Can you not read? it quite clearly states that they have apologised for releasing peroncells "personal information" which was found out to be false.
If it really is an apology then they would be forced to make it to both of them. where is terry's apology?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/7102733/Judge-lifts-super-injunction-over-John-Terry-affair-with-team-mates-girlfriend.html
Clear as day! ask yourself this....if it wasnt true, why would he not just sue the newspaper? he didnt because it happened...deal with it!
The links you provided are apologies to peroncel for breaching her privacy and printing lies about her private life, not about the affair
Can you not read? it quite clearly states that they have apologised for releasing peroncells "personal information" which was found out to be false.
If it really is an apology then they would be forced to make it to both of them. where is terry's apology?
--------------------------------------------------------------
OMG another one.
The bit where it says "it was untrue in any case" is referring to her "alleged affair with the footballer John Terry".
If it was just an apology for releasing incorrect personal information then why would the newspapers mention anything about the alleged affair with Terry ?
Think about it.
When newspapers are forced to backtrack and issue apolgies they always say the minimum that they have to.
we published some personal information about Vanessa Perroncel in articles concerning an alleged affair with the footballer John Terry.
The bit you keep missing out on is: "we published some personal details about vanessa peroncell". Published in the article about the affair.
At no point do they say the affair didnt happen.
My god you are thick.
if they lied they would apologise to both of them...they would have to or get sued.
they didnt....terry didnt sue...he had an affair....get over it
"some personal information about Vanessa Perroncel in articles concerning an alleged affair with the footballer John Terry..........and it was untrue in any case".
If you can't accept that as an apology for allegations of an alleged affair then you are simply being stubborn in order to cling onto a false idea.
FFS, you are a pleb!
How come none of the other papers that reported the affair, but not peroncels personal details, were forced to apologise?
lucas leiva
Why would they mention John Terry in their apology, as SuperbFrank said, they mention as little as possible.
Next you will be telling us that he didn't abuse American's after 9/11, hasn't been charged with assault, didn't urinate on a night club floor, hasn't had an injunction because of the affair, did't rent his wembley box out for cash or organise secret tour of chelsea, again for cash.
He's such a saint and of course he definitely isn't a racist.
Why would they mention John Terry in their apology, as SuperbFrank said, they mention as little as possible.
is that a serious question? if it is then its not even worth an answer
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/terrys-affair-with-team-mates-girlfriend-revealed-1883649.html
No apology!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/7102733/Judge-lifts-super-injunction-over-John-Terry-affair-with-team-mates-girlfriend.html
No apology!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1246974/John-Terry-named-star-affair-Wayne-Bridges-ex-girlfriend-Vanessa-Perroncel.html
No apology!
He's such a saint and of course he definitely isn't a racist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are we talking about Gerrard here?
You berl lucas.All those links are about the initial story for which they LATER apologised.They can't apologise before they were proven wrong.
You complete loolaa
He's such a saint and of course he definitely isn't a racist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Or are we talking about Suarez?
You berl lucas.All those links are about the initial story for which they LATER apologised.They can't apologise before they were proven wrong.
You complete loola
please, show me where the above papers apologised.....you "berl"!!??
FFS
Are you really this dim?
An apology comes weeks after the story,it is not part of the story.
He took out a super injuction just for a laugh
OP
Another one people fail to recognise is that Mikel did not cost us 16M.We sued and got some back.If you marry this up with the financials that year it seems we got just over 10.34M back.
First we sued for 16M Oct 2008
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=580660&sec=england&cc=5901
Settled later December 2008
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=598191&sec=england&cc=5901
FFS
Are you really this dim?
An apology comes weeks after the story,it is not part of the story.
I guess we are still waiting for some of the apologies then?
its a good job there are only a couple of chelsea fans commenting on this as you are not doing a lot to display the intelligence of an average cheslea fan.
If you cannot accept that terry had an affair then there really is nothing going upstairs. its quite obvious for someone with even an ounce of intelligence to see what the op's article ACTUALLY means.
It does not for one minute apologise for accusing terry of having an affair
He took out a super injuction just for a laugh
----------------------------------------------------------
Just like Giggs you mean?
Now what is worse,shaaaagging your ex.teammate´s ex girlfriend or shaaaging your brother´s wife?
Tricky one heh?
Giggs was a piece of class that guy is!
Judging by some of these replies there are clearly some people around who would argue that the world is flat if it suited their utterly biased and one-sided motives.
Hilarious really.
Sign in if you want to comment
Why do some people find it so hard to
Page 1 of 5
posted on 28/10/11
posted on 28/10/11
posted on 28/10/11
Can you not read? it quite clearly states that they have apologised for releasing peroncells "personal information" which was found out to be false.
If it really is an apology then they would be forced to make it to both of them. where is terry's apology?
posted on 28/10/11
posted on 28/10/11
hes still a tool though
posted on 28/10/11
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/7102733/Judge-lifts-super-injunction-over-John-Terry-affair-with-team-mates-girlfriend.html
Clear as day! ask yourself this....if it wasnt true, why would he not just sue the newspaper? he didnt because it happened...deal with it!
The links you provided are apologies to peroncel for breaching her privacy and printing lies about her private life, not about the affair
posted on 28/10/11
Can you not read? it quite clearly states that they have apologised for releasing peroncells "personal information" which was found out to be false.
If it really is an apology then they would be forced to make it to both of them. where is terry's apology?
--------------------------------------------------------------
OMG another one.
The bit where it says "it was untrue in any case" is referring to her "alleged affair with the footballer John Terry".
If it was just an apology for releasing incorrect personal information then why would the newspapers mention anything about the alleged affair with Terry ?
Think about it.
When newspapers are forced to backtrack and issue apolgies they always say the minimum that they have to.
posted on 28/10/11
we published some personal information about Vanessa Perroncel in articles concerning an alleged affair with the footballer John Terry.
The bit you keep missing out on is: "we published some personal details about vanessa peroncell". Published in the article about the affair.
At no point do they say the affair didnt happen.
My god you are thick.
posted on 28/10/11
if they lied they would apologise to both of them...they would have to or get sued.
they didnt....terry didnt sue...he had an affair....get over it
posted on 28/10/11
"some personal information about Vanessa Perroncel in articles concerning an alleged affair with the footballer John Terry..........and it was untrue in any case".
If you can't accept that as an apology for allegations of an alleged affair then you are simply being stubborn in order to cling onto a false idea.
posted on 28/10/11
FFS, you are a pleb!
How come none of the other papers that reported the affair, but not peroncels personal details, were forced to apologise?
posted on 28/10/11
lucas leiva
Why would they mention John Terry in their apology, as SuperbFrank said, they mention as little as possible.
posted on 28/10/11
Next you will be telling us that he didn't abuse American's after 9/11, hasn't been charged with assault, didn't urinate on a night club floor, hasn't had an injunction because of the affair, did't rent his wembley box out for cash or organise secret tour of chelsea, again for cash.
He's such a saint and of course he definitely isn't a racist.
posted on 28/10/11
Why would they mention John Terry in their apology, as SuperbFrank said, they mention as little as possible.
is that a serious question? if it is then its not even worth an answer
posted on 28/10/11
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/terrys-affair-with-team-mates-girlfriend-revealed-1883649.html
No apology!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/7102733/Judge-lifts-super-injunction-over-John-Terry-affair-with-team-mates-girlfriend.html
No apology!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1246974/John-Terry-named-star-affair-Wayne-Bridges-ex-girlfriend-Vanessa-Perroncel.html
No apology!
posted on 28/10/11
He's such a saint and of course he definitely isn't a racist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are we talking about Gerrard here?
posted on 28/10/11
You berl lucas.All those links are about the initial story for which they LATER apologised.They can't apologise before they were proven wrong.
You complete loolaa
posted on 28/10/11
He's such a saint and of course he definitely isn't a racist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Or are we talking about Suarez?
posted on 28/10/11
You berl lucas.All those links are about the initial story for which they LATER apologised.They can't apologise before they were proven wrong.
You complete loola
please, show me where the above papers apologised.....you "berl"!!??
posted on 28/10/11
FFS
Are you really this dim?
An apology comes weeks after the story,it is not part of the story.
posted on 28/10/11
He took out a super injuction just for a laugh
posted on 28/10/11
OP
Another one people fail to recognise is that Mikel did not cost us 16M.We sued and got some back.If you marry this up with the financials that year it seems we got just over 10.34M back.
First we sued for 16M Oct 2008
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=580660&sec=england&cc=5901
Settled later December 2008
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=598191&sec=england&cc=5901
posted on 28/10/11
FFS
Are you really this dim?
An apology comes weeks after the story,it is not part of the story.
I guess we are still waiting for some of the apologies then?
its a good job there are only a couple of chelsea fans commenting on this as you are not doing a lot to display the intelligence of an average cheslea fan.
If you cannot accept that terry had an affair then there really is nothing going upstairs. its quite obvious for someone with even an ounce of intelligence to see what the op's article ACTUALLY means.
It does not for one minute apologise for accusing terry of having an affair
posted on 28/10/11
He took out a super injuction just for a laugh
----------------------------------------------------------
Just like Giggs you mean?
Now what is worse,shaaaagging your ex.teammate´s ex girlfriend or shaaaging your brother´s wife?
Tricky one heh?
Giggs was a piece of class that guy is!
posted on 28/10/11
Judging by some of these replies there are clearly some people around who would argue that the world is flat if it suited their utterly biased and one-sided motives.
Hilarious really.
Page 1 of 5