Chelsea Lodge Complaint Against Mark Clattenberg

Prick!

Whatever about one case, there surely can't be 2 cases of racist abuse in one match. A referee wouldn't be stupid enough.

homerjay2005

rarnes1 wrote: »

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

Cheeky monkey is used alot by english people to one another. if you can say this to a white person without a problem, you should be able to say this to anybody else without an issue????

if thats classed as racist, then i give up....calling Mata a spanish twat is far more racist, but in essence no worse than an English person calling us all a bunch of dirty irish bas*ards or whatever.

Chelsea have nothing really to lose if it comes down to a "language miscommunication".

They have plenty to gain from the incident being reported though. It takes the spotlight off the stewert being injured.

GavRedKing

osarusan wrote: »

"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.

There is no evidence this is what Clattenberg has said, only what players have heard.

Even if Clattenberg has said what you highlighted above its absurd to say to A) refer to monkey in the same sentence when addressing a black player, it leaves the individual open to be labelled a racist and calling a guy a t**t, Mata would hardly address Clattenebrg in Spanish when hes fluent in English, if that was the case it shows Clattenebrg to be naive that a Spanish guy couldnt speak English and then insult him.

Matey or not with the players, even if what he has says matches the above its not very professional from Calttenberg.

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

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.

Possibily, but again if its Ramries and Luiz, both wouldnt have any real grasp of the Englidh language in the context that moneky was used.

Ramires, to my knowledge speaks very little English, Luiz has ok levels of English so maybe they just selectively heard " Monkey " even if it was proceded by cheeky.

Interesting one none the less.

homerjay2005

is there any video "evidence" of these conversations?

GavRedKing

homerjay2005 wrote: »

is there any video "evidence" of these conversations?

Unless Clattenberg comes out and admits he did it, it will be his word against a few players.

amiable

Gourlay and RDM are supposed to have entered the offficials dressing room shortly after the game along with Mikel.
Did Chelsea analyse it after the argument in there where security had to be called and threats of legs getting broken were heard made to the referee?

GavRedKing

amiable wrote: »

Gourlay and RDM are supposed to have entered the offficials dressing room shortly after the game along with Mikel.
Did Chelsea analyse it after the argument in there where security had to be called and threats of legs getting broken were heard made to the referee?

Clattenberg would have defininetly filed it in his report and once the FA get around to reading his match report and post-match report I'm nearly 100% that Chelsea FC will be done for failing to control players, officials following the meeting.

TBF Clattenebrg didnt have to entertain a meeting at all so whatever went on in there only added to the tension.

amiable

The society of black lawyers made their complaint to police based on the Daily Mail article their Chairman confirmed on SSN a few mins ago

You couldn't make this shït up

amiable

GavRedKing wrote: »

Clattenberg would have defininetly filed it in his report and once the FA get around to reading his match report and post-match report I'm nearly 100% that Chelsea FC will be done for failing to control players, officials following the meeting.

TBF Clattenebrg didnt have to entertain a meeting at all so whatever went on in there only added to the tension.

Apparently Clattenburg has filled out an extra report like an extraordinary incident report from what happened in his dressing room.
What business did Gourlay have being there. I can understand a manager.
John Terry arrived in there too.

Chucky the tree

Chelsea should have never let Mikel in the room after the match. Completely stupid of them.

homerjay2005

amiable wrote: »

The society of black lawyers made their complaint to police based on the Daily Mail article their Chairman confirmed on SSN a few mins ago

You couldn't make this shït up

there really has to be an emergency meeting about Racism in the entire English game and protocalls put in place to make sure the whole thing is carried out in a professional manner, this is turning into a farce and really not helping anybody, just like the tshirts fiasco the week before.

at this rate, while we dont know what happpened, its taking alot of focus off the scummish acts that happened in Serbia and giving them rebuttle tactics that they can use to darken the name of the English game.

id be of the opinion that Suarez, Terry and now Clattenburg didnt do a whole lot wrong, just got caught up in emotions and it snowballed from there but as i said, thats just my opinion.

In my opinion, every club should now have one representive on a board dedicated to equality in the game and if any incidents take place during the game, then it goes through them and not the media.

Paully D

The game is fucked. It's too late now, no going back.

osarusan

If the whole thing turns out to have been something lost due to a less than complete grasp of English*, it is confusing that this wasn't discovered during the meeting after the game.


"You racially insulted him."

"No I bloody didn't."

"You called him a monkey."

"No, I called him a cheeky monkey."


*of course it may turn out to be something much more serious.

J. Marston

amiable wrote: »

The society of black lawyers made their complaint to police based on the Daily Mail article their Chairman confirmed on SSN a few mins ago

You couldn't make this shït up

I can just imagine a few of them sitting around, one of them spots it in the newspaper and says: ''Lads, we'll report this. Sure we have nothing better to be doing.''

homerjay2005 wrote: »

is there any video "evidence" of these conversations?

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

That's the Mata one.

amiable

J. Marston wrote: »

I can just imagine a few of them sitting around, one of them spots it in the newspaper and says: ''Lads, we'll report this. Sure we have nothing better to be doing.''





That's the Mata one.

But that paper of all papers

J. Marston

amiable wrote: »

But that paper of all papers

Yeah there's that too.

How do you know that's the Mata one?

Unearthly

Hasn't it been confirmed that Mikel and Mata didn't hear it but Luiz and Ramires?

I'd imagine the decision of this case will go down to what the 3 other officials say and how in sync they are with each other.

Duck Soup

J. Marston wrote: »

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

That's the Mata one.

I doubt it.

Mata didn't hear the remark but at least one other Chelsea player did, so that suggests it was said behind Mata's back or at a distance. If Clattenburg had made either of the remarks directly to the players' faces, there would have been one hell of a reaction.

GavRedKing

amiable wrote: »

Apparently Clattenburg has filled out an extra report like an extraordinary incident report from what happened in his dressing room.
What business did Gourlay have being there. I can understand a manager.
John Terry arrived in there too.

Gourlay has no buisness really, should only have been RDM, not even Mikel should have been involved, if JT was there he again has no buisness been there have beennot involved in the match at all.

Sgt Pepper 64

Chelsea seem to be very sure there is a case to answer to


Chelsea made it clear to the Football Association today they believed they had no option but to file a complaint about the referee Mark Clattenburg and that they did so fully cognisant of the serious nature of the racial element to their case.
The decision to report Clattenburg for two incidents of "inappropriate language" - one of which was made to John Obi Mikel - was taken at the highest executive level by the club, with the knowledge of chairman, Bruce Buck, and chief executive, Ron Gourlay, in the aftermath of Sunday's defeat to Manchester United.
In private, the club are aware that their complaint has been dismissed in some quarters as retaliation for the FA charges laid against John Terry earlier this year but they are adamant that their case is justified. The club took statements from the players involved, including Mikel and Juan Mata, the two to whom Clattenburg is alleged to have made the remarks.
Overseeing the process for the club is David Barnard, the club secretary, who was heavily criticised by the independent commission which considered Terry's FA charges, for his part in the adaptation of Ashley Cole's witness statement. Chelsea have defended Barnard and regard him as the obvious candidate to supervise the process.
Clattenburg himself could be refereeing fixtures within the next 11 days, even though the referees' organisation - the Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) - announced that he had been taken off the list for this weekend's fixtures. One source said that Clattenburg "was not in the right frame of mind" to go straight back into refereeing.
The FA announced that there would be an investigation into the issue, although - as with a player - that does not prevent Clattenburg from taking charge of games in the meantime. He was at St George's Park yesterday for a meeting of the select group of referees, all of whom have been told by the PGMO general manager, Mike Riley, that they are not to discuss the case.
It is understood that Clattenburg, who is a Fifa list referee, was not scheduled to take charge of a Champions League or Europa League match next week. PGMO will consider his suitability or otherwise to referee on a week-by-week basis. The remaining three from Sunday's officials' team at Stamford Bridge - assistants Mike McDonough and Simon Long, and fourth official Mike Jones - have been allocated games this weekend.
Clattenburg has been in contact with his union, Prospect, which represents all match officials, to take stock of his legal position. Prospect issued a statement today in support of its member, who has told colleagues that he has been subject to unprecedented media scrutiny over the last 48 hours, including being followed on the motorway, having been collected from his home in Newcastle today by fellow referee Michael Oliver.
The FA has received an "extraordinary report" from Clattenburg, which is standard, given that he was confronted with the allegations by Chelsea staff, believed to have included the manager, Roberto Di Matteo, after the game. The FA will also receive Clattenburg's match report and, on this occasion, the governing body will have been contacted by match delegate Nick Cusack. The FA also spoke to Chelsea today.
The club are sensitive to allegations that they have concocted the charges. In relation to a Tottenham v Chelsea fixture in 2006, the former referee Graham Poll alleged in his newspaper column this month that "[John] Terry, Ashley Cole and other Chelsea players set about trying to tarnish my reputation by inventing stories about what I was supposed to have said to them on the field that day."
Poll claimed those allegations were later dropped. Chelsea have no intention of dropping their current complaint. Ultimately, it will be the FA's governance department which decides whether to press charges. The incidents took place on the pitch when Clattenburg's conversations would have been audible to his assistants.
PGMO described Clattenburg as one of the "elite referees in world football" but said his presence at games this weekend would generate an "intense level of scrutiny [that] would detract from the match and be unfair to the clubs and supporters of both sides".
The Metropolitan Police were last night considering a complaint received from lawyer Peter Herbert regarding the alleged incident. They have not yet opened an investigation.

amiable

Peter Herbert is the chairman of The society of black lawyers who made the complaint based on a Daily Mail article.
He has not been in contact with Chelsea or any of the players

Chucky the tree

amiable wrote: »

Apparently Clattenburg has filled out an extra report like an extraordinary incident report from what happened in his dressing room.
What business did Gourlay have being there. I can understand a manager.
John Terry arrived in there too.

Makes sense for Chelsea to go with two people so they have more witnesses. RDM goes in on his own and it's his word only.

Turtyturd

amiable wrote: »

Peter Herbert is the chairman of The society of black lawyers who made the complaint based on a Daily Mail article.
He has not been in contact with Chelsea or any of the players

'Yo Mikel, I'm really happy for you , and I am gonna let you make your complaint but the Secret society of Black legal Avengers just really need to hog some spotlight right now.'

amiable

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Makes sense for Chelsea to go with two people so they have more witnesses. RDM goes in on his own and it's his word only.

I can't think of his name his assisstant was with him too. Eddie something. Scored in an FA cup final in the 90's.

No need for a Chief exec to be there IMO

geeky

Am I the only one who finds it extraordinary that the society of black lawyers gets its news information from the Daily Mail? Its exactly the type of association that the paper gives out about.

geeky

amiable wrote: »

I can't think of his name his assisstant was with him too. Eddie something. Scored in an FA cup final in the 90's.

No need for a Chief exec to be there IMO

Eddie Newton I think. And TBH, if you think that an official from another organisation has racially abused two of your key employees, you'd want to be there as a Chief Exec.

Sgt Pepper 64

amiable wrote: »

I can't think of his name his assisstant was with him too. Eddie something. Scored in an FA cup final in the 90's.

No need for a Chief exec to be there IMO

EDDIE NEWTON FFS AMIABLE!
If you are going to talk about a club, at least make an effort man!

amiable

geeky wrote: »

Am I the only one who finds it extraordinary that the society of black lawyers gets its news information from the Daily Mail? Its exactly the type of association that the paper gives out about.

My earlier posts must have went right over your head

noodler

Would telling a Spanish player that "this isn't Spain" or something similar if they claimed a soft foul be considered racist?

Surely not?

Just spitballing here.

amiable

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

EDDIE NEWTON FFS AMIABLE!
If you are going to talk about a club, at least make an effort man!

Sorry Sgt. Trying to do a few things at the one time.:)

amiable

geeky wrote: »

Eddie Newton I think. And TBH, if you think that an official from another organisation has racially abused two of your key employees, you'd want to be there as a Chief Exec.

So you are saying within minutes of the game finishing the Chief Exec knew from the stand about this alleged racial abuse?
I find that extraodinary and seemingly he went in to confront the ref over his performance.

Even if he did know about it I think the Chief Exec should have gone down the proper channels rather than be involved in what turned in to a brawl and security needing to be called

Your Airbag

amiable wrote: »

Apparently Clattenburg has filled out an extra report like an extraordinary incident report from what happened in his dressing room.
What business did Gourlay have being there. I can understand a manager.
John Terry arrived in there too.

Did he have his full kit and shin pads on?

geeky

amiable wrote: »

So you are saying within minutes of the game finishing the Chief Exec knew from the stand about this alleged racial abuse?
I find that extraodinary and seemingly he went in to confront the ref over his performance.

Even if he did know about it I think the Chief Exec should have gone down the proper channels rather than be involved in what turned in to a brawl and security needing to be called

You seem to know every single detail about everything that happened on Sunday night. Despite multiple news sources saying many different things. Remarkable.

theoneeyedman

noodler wrote: »

Would telling a Spanish player that "this isn't Spain" or something similar if they claimed a soft foul be considered racist?

Surely not?

Just spitballing here.

Are Spanish people a separate race now, rather than a nationality??

Whatever about the veracity or otherwise of these complaints, it would make sense to have an official from 'upstairs' present when making a complaint of this nature, they should be better versed in documenting thist type of thing than a football coach.

amiable

Your Airbag wrote: »

Did he have his full kit and shin pads on?

When I was typing my post I knew someone would reply with this

amiable

geeky wrote: »

You seem to know every single detail about everything that happened on Sunday night. Despite multiple news sources saying many different things. Remarkable.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/mark-clattenburgs-chelsea-bust-up-was-like-1407220

Several papers running these allegations too.
I've implied these are allegations on several occasions.

Caveman1

Is all this about Ron Gourlay, Eddie Newton, John Terry all being in the room actually fact or is it just rumours?

Seems like a lot of people are just making it up as they go along.

Considering that Chelsea would have a whole PR team and multiple people would of being behind the decision to make the complaint, I cant see Chelsea doing it unless they thought that there was some solid evidence.

Its going to be interesting to see how the referees treat the next few Chelsea games, they obviously wont be happy that Clattenburg has been put inder this sort of media attention.

The_Kew_Tour

Well I would believe it if John Terry was there.

He knows a racist remark or two when he hears them.

Will I Amnt

amiable wrote: »

Peter Herbert is the chairman of The society of black lawyers who made the complaint based on a Daily Mail article.
He has not been in contact with Chelsea or any of the players

Seems he thinks Mata is black too

quarryman

astrofool wrote: »

Chelsea have an awful history in intimidating referees,

Cmon now. Utd invented and patented that shít.

Will I Amnt

^^^^^^Is there a team that doesn't do it???

kitakyushu

Re surrounding the ref I hate that aspect of the game so much. For the most part it's pure cynical gamesmanship and unlike diving etc could easily be cut out of the game in an instant if anyone had the mind to do so.

I'm not a fan of rugby but I'd definitely like to see it where only the captains can even talk to the ref.

Ordinary man

quarryman wrote: »

Cmon now. Utd invented and patented that shít.

They must be thanking the ref since they get all the decisons their way:rolleyes:

The_Kew_Tour

Just type Liverpool/Chelsea players surrounding the ref into google for similar results.

astrofool

quarryman wrote: »

Cmon now. Utd invented and patented that shít.

Ah yes, and it's well known that the actions in those pictures resulted in death threats against the referees or forced them to leave the game.

Soups123

Wonder if Chelsea logged the complaint because they knew they went too far with the ref after game, might have needed a stronger excuse, seems mad that two players that don't speak good English raised the issue to the effected player who didn't hear it himself! For the ref to let his guard down not once but twice seems strange.

Liam O

Doesn't Clattenberg play for United? Strange for him to be giving penalties to the opposition.

sReq | uTeK

Soups123 wrote: »

Wonder if Chelsea logged the complaint because they knew they went too far with the ref after game, might have needed a stronger excuse, seems mad that two players that don't speak good English raised the issue to the effected player who didn't hear it himself! For the ref to let his guard down not once but twice seems strange.

I'll call bull**** on this, these refs are trained intensely never to react to players over the top antics, for a ref to do it twice in one game and in this day and age where a camera is on you 24/7 and microphones are hooked up to other match officials, honestly.

Perhaps he was just repeating what the players said to him, evra apparently said he can back this up as has ferdinand