Chelsea FC: Why Are the FA Shielding John Terry from Racism Allegations?

Is racist language acceptable in the heat of the moment in aggressive sports?  Is it acceptable in any sporting arena, or any aspect of day-to-day life?

I didn't think so; well done, reader.

John Terry allegedly racially abused QPR's Anton Ferdinand, but Ferdinand didn't hear it during the game; it was only afterwards that he saw the video of what Terry was caught saying to him following an altercation. 

As soon as the final whistle blew, it dawned on Terry that he might be about to get in trouble, so he went to great lengths to try to diffuse the situation, but was unaware that Ferdinand had not even heard it. 

This Daily Mirror article highlights the embarrassing drama after the final whistle.

So why is it that Terry continues to play football for Chelsea, continues to be regarded as the captain of England, and will now go on to represent England at Euro 2012 and probably end up being wheeled around as a national treasure during the London Olympics this summer?

This remarkable situation is exacerbated by the FA's deadpan excuse that any guilt that they shade Terry with by way of a Premier League ban could bias the court case due to take place in July 2012.

How convenient.  But what happens if Terry is found guilty in July?  Will the FA apologise?  Will the FA impose their own eight-game ban as per Luis Suarez? 

Will it be less, will it be more?  Will Terry stay in the country?  Will Terry retire from international football?

Many now feel Terry is getting too prone to lapses, and his lack of athleticism is catching up with him, so his England place should already be under threat from the emerging Gary Cahill and the powerful Micah Richards. 

But England manager Fabio Capello will likely pick him for his "leadership qualities."

Tell me, though, when an entire team refuses to shake Terry's hand, does that suggest he will be a popular captain for England this summer? 

When Terry has allegedly called Rio Ferdinand's brother a racist term, do they think that might create some unwanted tensions in the England camp?

A bullet was sent by Chelsea fans to the QPR training ground, classy, but the FA do nothing. 

They jump on Liverpool fans en mass and create pandemonium by asking Sir Alex Ferguson and Kenny Dalglish to calm the fans ahead of a recent game, but was there any need? 

No, it was just a couple of idiots who got ejected.  Speaking of which, the Tom Adayemi incident has quietened down—anything happen, anyone cleared?

There's much more evidence to suggest Terry is a racist than there is to suggest Suarez is a racist. 

Yet, one person, a foreigner, gets an eight-game ban, while the other one, an Englishman, gets no ban, and the case is referred to the courts where the greatest possible sanction could be a £2,500 fine. 

The FA never gave Liverpool FC the chance to have their player tried in a court of law because they knew they'd lose it; the "evidence" was one person's word against another—no video proof of any wrong doing. 

No, they wanted to keep that in their own court, a Kangaroo Court where they could pick and choose what evidence to use and dish out whatever punishment suited them.

Conveniently, a police complaint was lodged against Terry, so the FA claim that they cannot act before that is resolved. 

Could a Chelsea-based "witness" have come forward to save Chelsea's season from a similar eight-game ban?  That's not such a wild theory.

Meanwhile, the QPR handshake story says volumes about the guilt hanging over England's captain, "Brave" John Terry.