A comment like this, "Sex is good, but why not in football?" coming from a certain JT would be understandable, but the wide condemnation that followed the Terry-Bridge episode was timely and
sends an aggressive message to the broader sporting world that soccer’s
moral standards will be defended staunchly from now onwards, WAG or no
WAG. Only good sex is good for the beautiful game.

In years past, this romp would have been dismissed as a casual fling, which is flashed on the pages of interested newspapers briefly and then whisked away from memory to be replaced by
another brief scandal. Not this time, as a sense of betrayal was ignited
in the consciousness of almost everyone. Betrayal is an out-of-world
trait in the land of the decent and soccer players are expected to be
heavily represented in the community of decent pals. The element of
betrayal has always been a sharpened sword that pierces the heart.

This episode has lived on, threatening to derail English soccer team’s preparation for the 2010 FIFA world Cup in South Africa. The individual players of Chelsea FC and
Manchester City were not left out either, as the enacted the battle at
the bridge with City comprehensively outplaying Chelsea 4 – 2 in
Chelsea’s backyard.

I am happy that soccer is too huge to suffer wholly from such off field distractions, but a moral compass has been set to gauge behavioural trajectory among soccer players and a
bench mark definitely instituted to weigh subsequent misbehaviour. Sex
is good but bad sex is bad for the beautiful game.

Sarah Ashley | sokaspace