I dont ever recall them playing that card
Mind telling us when they have??
Well you had Evra's lies of being racially abused by Chelsea ground staff after a chelsea - man u game in 2008 for one.
Here we go again - Clattenburg accused of racism
- Thread starter BaZ87
- Start date
Well you had Evra's lies of being racially abused by Chelsea ground staff after a chelsea - man u game in 2008 for one.
You do know its the ref thats accused of using a racist term?
Evran didn't say any such thing. Good effort though.
that's what he means. Playing the race card means to suggest you are being discriminated on the basis of your race. Not to do the discriminating.
Utd have a player called Evran?
No it was Mike Phelan that made the accusation. Good effort though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,398
- Location
- ST4
Of course I do, why do you ask?
I do hope that the FA act with sanctions against Chelsea, Mikel and co if it is proven that Clattenburg has not made any racist remark, a 4-game ban and hefty fine/sanctions against the club would be a start. Maybe then people will think twice about playing the race card.
It difficult from the video evidence we have seen to see anything untoward, find it odd that it is being reported Mata and Luiz heard the remark, advised Mikel but he did nothing until after the game. The images I saw though dont show Luiz anywhere near either Mikel or Clattenburg when the alleged incident took place.
Just a sad state of affairs if it turns out it was made up because of his performance leading to Chelsea's defeat.
It difficult from the video evidence we have seen to see anything untoward, find it odd that it is being reported Mata and Luiz heard the remark, advised Mikel but he did nothing until after the game. The images I saw though dont show Luiz anywhere near either Mikel or Clattenburg when the alleged incident took place.
Just a sad state of affairs if it turns out it was made up because of his performance leading to Chelsea's defeat.
Ah I see, thats playing the race card.
You meant something like as reported here
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...trice-Evra-Everything-need-know-race-row.html
Quote
Evra catches Kuyt two minutes later and is booked. He allegedly shouts at Marriner: 'You're only booking me because I'm black.'
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Fez, the point is, that currently, and that is a key word, CURRENTLY, players cheat constantly because, they rarely get punished/caught and the upside is goals, penalties, red cards. No downside almost all upside.
If you have a challenge system, I'm 90% sure we'll have 2-3 truly hilarious weeks, probably a game abandoned at Stoke as they have 7 players sent off for pulling shirts in the penalty box and the like. They aren't unique it will be an insane two weeks of longer games, boohoo. After 7 people get sent off, you know what will happen next week, Boss says, don't pull shirts, its a fine of 2 weeks wages if you get called on it next time, a month the time after that.
Once people realise they'll get caught and punished, that is the entire point, once there isa downside, when people are getting caught and conceding penalties...... they WILL stop fouling
2 weeks of hilarity followed by the rest of our lives of almost no cheating, mostly fair results with very few wrong decisions, only those that can't be clearly seen on replays?
Footballers cheat because the upside is massive and even missing a few games now and then for a straight red, isn't a downside, if you win 5 penalites a year and each one helped a team win, is getting sent off for diving maybe once a year a really big downside?
Firstly, I want to see 2 weeks of crazy football and people getting sent off left right and centre, it will be amazing to watch, second, the decades of almost no cheating and results that are fair is something the sport desparately needs.
Video replays will lead to less cheating, less fouls, less freekicks, which will all lead to less break in play to start with, and when there is a key decision a HUGE decision instead of 5 players from each team surrounding the ref for 2 minutes and the ref calling out two players for pushing while they get ready for a freekick, it will be a 30 second replay, the correct decision and the players will be 99% sure its the right decision, no complaining, no arguing, no surrounding the ref, 30 seconds and get on with it.
Yeah, you're starting to get it. If that actually occurred it would most likely be an example of 'playing the race card'.
It's pretty sad that nigh on every post in this thread has already assumed Chelsea are those in the wrong and are already fantasizing on punishments they should be given.
I guess, because they play for Chelsea, these players clearly have such nastiness embedded into their system that they'd want an innocent man's career to be ended because he had a bad game that impacted upon them negatively. And the senior members at the club we already know are pawns of Satan himself; they may even have concocted the entire thing and briefed the players of it at the final whistle.
Until the investigation has taken place, the biggest, most worrying concern is that the allegations are true. It would be a catastrophe for all of football. To hope that it's not true is clearly the only course any right-minded person would take, but I fear that most people feel that way not so we can avoid said catastrophe, but more to see embarrassment and disarray heaped upon a football club they don't like.
Even if it ends up that there is no real case to answer, there are so many variables that automatic punishment of the people who made the allegations is highly unlikely. If rumours are to be believed and he used the words "cheeky monkey" (which I don't, for the record - who says that to an adult?), a phrase which players like Luiz, Ramires and Mikel are unaware of the meaning of, and even after these players were informed by those high-on-up that it's not a term with racial connotations, it's still possible that Mikel (or anybody else) felt so offended that he ignored their warnings and wanted to proceed with the complaint. Is that really Mikel being cynical, spiteful, and therefore worthy of punishment for trying to flip something so "harmless" into something so much more? Or is it merely somebody that feels their interpration of words said to them were deeply offensive?
Is it really so hard to believe that both Chelsea were right to call for an investigation, and that Clattenburg could be cleared? With this zero-tolerance to racism stance that has been hammered into everybody involved in football over the past few months, surely not following up on even the slightest possibility that he did commit racial abuse would be the real wrong-doing. I'm sure Chelsea know that an investigation will uncover the truth - why would they pursue it if they knew it was a false allegation? I hope that Chelsea were simply misguided but honest, genuinely believing that it had to be looked into, but in the end that he is cleared of the charges. I'd have thought that'd be the natural stance of anybody that cares about football.
I guess, because they play for Chelsea, these players clearly have such nastiness embedded into their system that they'd want an innocent man's career to be ended because he had a bad game that impacted upon them negatively. And the senior members at the club we already know are pawns of Satan himself; they may even have concocted the entire thing and briefed the players of it at the final whistle.
Until the investigation has taken place, the biggest, most worrying concern is that the allegations are true. It would be a catastrophe for all of football. To hope that it's not true is clearly the only course any right-minded person would take, but I fear that most people feel that way not so we can avoid said catastrophe, but more to see embarrassment and disarray heaped upon a football club they don't like.
Even if it ends up that there is no real case to answer, there are so many variables that automatic punishment of the people who made the allegations is highly unlikely. If rumours are to be believed and he used the words "cheeky monkey" (which I don't, for the record - who says that to an adult?), a phrase which players like Luiz, Ramires and Mikel are unaware of the meaning of, and even after these players were informed by those high-on-up that it's not a term with racial connotations, it's still possible that Mikel (or anybody else) felt so offended that he ignored their warnings and wanted to proceed with the complaint. Is that really Mikel being cynical, spiteful, and therefore worthy of punishment for trying to flip something so "harmless" into something so much more? Or is it merely somebody that feels their interpration of words said to them were deeply offensive?
Is it really so hard to believe that both Chelsea were right to call for an investigation, and that Clattenburg could be cleared? With this zero-tolerance to racism stance that has been hammered into everybody involved in football over the past few months, surely not following up on even the slightest possibility that he did commit racial abuse would be the real wrong-doing. I'm sure Chelsea know that an investigation will uncover the truth - why would they pursue it if they knew it was a false allegation? I hope that Chelsea were simply misguided but honest, genuinely believing that it had to be looked into, but in the end that he is cleared of the charges. I'd have thought that'd be the natural stance of anybody that cares about football.
Last edited:
I cant believe for a second that Mikel has not ever heard the phrase "cheeky monkey" in his time at Chelsea (not directed at him necessearily, just in general).
Saying that I would also think Clattenburg would have to be completely stupid to even use that phrase nowadays in whatever context (without even considering the two high profile cases in the last year or so)
Saying that I would also think Clattenburg would have to be completely stupid to even use that phrase nowadays in whatever context (without even considering the two high profile cases in the last year or so)
Exactly, if he did say something he shouldn't I am almost certain one of the other 3 officials would have said something.
What also gets me is that if someone said to me that so and so has just made a racist comment about me, I sure as hell wouldn't wait atleast another 14 minutes (until full time) and how ever long after Mikel waited to enter the referees dressing room to make my point known to said individual.
it's not so much that, it's the fact that had they have won this game and/or not had 2 players sent off, i'd bet my bottom dollar this story would not exist.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,078
- Location
- Shepley
If you have a challenge system, I'm 90% sure we'll have 2-3 truly hilarious weeks, probably a game abandoned at Stoke as they have 7 players sent off for pulling shirts in the penalty box and the like. They aren't unique it will be an insane two weeks of longer games, boohoo. After 7 people get sent off, you know what will happen next week, Boss says, don't pull shirts, its a fine of 2 weeks wages if you get called on it next time, a month the time after that.
Once people realise they'll get caught and punished, that is the entire point, once there isa downside, when people are getting caught and conceding penalties...... they WILL stop fouling
2 weeks of hilarity followed by the rest of our lives of almost no cheating, mostly fair results with very few wrong decisions, only those that can't be clearly seen on replays?
I've lost count of how many times you've made this post. Do you copy and paste it or is it recounted from memory?
You know that David Dean was vice chairman of Arsenal between 1996 and 2007 dont you?
And was vice chairman of the FA between 2000 and 2004 having been at the Football league management committee since 1986 before leaving the FA in 2007?
Despite being one of the most powerful men in UK football and a rabid Arsenal fan he was unable to prevent United winning 9 league titles 4 FA cups and two league cups.
David Dean stepped down from the FA after it was alleged he was involved in dodgy transfer dealings during his time with Arsenal.
Dein never stepped down, he was voted off following a fake story about backhanders allowing david Gill to get himself voted onto the FA board.
I wonder where that story came from?
From wiki
Dein sat on the FA Board until 2 June 2006 as one of four representatives of the FA Premier League clubs on the Football Association board. He was replaced by David Gill, chief executive of Manchester United.[11] This removal came one day after a news story broke on the BBC's Newsnight programme regarding possible infringements of FIFA rules regarding player transfers with, and loans to, Belgian club Beveren.[12]
The timing of the news story may have been an issue in the vote. The FA compliance committee investigated the BBC's allegations but did not find any breach of FA or Premier League rules by Arsenal.On 30 June 2006, FIFA released a statement claiming there was no evidence whatsoever of any wrongdoing by Arsenal in relation to its ties with Beveren. This came following close consultation with the FA which had investigated the allegations made by Newsnight. FIFA’s statement concluded by stating that “In view of these findings, FIFA does not see any reason for further investigation or for any additional measures to be taken in this connection.”[10].[13]
I wonder where that story came from?
From wiki
Dein sat on the FA Board until 2 June 2006 as one of four representatives of the FA Premier League clubs on the Football Association board. He was replaced by David Gill, chief executive of Manchester United.[11] This removal came one day after a news story broke on the BBC's Newsnight programme regarding possible infringements of FIFA rules regarding player transfers with, and loans to, Belgian club Beveren.[12]
The timing of the news story may have been an issue in the vote. The FA compliance committee investigated the BBC's allegations but did not find any breach of FA or Premier League rules by Arsenal.On 30 June 2006, FIFA released a statement claiming there was no evidence whatsoever of any wrongdoing by Arsenal in relation to its ties with Beveren. This came following close consultation with the FA which had investigated the allegations made by Newsnight. FIFA’s statement concluded by stating that “In view of these findings, FIFA does not see any reason for further investigation or for any additional measures to be taken in this connection.”[10].[13]
"I'd bet my bottom dollar", eh? Sounds like a statement of some assuredness - that you're sure Chelsea are only proceeding with this complaint because they're angry at the ref. Which means you assume they've made it up, right?
Or are you suggesting they'd have been happy to sweep some racist abuse under the carpet if all else was well? Keep it in the locker for the next time Clattenburg ballses up a game involving them? Not bother reporting something that they are 100% obliged to, even if they aren't 100% sure, because they can't be bothered to be "embroiled in another race row"?
I'm just quite convinced that after the John Terry case, the last thing Chelsea would want is to be involved in even more controversy on the subject. They'd have known before submitting the complaint that suspicions would be aroused of them because of their past (Mourinho + Frisk), as well as some people thinking they're attempting to divert attention away from the John Terry case (why would they need to? The case has ended), and they aren't for one minute stupid enough to think that totally false claims wouldn't come back to bite them on the bum - all of which suggests, to me at least, they genuinely think there is some weight in these allegations.
correct on both accounts.