of Steven Gerrard lifting the World Cup for the first time in 44 years, rather than that of a Chelsea centre back, and the same can be said for a Manchester United fan in regards to Wayne Rooney or Rio Ferdinand. In an ideal world I’m sure we would all love to say that our opinion regarding a supposed offence would be consistent regardless of the perpetrator, but this is not necessarily true.
Luckily, the man making the decision is not, to my knowledge a fan of any specific English club, and his decision will be a completely professional and neutral one. He will speak to the senior players and staff and assess the situation; if the England team can deal with Terry’s actions and continue in a professional manner, then he will stay as captain.
If the bond between captain and colleagues is broken, Capello will do whatever is best for England, and there can be no arguments with his decision.
Football News 24/7
Your argument – that Capello should judge Terry solely on his ability to lead the England team and not on morality – is sound.
The comparison with Gerrard, Rooney and Ferdinand is not. In the case of the two United players, their misdemeanour was at least 5 years ago (each) and both have displayed a remarkable maturity in their on and off-field actions since then.
And if we’re comparing misdemeanours, Gerrard, Rooney and Ferdinand each have one or two ‘off-field’ embarrassments of their own to own up to (Rooney has a brother who liked to ‘score’ by pretending to be his brother). Terry on the other hand has a list of personal ‘scandals’, if you will, all of which have been gleefully highlighted in the press.
Still, if England aren’t affected as a unit then he shouldn’t be sacked.
The thing is, Terry was picked as a captain precisely because of what would happen to the team if he wasn’t. Terry doesn’t play nice when he’s not picked as captain (remember his whining in the buildup to the announcement of England captain) and he is along with Ferdinand the best central defender in England. Can’t really lose him, unless Carragher wants to come back.
February 2nd, 2010 @ 06:331- the captain of the English national team has the obligation to have the highest professionalism on and off the pitch.
2- cheating on a fellow player and friends ex is not the proper behavior of a captain and a disgrace. The media in the UK will follow him on this story pre, during, and post world cup creating a hostile environment for the national team. Aside from that it’s treachery against one of your own players a case where your private life infringes on pro life.
3- John. Terry did 2 above therefore he shouldn’t be captain of England
there is some logic for you. Terry is a great defender but all of the media frenzy will not go over until he steps down. It also should set a precedent to these arrogant high paid players that such behavior shouldn’t be tolerated.
February 2nd, 2010 @ 07:23Ahmed Bilal – I appreciate your comments but I think you may have missed my points. I know the others ‘scandals’ are nothing in comparison with John Terry’s, what I was saying is that if his social life has apparently affected his ability to play and know football, then why has it not done so with the others? I was saying that it hasn’t, the others knowledge of football has not been affected by social events in their lives, and neither has Terry’s.
February 2nd, 2010 @ 15:13Jjbryan – The captain of the England football team has an obligation to lead his team to success as best he can.
Any other ‘obligations’ are implied and have little do to with his actual job.
The cheating is all speculation currently, and there have been new reports to suggest that the affair occurred after the split between Wayne Bridge and his partner, and that Wayne Bridge has known about this for a substantial amount of time. I can’t claim any credibility for this.
If the speculation is true however, than I refer to my points before. It should not affect their performance on the pitch.
The media are going to follow John Terry regardless of whether the captaincy is stripped, and after time this will all inevitably die down. I believe he has the mind set and mental capability to deal with it, as he showed on Saturday against Burnley; Playing as confidently and well as before.
I totaly agree with the writer,whatever happens in his personal life is his buisness and nobody elses.
February 3rd, 2010 @ 01:51” I don’t fully understand the relationship between a player and captain, and if the link that makes John Terry so very influential has been broken because of a loss of respect for him, then maybe Capello should search for a new captain”
Every time Wayne Bridge looks at Terry he’ll see images of the woman he fell in love with in the arms of the close friend & comrade he, until recently, considered one of his inner circle.
An issue festering like that in one player is bound to be felt one some level by the whole squad and whether for, against or don’t know!, it’s not what the players need in the back of their minds preparing for a World Cup.
I think Terry’s influence in the team was substantial, but something has changed and there’s no going back. The players will still rate him as before in terms of his ability, but the man they looked up to is no more.
I do play football, not anywhere near EPL level!, but I understand that if you’ve been through the experiences they have, it forges a strong bond. Especially in the era of ‘the special one’, the
Kings Road ‘Band of Brothers’ style mentality Jose imbued into the squad mean the scars from this will run deep.
It’s not so cut and dried that Bridge is an automatic selection for the squad, but let’s say he can’t be talked out of quitting the squad due to JT’s involvement. That will leave another bitter taste in the mouth of any number of players in the dressing room.
An aggravating factor is the media who will pay for all the juicy details from all angles, only compounding the embarrassment for all involved and adding to the calls for Terry to be replaced.
Capello does not shirk big decisions. This will be one of his biggest and for all English peoples critical for the best chance of success in South Africa.
I know Italian’s have a somewhat laissez faire attitude when it comes to a little extra marital slap and tickle (Berlusconi springs to mind!) but I’d say in football there’re are red lines. Spitting on an opponent is stepping over the line.
Shagging your best mate’s wife is hurling yourself as far over the line as humanly possible.
We should prepare for two scousers to be leading England in June.
S.Gerrard as skipper and W.Rooney vice captain sounds a likely alternative to me.
February 3rd, 2010 @ 05:18“Legally, there are no grounds in which to demote John Terry. The idea of an affair within football is not a new one, and it is common knowledge that the F.A have admitted in the past to the affairs of Sven Goran Eriksson and chief executive Mark Palios with a secretary within the F.A. Neither of these people received any punishment and because of this to call upon John Terry to step down would be entirely hypocritical, and contradictory to prior precedent, upon which law is based.”
There is no legal angle to this whatsoever! Appointing or demoting a captain is decided by managers/clubs/countries with no reference to any legal framework whatsoever so I’ve no idea what that paragraph is about!?
Thinking you can simply draw a line between the ‘personal’ and the ‘professional’ is nonsense. Captaining England at any sport is a huge ambassadorial role and the role model aspect is very important also.
Terry should be removed as captian or it sends out the wrong message on a number of levels.
February 3rd, 2010 @ 06:04If Terry was a real leader, a real man, he would have stepped down from his position as captain. That alone speaks volumes about his character, not about his football abilities, but his character. Obviously he had no regards concerning a fellow mate on the team, so it doesn’t surprise me that he doesn’t do the dirty work himself.
STEP DOWN JOHN!, and save everyone the hassle of cleaning up after you (again).
Stevie G, Wayne or Frankie can do as well as John Terry!
February 3rd, 2010 @ 15:49BD Condell – Legally is the wrong word, sorry. But the two authoritarian figures that have committed similar (though not the same scandals) as everyone John Terry. And they too are in places of supposed ‘responsibility’, and neither of them lost their jobs. The idea of precedent was the point I was getting at.
February 3rd, 2010 @ 16:58BD Condell – Legally is the wrong word, sorry. But the two authoritarian figures that I mentioned have committed similar (though not the same scandals) as John Terry. And they too are in places of supposed ‘responsibility’, and neither of them lost their jobs. The idea of precedent was the point I was getting at.
February 3rd, 2010 @ 17:01BD Condell – Legally is the wrong word, sorry. But the two authoritarian figures that I mentioned before have committed similar (though not the same scandals) as John Terry. And they too are in places of supposed ‘responsibility’, and neither of them lost their jobs. The idea of precedent was the point I was getting at.
February 3rd, 2010 @ 17:18Methinks the Joe Marshall doth protest too much. I start to wonder if Joe has aborted the fetus of his lovechild with his bestmates girlfriend. You cant argue the case of precedent in a matter that is not legal. Especially when it is not a related matter- 3 FA employees in a love triangle is not the same as this. I dont think Terry deserves to captain England any more, purely because he has demonstrated exactly how much respect he has for his team-mate (and one of his best mates, come to that). Respect should be mutual- as such the public, the FA, the footballing world as a whole, and THE ENGLAND PLAYERS most of all, have all lost respect for him not only as a man, but as a leader. Of course he is a top player. He was always a philanderer. Many men and footballers are were and will be. He is now exposed as the scum opposition terraces chant about. That he is England captain doesnt excuse him. Wayne Carey, perhaps one of the greatest Aussie Rules footballers of all time, was caught out in almost exactly the same situation- shagging his best mate/vice-captain’s wife. The club and the players booted him. Google him to find out how he has fared since. Pandering to a highprofile player in this way just so they play well, or dont throw their rattle out of the pram in other ways, just proves how superficial modern sport is. Being captain has never been about being the best player, but being the best man to organise the players into the best team possible. I doubt Terry’s teammates can trust him anymore. I certainly dont, and I dont have to follow him into battle. Like the other millions, I just contribute to his excessive lifestyle by having subscription TV and buying England jerseys.
February 3rd, 2010 @ 22:15hristinho18 – I assure you my protesting is entirely objective. Some very good points, but you seemed to skip round some of my points. The only argument that has been said to me, claiming John Terry should step down has been that the players have ‘loss respect’. But nobody has said how this will affect the game. Within the individual games themselves, specific to moments within the match.
Your claim that “Being captain has never been about being the best player, but being the best man to organise the players into the best team possible.” has only given argument to the fact that John Terry is still the best player, and still the best man to organise his team on the pitch.
February 4th, 2010 @ 13:11Part one: The bottom-line question you raise then, is: “Just how important is the captain on a football pitch?” Isn’t it? Let’s say Chelsea didn’t even have a captian on the team this past year. How do you think they’d fair? I’m going to assume that thier record would probably not be changed. They have all the talent. They still have Cech in the back screaming at people. They have their passionate Italian coach on the sidelines directing them. Just how important is the captain?
Part two: What if we graded captians for England with school “letter grades.” And let’s give Terry an A+ becsaue he is an excellent captain. What if we would give Frank or Wayne or someone else a B, maybe even a B+ for their effort. It’s not as good as Terry’s but still a good grade nontheless. Do you think that the difference between having Frank or John as captain will really determine THAT much what happens on the pitch? I truly don’t believe so.
I think that the damage done by Terry far out weighs the difference between an A+ and a B by a captain. Can John still contribute, and yell and scream, and do almost everything else even if he wasn’t the captain? Sure! But by wearing that band around his arm, I think he needs their respect to listen to him, to follow his orders during the battle. Right now, I’m assuming his respect level is pretty low.
Step down John.
February 4th, 2010 @ 17:40Does anybody know if Perroncel was Bridge’s girlfriend at the time of Terry affair or was she an
February 4th, 2010 @ 22:09“ex” already?
Joe, stop it. I mean it bud. Arguing the toss about such an issue leads to only one assumption, ie you’ve never touched a woman, physically or emotionally.
JT was/is a good organiser of a back 4.
Are you trying to tell me that his organisational abilities outweigh the feelings of an entire squad.
” the players have ‘loss respect’. But nobody has said how this will affect the game. Within the individual games themselves, specific to moments within the match”.
How can you be so short sighted?.
It sounds like the glib comment of some w”£ker down the pub who’s never been part of a team in his life and started supporting Chelski post Ambramovich.
He fuc£ed another players wife!.
Specific to the moments in the match is something we’ll all lament after the event, ie if Terry captains England, Bridge is in the squad and we do badly, then you’ll have you’re answer.
Then you can post another article saying,
“I’ve never played in a team before but it seemed that the players didn’t have a good attitude, they seemed a bit lacklustre and not that bothered, even when JT was trying to raise their spirits”.
This argument can be settled with one simple question.
Do you think that without Terry as Captain, England would do worse than they would with him with the armband on.
If Gerrard was skipper, or Rooney for that matter, do you honestly think it would make such a difference?. JT is a good, solid dependable player, who, like JCarragher or GNeville would put his face into a challenge that some strikers wouldn’t put their foot. I love that and think it’s a great foundation for any team.
I feel great, knowing my centre back, I play in Midfield, is a scary hard bastard who doesn’t take any prisoners. But if he shagged my girlfriend, I wouldn’t care if it was the world cup or a pub team friendly, I’d be giving him ‘hospital passes’ throughout the whole 90 mins.
Stop looking at this issue through tactical, organisational and player rating values.
He no longer has the love or respect of anyone in the dressing room.
The idea of him remaining Captain is a mute point.
The real question is, has his exploits made him a positive inclusion to the squad, or a negative one?.
If, as I think any right minded person would suggest, his recent exploits have diverted attention away fro Englands nigh on perfect build up to the W.C and in some way zapped the positive feeling of England fans, regarding our chances of getting beyond the semi’s as a strong possiblity, then even his inclusion in the squad is for me in question.
February 5th, 2010 @ 01:33Fail to plan, plan to fail!. If we knowingly take a bad apple, from the players point of view, we can have no complaints when in the heat of battle, things go pear shaped.
I wish Jonathon Woodgate didn’t have a dodgy knee!, on his day he is a more stylish defender and better passer than JT ever was, or will be.
Barnes: No bud I haven’t played in a team. Not since I was about 14 so no I can’t make any claim there. The point I have been looking to make was that John Terry’s influence on pitch (solely regarding footballing ability, and capability) will have had no effect. i.e, you know full well that if your mate at centre back did sleep with your girlfriend, his footballing qualities would not have been effected, nor would he negate to ‘take prisoners’. This was the point I was making.
February 5th, 2010 @ 19:32Regarding Woodgate, the key phrase there was ‘on his day’. John Terry presents consistency that many others don’t.
Regarding me ‘arguing the toss’ that’s what this (soccerlens) is about, displaying your perception, and receiving the opinion of others in return. I don’t necessarily agree with all the points I have made, or the points of others, but what I did here was portray some of the issues regarding John Terry’s captaincy, necessary or not.
FYI, I have been a Chelsea fan all my life, and I greatly appreciate your concern about my loyalty as a fan, and my personal life. Cheers.
Which of the points you made during this dialogue do you actually agree with Joe.
Logic was supposedly the basis of your argument but phrases like
‘what I did here was portray some of the issues regarding John Terry’s captaincy, necessary or not’!,
don’t inspire confidence that as a life long Chelsea fan and JT supporter, you’ve simply picked out some random absract and favourable points for keeping Terry as Skipper by saying his performances would be unaffected. Great, then it’s just 10 other players whose performaces might be.
His performance against Hull said it all for me.
His wife at home feeling as low as can be and he puts in a match winning performance, what a pro!.
I can remember when Lee Bowyer went through a purple patch at Leeds when his odious off field antics were front page news.
Capello was the best person to judge the logic of Terry’s continued captaincy, just glad he acted quickly and hopefully brought closure for everyone involved, notably Bridge!.
February 5th, 2010 @ 20:58I agree with the Capello statement, as I said before. Though I can’t see that John Terry being demoted is going to bring closure to Bridge. The game winning performance is what I was talking about, John Terry keeping his off field problems off the field, and not letting it effect him. Chelsea as a team have seemed to deal with it, though I understand that they are not playing under the same circumstances as England.
February 5th, 2010 @ 21:29I don’t think what I agree with is relevant. It’s just a blog, displaying some facts and figures (don’t pick at the facts and figures bit its just a phrase), the question of my fanship isn’t under scrutiny.
The right decision has been made by Capello. It seems to have popular supportst the media and across the Blogs.
It’s mainly Chelsea fans that object………and that says it all really!
February 6th, 2010 @ 05:02