The delay is far more likely to be tactical. Human beings have a tendency towards prurience, but attention soon wanders on to the next scandal. Terry's relationship with Vanessa Perroncel may no longer have the public quite so enthralled even now. Indifference towards the whole subject will work in Capello's favour if he wants to retain Terry as captain. The sole problem with that tactic may be the assumption that there are no more headlines to come. It is feasible that the Sunday papers will unleash new tales.

So far, the evidence suggests that Terry will keep the armband.

The was some good news - albeit indirectly - for Terry yesterday, as the Court of Arbitration for Sport overturned Chelsea's ban on making transfers. Although a line can apparently now be drawn under the situation, Nick Harris in the Independent suggests that the outcome throws up more questions than answers.

We know Chelsea don't accept any legal liability for any wrongdoing, because Buck told us. What we don't know is three key things. Why did Chelsea buckle and effectively "settle" if they thought they could win? Why did Lens effectively accept a compromise? And what does Fifa think about its own original verdict over a poaching allegation being found, effectively, baseless?

Make no mistake: at a meeting on 26 August last year, Fifa's dispute resolution chamber found Kakuta guilty of breaching a contract with Lens as a 15-year-old, and found Chelsea guilty of inducing that breach. Fifa handed out an additional punishment element in its ruling, banning Chelsea from two transfer windows. Chelsea appealed to the CAS over that Fifa ruling but CAS was ultimately spared a decision.

The questions remain. If Chelsea genuinely believed they were innocent, why pay about £1m to settle the case? Buck argues it was an "act of good faith and with a view to the possibility of future collaboration with Lens". Hugs all round, and kisses to both cheeks.