Here we go again - Clattenburg accused of racism

JohnnyG said:
No it's not, it's just another load of spiteful, contrived ******** from Des Kelly.
Liverpool & Man. City fans will tell you the level of his 'journalism', notice I didn't include Man.U. fans in that, nor does he in his fables. It's almost as if he's a Man.U. fan.
There's a reason he writes for the Daily Mail.
Click to expand...

What does he say that isn't true in that article then?
 
The wild accusation that referee Mark Clattenburg hurled racist abuse at John Mikel Obi appears to be coming apart and it is taking the club’s reputation along with it. - Is it wild? He knows that does he?

For unknown reasons that seem to defy any true appreciation of justice, Chelsea rushed into the public domain with claims that this experienced match official had racially abused two of their players during Sunday’s defeat by Manchester United. - What's the exact time limit on reporting suspected racist abuse?

They claimed Juan Mata was called a ‘Spanish ****’ and — staggeringly — that the referee told Mikel to ‘shut up, monkey’. - No, they haven't. They've claimed Clattenburg used inappropriate language.

They are charges so disgracefully damaging to Clattenburg, it is almost impossible to believe the Stamford Bridge board could proceed without making sure there was genuine substance to the claims. - The Board proceeded after consulting independant legal advice.

They will presumably have known how the stigma of any such charge would hang over the official. They would have been aware of the implications for the man and his career. But they did it anyway, two hours after losing a heated, bad-tempered match. - So obviously there was gravity in it else they wouldn't have.

Only it now seems their case is based on the flimsiest claims. We are told there is no television footage. No audio recording. No corroborating testimony from the officials on the touchline wearing communication devices. And no witness who is likely to stand up to genuine scrutiny. In short, there is little proof that anything of the sort happened. - Does it seem that? Is it based on flimsy claims? Are we told anything?

Not that Mikel heard this insult, you understand. It is based on the word of Brazilian player Ramires Santos do Nascimento, who apparently believes he was able to hear Clattenburg abusing his Chelsea team-mate. - So what? Ferdinand didn't hear Terry say anything but chose to accept the video evidence.

I can't be arsed to go on unless you really don't know what's true & what's just sensationalism but you get the message I hope.
I mean he even says that a referee was smuggled out of England by police in one paragraph, utter ****.
 
The reason rugby officials don't get abuse is because they have the tools to allow them not to make a pigs ear of officiating, same goes with tennis the days of John McEnroe shouting at the umpire is a thing of the past because todays players have very little to get irate about.

Most sports today have embraced technology to minimise injustices, except for football where the officials still regularly cost teams points and influence outcomes of matches through bad decisions. I'm not blaming the officials because they aren't allowed the tools they clearly need, I can understand though why players get angry at the referees when poor decisions are the difference between winning and not winning when they've trained hard all week and given 110% on the pitch.

Pigeon_Killer said:
If he's found guilty they should sack him but my guess would be he'll be found innocent, he'll then threaten to sue Chelsea for defamation but won't take it any further but Chelsea will face months if not years of incorrect decisions as payback.
Click to expand...

I don't see how this can be resolved because there is no evidence (that I'm aware of), it's just the word of the officials against word of the Chelsea players.

I said earlier in the thread but I think that all will come of it is referee communication being recorded in the future and probably Clattenburg not being assigned Chelsea matches for a while, it's all the FA can sensibly do unless they are going to take sides "on the balance of probability".
 
Last edited:
BaZ87 said:
I agree that players shouldn't abuse officials but officials need to communicate better with the players too. Too often you see officials dismissing players as if they're 5 years old which doesn't help the matter.

And No1newts before being too criticial of players for their reactions to perceived poor decisions, remember how you felt after the North East derby:

:p
Click to expand...

I know I get carried away :)

But I don't get paid 100k a week and be on display in front of the nation. I don't act like that when I play football to the ref, venting on the net or to your mates is a different kettle of fish to the dog abuse they give them to their face.
 
Clattenburg missing a second weekend then...

I hope when he's found innocent, he sues the **** out of Chelsea
 
I like how people go on about it being impossible to find Clattenburg guilty due to lack of evidence, but seem to be jumping the gun as to how to punish Chelsea for making it up, when it would be even harder to find any evidence that Chelsea fabricated this. And fabrication would be the only crime Chelsea could possibly be accused of here - making an allegation on weak evidence isn't against the law.

Perhaps it's because Clattenburg totally ballsed up the game to Chelsea's detriment and people are assuming they're "out to get him!", but where in "making a complaint" does it become a personal battle, one whose outcome must have a negative effect on either one or the other? If you are made aware of something untoward occuring, it is your duty to report it, which is basically all Chelsea have done. It doesn't mean you're putting everything on the line in the pursuit of justice.

If he is guilty, Chelsea should be applauded for the balls to follow up with this.
If, somehow, Clattenburg is found guilty despite being innocent, it will be a corrupt investigation rather than the result of the accusers, who could've (and probably have) acted completely honestly.
And if he is innocent, Clattenburg gets on with his life, and I'm sure Chelsea won't be feeling hurt by it. They handed the case over to be investigated and should've assumed the investigation would find the correct result.
 
Last edited:
xibinim said:
Is this going to take another year then? In fact, why did it take a year for JT?
Click to expand...

Because the FA needed him toi play for England in the Euros, which wouldn't very well happen if prior to his going there they decied to find him guilty of using racist language on the field of play.

Its called having your cake and eating it. If the FA actually cared about 'Kicking it Out' and the clubs actually cared about 'Kicking it Out' this crap woul dhave been squared away within weeks, not years.

The fact that there was an independant court case in situ makes no difference. The FA as the ruling body for football in England could still make an indepedant desicion which would not predjudice any court case that was set to take place.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...erry-decision-taken-by-FA-alone-says-CPS.html

The CPS are very clear when they state they did not ask the FA to delay any actions they would have taken themselves.
 
PaddyMC89 said:
I like how people go on about it being impossible to find Clattenburg guilty due to lack of evidence, but seem to be jumping the gun as to how to punish Chelsea for making it up, when it would be even harder to find any evidence that Chelsea fabricated this. And fabrication would be the only crime Chelsea could possibly be accused of here - making an allegation on weak evidence isn't against the law.
Click to expand...

You've got yourself mixed up there.

Its extremely easy to say nothing happened- there is no evidence and past history shows Cheslea have fabricated the same lies before.

Where as its extremely difficult for them to prove anything happened, as all they have is an unreliable witness and nothing else.
 
atpbx said:
You've got yourself mixed up there.

Its extremely easy to say nothing happened- there is no evidence and past history shows Cheslea have fabricated the same lies before.

Where as its extremely difficult for them to prove anything happened, as all they have is an unreliable witness and nothing else.
Click to expand...

I think it might be you who's getting things mixed up.

FA Rule E14 said:
“A participant shall immediately report to the Association any incident, facts or matter which may constitute misconduct”.
Click to expand...
They also have a duty of care under the Equalities Act to report any incident.

Whether people like it or not Chelsea have just done exactly what they are supposed to do under the Law & FA rules when an employee has a complaint.
That's not say that Clattenburg is guilty of anything of course but just ignoring the issue or trying to sweep it under the carpet would be illegal.
 
If you're going to insist that the Club have made wild unfounded accusations then there's no point explaining what's actually happened.
If you are willing to realise that the Club have just done what they're supposed to do if an employee has a complaint then you're not beyond saving.
A player (or players depending which rag you read) has made a complaint & the Club have to (not could or might) lodge that complaint.
It's not rocket science.
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
If he's found guilty they should sack him but my guess would be he'll be found innocent, he'll then threaten to sue Chelsea for defamation but won't take it any further but Chelsea will face months if not years of incorrect decisions as payback.
Click to expand...

That would be bad, considering how many decisions refs get wrong, if they reverse those decisions as punishment, it will probably end up helping Chelsea :p

I haven't really watched the NFL for years, used to watch it a lot when it was on CH5, these are big guys, agressive, who smash into each other a hell of a lot, and I don't recall seeing guys surround the ref or shout about poor decisions much at all.

Good ref's pretty much make complaining and talking back to the ref pointless. Ref's are shockingly bad and players rightly get upset about that, decisions improve and players are less wound up by every awful decision that they also complain less about the correct decisions.
 
JohnnyG said:
If you're going to insist that the Club have made wild unfounded accusations then there's no point explaining what's actually happened.
If you are willing to realise that the Club have just done what they're supposed to do if an employee has a complaint then you're not beyond saving.
A player (or players depending which rag you read) has made a complaint & the Club have to (not could or might) lodge that complaint.
It's not rocket science.
Click to expand...

Did they have to do it immediately after an important game that they lost though? Surely it could have been investigated internally beforehand? It has turned into a bit of a PR disaster the way it has been handled really.
 
grimm said:
Did they have to do it immediately after an important game that they lost though? Surely it could have been investigated internally beforehand? It has turned into a bit of a PR disaster the way it has been handled really.
Click to expand...

Apparently they did have to, yes -
FA Rule E14 said:
“A participant shall immediately report to the Association any incident, facts or matter which may constitute misconduct”.
Click to expand...

It's only a PR disaster because of what the media are spinning, as usual.

The Club haven't done or said anything other than making the statement of 'Inappropriate Language' everything else is just hearsay & ********.
I'll point out again that the Club have done everything by the book in this case, they have to, but that doesn't make good **** material.

"This [formal complaint] is a result of a thorough investigation carried out by the club, and led by outside legal counsel, of all information available to us including interviews with a number of players and staff.
"Following Sunday's Premier League game against Manchester United, club board members were quickly made aware, upon entering the home dressing room after the final whistle, that there were allegations of inappropriate language directed at Chelsea players by Mr Clattenburg during the game.
"Board members began establishing the details of the allegations, speaking to all relevant players and staff. After those initial interviews it was clear that the matter had to be reported.
"The correct protocol for doing so was to report the incidents to the match delegate, and the club took immediate steps to inform him as soon as he was available. It was not a decision the club took lightly."
Click to expand...

I'll re-iterate that I don't believe Clattenburg intentionally abused anyone by the way.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom