clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

John Terry and Chelsea annoy a politician

New, comments
Paul Gilham

John Terry's clash with Anton Ferdinand has now managed to worm its way into the bizarre world of local politics. Sutton City Council are paying Chelsea some £60,000 to promote Sutton Life Centre*, but now, thanks to a combination of the FA's guilty verdict and the fact that Terry still captains the side, Councilor Tim Crowley wants a take backsies (he's not going to get it, probably):

Does the council still think it is right to align itself with a club that rewards and tolerates these actions?

Can I ask what sort of an example will it set to youngsters if we continue to pursue our affiliation with the club through our tie up with Chelsea?

It's be easy to go all up in arms about this one, but, to be honest, it's pretty hard to blame them. Chelsea have, as captain, a man found guilty by the FA (but not the courts, obviously) of racism. That's not a good example to be setting to youth, and I'll concede that whether I'm a supporter or not.

That said, i do have one nit to pick -- if Chelsea were 'rewarding' Terry for his actions, they probably wouldn't have taken disciplinary action against him. That part reads like rather unfortunate rhetoric on Mr. Crowley's part, as does his refusal to acknowledge the club's continuing relationship with organisations such as Kick it Out, with whom the Blues just renewed their partnership.

Also I think that the club should avoid any association with Sutton. We know how that turned out last time.

*No word on how much they're paying me for this post promoting Sutton Life Centre. I assume I'll be getting a cheque in the post.