Chelsea Lodge Complaint Against Mark Clattenberg

Pudsy33

smokedeels wrote: »

I've seen numerous interviews conducted in English with Mata, dude speaks fluent English.

I don't buy it, unless Clattenburg was being deliberately condescending or was feigning a lack of comprehension to avoid the discussion.

What I posted could be absolute crap btw.

However I agree with you, if it was what was said it seems very strange.

JimsAlterEgo

smokedeels wrote: »

I've seen numerous interviews conducted in English with Mata, dude speaks fluent English.

I don't buy it, unless Clattenburg was being deliberately condescending or was feigning a lack of comprehension to avoid the discussion.

or Mata was deliberately pretending not to understand him then the comment doesn't seem as bad

geeky

amiable wrote: »

Clattenburg is saying he was threatened to have his legs broken according to some papers

He'd know about that sort of stuff. :pac:

I know, cheap shot.

I don't think the issues surrounding his past sacking should affect the handling of this case. But it does show that he doesn't always engage his brain before saying/typing things.

Pudsy33

Pudsy33 wrote: »

He is alleged to have said "It's not my fault you're Spanish" to Mata, suggesting the language barrier was a problem.

Stick up a link for this if you have it.

Without quotes it's meaningless

Leiva

Thank goodness this has feck all to do with LFC.

It's good to be watching the drama rather than being part of it.:D

osarusan

Irish times reporting that Chelsea examined the allegations carefully before decising to make a formal complaint.

Senior Chelsea players spoke to Mikel, the Nigeria midfielder, and asked him if he was absolutely certain that he had heard Clattenburg correctly in the flashpoint that followed Javier Hernandez’s controversial winning goal for United, when Mikel was booked for dissent.

It was even discussed whether there might have been a misunderstanding that related to Clattenburg’s north-east accent. Everybody at Chelsea is acutely sensitive to the severity of the allegation, particularly in the wake of the club captain John Terry’s four-match FA suspension for racially abusing Queens Park Rangers’ Anton Ferdinand last October.

With tensions running high, Mikel was adamant he had been wronged and it is understood that three or four of his team-mates were ready to support him; the Brazil midfielder Ramires is one of them. Juan Mata, the Spain midfielder, also felt that Clattenburg had directed offensive language towards him and it is a key aspect of Chelsea’s grievance that the referee is accused of using “inappropriate” language on separate occasions to different players.

Clattenburg, who has yet to comment on the allegations but is said by the Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) to welcome “the opportunity for the facts to be established”, has been stood down from taking charge of a game this weekend.

Roberto Di Matteo, the Chelsea manager, emerged late for his post-match press conference as he had been to see Clattenburg, as did Mikel, to confront him over the allegations. The Chelsea squad remained at the stadium for two hours after full-time while the club carried out an investigation to establish the facts before they made their formal complaint to the football authorities at 8pm.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/1030/1224325895389.html

Leftist

It's absolute rubbish and trust mikel to completely undermine the anti-racism campaign, you have evra and ferdinand booed for daring to report actual racist remarks and this clown has reported racism from a ref? how absolutely stupid would a referee need to be to racially insult a player? it's ridiculous.

Leftist

Leftist wrote: »

It's absolute rubbish and trust mikel to completely undermine the anti-racism campaign, you have evra and ferdinand booed for daring to report actual racist remarks and this clown has reported racism from a ref? how absolutely stupid would a referee need to be to racially insult a player? it's ridiculous.

Hold on, do you know what was said?

I haven't seen anything reported yet.

ROCKMAN

Paully D wrote: »

Any lip readers on here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzOriUTAkkA

I know the video is short but if this is the moment that Mata feels insulted by, his body language and reaction doesn't really show it....Just my opinion...

GavRedKing

Always liked Clattenberg, thought he was one of the better ref's in the league.

Be interesting to see what comes out about this though.

quad_red

If Clattenberg has said these things, then he is finished.

But it's a sad state of affairs. Being chased around the pitch by 22 screaming cheats who abuse you for every decision, no matter how clearcut, must be awful.

Rugby has showed how to address these. Have the ref's mic as an open feed and totally clamp down on *any* abuse from players.

All this hand wringing about what could/should be done is pathetic.

Leftist

shame he didn't have his mic on. mikel has chosen to take offense to something because he's angry at the referee's decision.

I just cannot for a moment, imagine a referee at that level would be stupid enough to use racist language to insult a player.

Essien

Leftist wrote: »

shame he didn't have his mic on. mikel has chosen to take offense to something because he's angry at the referee's decision.

I just cannot for a moment, imagine a referee at that level would be stupid enough to use racist language to insult a player.

A lot of us couldn't believe players at that level were thick enough to do it either, but clearly they are, I don't know what makes you think refs are above it.

Duck Soup

Apparently, the 'Spanish twat' remark wasn't heard by Mata, but was heard by at least two other players. The contentious one is of course the racial slur against Mikel. Reports are saying that the club management sat down with Mikel directly after the game to make sure that he knew exactly what was said and he didn't misinterpret Clattenburg's strong North Eastern accent (Clattenburg's originally from Durham).

Unlike a lot of posters here, I have to say there's likely to be something in it. First off, one incident might be an I-say-he-says issue; two separate reported incidents make it more likely that Clattenburg's nerve cracked under the pressure from players and fans after the Brana sending off. Both incidents happened after the first sending off and Clattenburg was getting it in the ear from the Chelsea players.

There's no way this ends well. Whatever about the Mikel remark - I'm not sure if it happened on the pitch or in the referees' dressing room - there are at least two players who have given statements about the Mata remark, which happened during the game when all the refs were mic-ed up. So whatever way that one's decided, it will make either 2 or 3 players liars or 2 or 3 match official liars.

But whatever happens, it has to be looked into.

TheDoc

One of the Referee Associations delegates is quoted as saying he has seen the complaint and the alleged insult, and when he read it he laughed at first.

Mark Clattenburg is one of the elite referees in world football and, in these circumstances, the intense level of scrutiny would detract from the match and be unfair to the clubs and the supporters of both sides.

Initially, it is insulting words and I must admit I smiled at that because we watch football matches every week of the year hearing players use insulting words to referees and then somebody takes umbrage when somebody allegedly says something back. But I just hope this can be cleared.

It's slightly ironic that players dish it out left right and centre and then if - and there is a massive if - something has been said back - and we're not talking about racial here, we're talking about like for like - then I don't think anybody's got a right to complain.

It is a joke on Chelsea's behalf going after the referee like this, and nearly sounds like a get back for the FA ban on Terry. Chelsea were getting back into the good books with many neutrals and yet again their club has been tainted and is an utter joke. They are the laughing stock of European football at this stage.

Chelsea fans need to cop on that Torres being sent off didn't loose them the match, the first red, 100% correct, lost them the match. Build bridge, get on with it.

Just shows there isn't a braincell in that club, surely they should be keeping their head down, and moving on and focusing on challenging for the title, now they have more ****e looming over them. And its just embarassing that they are making claims at "Racial abuse" , and absolute joke.

Hopefully they get fined and punished for such an outlandish complaint.

astrofool

Chelsea could be shooting themselves in the foot here, all Clattenburg has to do is detail all the abuse the Chelsea players dished out during the match (the stuff that goes on, but a blind eye usually gets turned) and they'll be getting multiple yellow and red cards per match. They'll turn their first loss of the season into an ongoing nightmare for the rest of the season.

Chelsea have an awful history in intimidating referees, they must really really believe Mikel and Mata to be pursuing this.

Sgt Pepper 64

Leiva wrote: »

Thank goodness this has feck all to do with LFC.

It's good to be watching the drama rather than being part of it.:D

Actually I heard the ref called Mata "a dirty Suarez" !:eek:

JimsAlterEgo

astrofool wrote: »

Chelsea could be shooting themselves in the foot here, all Clattenburg has to do is detail all the abuse the Chelsea players dished out during the match (the stuff that goes on, but a blind eye usually gets turned) and they'll be getting multiple yellow and red cards per match. They'll turn their first loss of the season into an ongoing nightmare for the rest of the season.

Chelsea have an awful history in intimidating referees, they must really really believe Mikel and Mata to be pursuing this.

agree, Chelsea are now going to get a torrid times from referees now, especially if he is innocent. Expect the letter of the law to applied in every Chelsea match from now on: penalties for holdings shirts, yellow cards for any backchat etc.

Sgt Pepper 64

astrofool wrote: »

Chelsea could be shooting themselves in the foot here, all Clattenburg has to do is detail all the abuse the Chelsea players dished out during the match (the stuff that goes on, but a blind eye usually gets turned) and they'll be getting multiple yellow and red cards per match. They'll turn their first loss of the season into an ongoing nightmare for the rest of the season.

Chelsea have an awful history in intimidating referees, they must really really believe Mikel and Mata to be pursuing this.

And more importantly, non one, not even the manager, should be going to see the ref after - and especially the players - thats just asking for trouble

noodler

When I first heard this I obviously thought it was just players being precious (I mean how often do we say "fcuking hell Ref", "fcuk off Ref" etc etc etc with no sanction.

Racism would be a different kettle of fish but I'd be shocked.

astrofool

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

agree, Chelsea are now going to get a torrid times from referees now, especially if he is innocent. Expect the letter of the law to applied in every Chelsea match from now on: penalties for holdings shirts, yellow cards for any backchat etc.

Penalties when John Terry is informed he's not a goal keeper after use of his arms!

JimsAlterEgo

noodler wrote: »

When I first heard this I obviously thought it was just players being precious (I mean how often do we say "fcuking hell Ref", "fcuk off Ref" etc etc etc with no sanction.

Racism would be a different kettle of fish but I'd be shocked.

was my first reaction too, something like "would you ever Fvck off?"

TheDoc

Are the transcripts of a referee's communication during a game recorded?

D. Gallagher was on SSN outlining how there is open mic comms with linesmen and ref's, with PTT to the 4th official, but he didn't outline if the conversations are recorded.

He outlined the mic's are on from the start to half time, then the resume till the end. The incidents seemed to have happened after the third goal when Mikel was booked? Surely it was recorded ( I could see the benefits for training) and if not the two linesmen definitely heard it.

And I'm going to back the ref until the facts come out, players give ref's DOGS abuse during a game which is easily seen, and there was enough occasions where the Sky cameras caught Chelsea players labelling the ref

"A f*cking idiot"
"Stupid C**T"

And more of the normal ****e.

iregk

TheDoc wrote: »

Are the transcripts of a referee's communication during a game recorded?

I'm with you on the siding with people here. I'm not going either way until I hear exactly what was said or a verdict comes out. How many times have we seen Wayne Rooney or John Terry tell a ref to "f**k off"?

Regarding the transcripts as I'd heard before and also Marcotti was confirming on Sunday the comms are not recorded and indeed the ref can also turn the mic off at any time he wishes.

TheTownie

TheDoc wrote: »

Are the transcripts of a referee's communication during a game recorded?

D. Gallagher was on SSN outlining how there is open mic comms with linesmen and ref's, with PTT to the 4th official, but he didn't outline if the conversations are recorded.

He outlined the mic's are on from the start to half time, then the resume till the end. The incidents seemed to have happened after the third goal when Mikel was booked? Surely it was recorded ( I could see the benefits for training) and if not the two linesmen definitely heard it.

And I'm going to back the ref until the facts come out, players give ref's DOGS abuse during a game which is easily seen, and there was enough occasions where the Sky cameras caught Chelsea players labelling the ref

"A f*cking idiot"
"Stupid C**T"

And more of the normal ****e.

Its not recorded. Yes the linesmen can hear what he said. Regardless of what he said, the refs will back each other if at all possible. They get enough stick without turning on each other.

amiable

Apart from the 2 Torres decisions what else do people feel Clattenburg got wrong?

GavRedKing

After not seeing the game, the only one I think that was wrong that he could have got right was the Torres 2nd yellow.

As I said, it looks like the ref'sa re taking a zero tolerance on diving which is good, but even tackles with genuine contact, even if its not that much are going to get yellow carded now, so we've gone from one extreme to another.

what a day

amiable wrote: »

Apart from the 2 Torres decisions what else do people feel Clattenburg got wrong?

I cant remember them all cause my brain is still fryed from the game but i remember we had a corner and Luiz was supposidly fouling Ferdinand and Utd got a free out. Luiz got an elbow in the face too. There was one or two others the Ref did not see or got wrong.

amiable

what a day wrote: »

I cant remember them all cause my brain is still fryed from the game but i remember we had a corner and Luiz was supposidly fouling Ferdinand and Utd got a free out. Luiz got an elbow in the face too. There was one or two others the Ref did not see or got wrong.

Genuine question but were these close calls that when 2 players are at each other they can go either way?

In my head the 2 big decisions that he got wrong were just the 2 on Torres.
I think the first yellow should have been a red card.
The second yellow Torres went down slightly easy IMO but it wasn't a dive and in no way deserved a second yellow. He was probably going so fast a slight touch would send him over to be fair to him.

Will I Amnt

Luiz got no elbow in the face and to suggest he did is a bit ridiculous if you watch it again.

TheDoc

what a day wrote: »

I cant remember them all cause my brain is still fryed from the game but i remember we had a corner and Luiz was supposidly fouling Ferdinand and Utd got a free out. Luiz got an elbow in the face too. There was one or two others the Ref did not see or got wrong.

- Luiz ( or was it Cole) handball from a Valencia cross. Arm was clearly out intruding the flight of the ball, penalty.

- Luiz elbow in Van Persie, numerous times, including what was essentially a full force punch.

- Cahill dragging Evans to the ground during a corner

- Torres first booking, should have been a straight red.

- Torres second booking, I'm still undecided, there was contact, but he had a dive aswell knowing Ferdinand was getting there before him.

- Chico third goal.


The handball, Torres first booking and the Chico goal were my main gripes on decisions. Other then that, it is just the normal ****e, but Luiz also could have had himself sent off if the ref caught the punch. (shortly afterwards RVP dropped him an elbow)

TheDoc

cambo2008 wrote: »

Luiz got no elbow in the face and to suggest he did is a bit ridiculous if you watch it again.

He got a pretty solid elbow in fairness, but it was only after he had given Van Persie a dig in the head, to which he barely flinched at bar giving him some awful stare. Trying to find gif I was looking at the other night, its brillaint

amiable

To be fair to the ref it's hard to blame him for the offside goal

astrofool

Clattenburg couldn't do anything about the third goal, it was also a pretty difficult decision for the linesman to make given that they were coming onto the pitch, and the goalkeeper was in the way.

Will I Amnt

He didn't swing an elbow at him. It was an arm out and it connected with him. To say he got an elbow, would be to use the noun and not the verb.

what a day

Luiz def got caught in the face.... typicall i didn see the RVP punch

The ref had a howler i cant remember all the call he missed out on or gave a wrong call but there was more than the two big ones thats for sure!

geeky

astrofool wrote: »

Chelsea have an awful history in intimidating referees, they must really really believe Mikel and Mata to be pursuing this.

This.

A club official said to John Motson before Monday's 5 live show "given everything that's happened, do you seriously think we'd make a complaint if we didn't believe it?" I think it's a point.

A lot of people seem really keen to dismiss this because it's Chelsea involved (some seem to think that having Terry as captain somehow makes players fair game for abuse ).

But consider for one second the players involved: Mikel and Mata. Neither of these guys has a history of making frivolous complaints, moaning at the ref more than most, or cheating. In fact, both of them have quite a good disciplinary record.

It's fashionable to hate Chelsea but they're simply acting as a responsible employer to two players with no history of wild allegations. What's so bloody wrong with that?

Duck Soup

Bit more detail on the Mikel incident. From today's Daily Mail.

Mikel responded after team-mates David Luiz and Ramires told him they believed he had been racially abused by the FIFA official moments after he was booked at Stamford Bridge.

Now Sportsmail can reveal details of the dialogue that is alleged to have taken place between Mikel and Clattenburg that led to the 76th-minute incident which the Chelsea players claim to have heard.

Mikel did not hear the alleged abuse, but Ramires and Luiz are prepared to make statements saying they did.

In the explosive scenes that followed the final whistle, Chelsea manager Roberto Di Matteo and chief executive Ron Gourlay had to stop Mikel attacking Clattenburg during the confrontation.

So long story short: Clattenbutg books Mikel. Luiz and Ramires hear Clattenburg call Mikel a 'monkey' directly after. They tell Mikel. Mikel goes ballistic at the final whistle. Luiz and Ramires willing to go on record as to what they heard.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2225063/Mark-Clattenburg-John-Obi-Mikel-racism-row-latest-How-erupted.html

Will I Amnt

what a day wrote: »

Luiz def got caught in the face.... typicall i didn see the RVP punch

The ref had a howler i cant remember all the call he missed out on or gave a wrong call but there was more than the two big ones thats for sure!

He definitely got caught, as I said he got an elbow in the noun form, not the verb form.

MagicMarker

what a day wrote: »

I cant remember them all cause my brain is still fryed from the game but i remember we had a corner and Luiz was supposidly fouling Ferdinand and Utd got a free out. Luiz got an elbow in the face too. There was one or two others the Ref did not see or got wrong.

Really? Is that it? These kinds of things happen in every single game.

Fact of the matter is the only major thing the ref got wrong was the 2nd yellow for Torres, but it can be argued that he should have seen red anyway for his foul on Cleverley.

JimsAlterEgo

Duck Soup wrote: »

Bit more detail on the Mikel incident. From today's Daily Mail.



So long story short: Clattenbutg books Mikel. Luiz and Ramires hear Clattenburg call Mikel a 'monkey' directly after. They tell Mikel. Mikel goes ballistic at the final whistle. Luiz and Ramires willing to go on record as to what they heard.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2225063/Mark-Clattenburg-John-Obi-Mikel-racism-row-latest-How-erupted.html

would imagine he meant it as cheeky monkey and may have even said cheeky also, if linesmen and/or 4th official conform this Chelsea would look very foolish. Chelsea appear to be taking the hard line that monkey = racism

Predalien

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

would imagine he meant it as cheeky monkey and may have even said cheeky also, if linesmen and/or 4th official conform this Chelsea would look very foolish. Chelsea appear to be taking the hard line that monkey = racism

I was wondering what he might have been stupid enough to say, cheeky monkey is quite a common phrase in the north of England, and I wouldn't consider it racist but referee should know better.

As for using insulting language, I'm fairly sure I've seen Phil Dowd tell players to eff off in the past.

MD1990

Sky Sources: Mark Clattenburg denies using inappropiate language towards #Chelsea players and has full support of other officals at the game

amiable

The Met are now involved

GavRedKing

If Clattenberg has said cheeky moneky then it does point towards some confusing about his accent and maybe his use of the word in this context.

It would be easy for a pair of Brazilian's to misunderstand what they heard as a racist remark.

Same goes for the Mata incident, if he tells him F-off it doesnt seem to much as the ref's now a days get dogs abuse but calling him a Spanish t**t could have touched a nerve and is a bit worse then telling someone just to F-off.

recyclebin

amiable wrote: »

The Met are now involved

Yeah they are predicting Chelsea to kick up a storm the size of Sandy.

Cheeky monkey?

Do adults actually say that to each other? Something you'd say to a kid.

Cheeky Monkey can be this season's negrito

osarusan

GavRedKing wrote: »

It would be easy for a pair of Brazilian's to misunderstand what they heard as a racist remark.

Same goes for the Mata incident, if he tells him F-off it doesnt seem to much as the ref's now a days get dogs abuse but calling him a Spanish t**t could have touched a nerve and is a bit worse then telling someone just to F-off.

"No way you cheeky monkey."

"I can't speak to you in Spanish, ya twat."

First of all I have no evidence whatsoever that these were the things Clattenburg said.

Both sentences are just examples of how miscommunication might occur - in both cases I could see how non-native speakers might have got the wrong message and taken it up as something far more serious.

Clattenburg has a reputation as a 'matey' referee and this may be an example of using 'matey' language with people who are less likely to understand it as intended.

JimsAlterEgo

GavRedKing wrote: »

If Clattenberg has said cheeky moneky then it does point towards some confusing about his accent and maybe his use of the word in this context.

It would be easy for a pair of Brazilian's to misunderstand what they heard as a racist remark.

Chelsea are supposed to have analyzed this before reporting it, surely if it was s cheeky monkey they would have explained it to Mikel and it end there. Perhaps only monkey was heard.

JimsAlterEgo

rarnes1 wrote: »

Cheeky monkey?

Do adults actually say that to each other? Something you'd say to a kid.

I would see adults using it in a condescending way.