MARTIN SAMUEL
Bobby Moore was no Judas when he left for a new club ... neither is Terry
Captain, leader, legend… Judas? is that how John terry is destined to be remembered, if he has the temerity to seek a career beyond his Chelsea years? Will 713 games as the most decorated player at the club and heartbeat of their modern existence count for nothing if he so much as plays a year at, say, Bournemouth?
as for another London team, or a title rival — heaven forbid. For those demanding his absolute loyalty, it is as if nothing will do unless terry sacrifices all control over his career. it is not his call when he stops, but theirs. now Chelsea have no use for him, he either gives up or continues in disgrace. it wasn’t always this way.
nobody at West Ham considered Bobby Moore a Judas. not at the Fa Cup final in 1975, not even when knocking his old club out of the League Cup some months earlier. October 8, 1974: Fulham 2 West Ham 1. the tie was Moore’s first match against West Ham, the second being his last game at Wembley the following May, when West Ham beat Fulham 2-0 to win the Fa Cup.
Moore wasn’t resented for either appearance. He didn’t have to apologise for continuing a career, nor was he expected to snub the celebrations if his new team won. there is no account of him shuffling away sheepishly when Fulham beat West Ham in the League Cup third round, either.
it was a game of football, he was a footballer. He played, he won, he was happy for his team. What else was he expected to do?
nor is the support at West Ham exceptionally understanding. Frank Lampard and paul ince will testify to that. it was the times that were different. Fans were realistic about career footballers. they recognised men that were paid to play.
So why the surprise that has greeted terry’s decision to seek a swansong with another premier League club? Why this sense of entitlement, of ownership? it is perfectly plain there is no future for terry as a Chelsea player, so how is he being disloyal or disrespectful?
Chelsea have sacked Jose Mourinho, twice. that’s one less time than he won the title there, which he has done two more times than any other Chelsea manager. So they’ve got their value from him, it can be said.
Yet when Mourinho returned with Manchester United for an Fa Cup tie last month, a section of the crowd taunted him with cries of ‘Judas’ throughout. How ridiculous. What was he supposed to do after December 17, 2015? Give up coaching? Look only for positions that would never bring him into conflict with a former employer?
Mourinho would not have resigned as Chelsea manager. He loved it there. His only permanent residence in England is in London. He as good as turned Manchester United down when Sir alex Ferguson left, to return to Chelsea the second time.
So it was entirely their call. Chelsea rejected him. Roman abramovich dumped him: twice. How is he then the traitor?
there is a lot of talk about player power, but it is a fallacy for those at the end of their careers. Few have less power than an ageing footballer — ask Zlatan ibrahimovic, whose contract at Manchester United will run out while he recovers from a cruciate ligament injury and who may, as a result, be bundled unceremoniously towards a career in the comparative backwaters of Major League Soccer.
if any end demonstrates the fragile hold on professional destiny — for even the proudest and greatest — it is that.
So, once antonio Conte found a way of succeeding without terry, he was largely redundant — but that is not the same as being finished. terry clearly thinks he can still play at a good level and so, it seems, do a strong field of suitors. Why should Chelsea then get to decide when his career ends?
We used to be much more grown-up about this. there was always admiration for the loyalty of one-club men, but also appreciation that the option was not available to all.
West Ham decided they did not need Moore (below), in a way they never did Sir trevor Brooking. By the time Moore had reached the age at which Brooking retired he had played 125 matches for Fulham and was with San antonio thunder in the United States. Some want, or need, that.
Jimmy Greaves carried on dropping through the divisions having made a recovery from alcoholism — Brentwood, Chelmsford, Barnet, Woodford town. a player decides.
Maybe when so much about the modern game is transient, supporters cling to the few constants. Yet much of loyalty concerns opportunity. Ryan Giggs and paul Scholes were at the best club in the country, in and around the team to the end.
Gary neville played his entire career at Manchester United and, when he was finished with them, was probably done at the elite level too. is he therefore more loyal than his brother, phil, who United decided was surplus to requirements at 28? phil remains a United man, despite playing almost as many games for Everton. United left him; Chelsea are leaving terry.
He can still be a Stamford Bridge legend, even if he returns in the colours of another club. it does not alter what he has given Chelsea, or what Chelsea gave him. terry’s no traitor; he is just a professional footballer. no shame in that. FOLLOWING his appalling outbursts at the Federation Cup on Saturday, Ilie Nastase should not be let near a major international tennis tournament again. The same goes for George Cosac, president of the Romanian Tennis Federation, who thought Nastase was a suitable person to captain at a women’s event.