Chelsea Lodge Complaint Against Mark Clattenberg

The_Kew_Tour

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

according to Guardian Chelsea have not made an official complaint yet

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/oct/30/mark-clattenburg-set-deny-allegations

if true then oh dear.

JimsAlterEgo

MagicMarker wrote: »

Why didn't they do all this before unleashing a shít storm?

Joke of a club.

its starting to stink, if nothing comes of this there should be severe sanctions (i.e. if no complaint made)

Caveman1

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Don't know of it's posted already, but Mikel is claiming Clattenberg called him a monkey?

I find it hard to believe Clattenberg is that stupid, he had a shocking game in the first place and then he goes and racially abuses a player with cameras there to prove it if he did..

Mikel isn't claiming anything, it was supposedly Luiz & Ramires who heard him say it and informed Mikel afetr the match.

darced

This post has been deleted.

Caveman1

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Really ? I would be more concerned that the 2 lads dont speak the greatest english rather that saying they lost the plot.

Does anybody know who was meant to have have Clattenburg abuse Mata.

FutureGuy

If it is found that these stories were fabricated by players, then the players diectly involved in the fabrication should receive the maximum punishment available.

There has to be a full investigation now. Otherwise this will hang over Clattenberg for life.

Caveman1

FutureGuy wrote: »

If it is found that these stories were fabricated by players, then the players diectly involved in the fabrication should receive the maximum punishment available.

100% agree.

I'm obviously a bit biased being a Chelsea supporter but it annoys me how everyone is already assuming that Chelsea players are lying, that Clattenburg is a victim etc.

I know Chelsea are public enemy #1 at the moment, but I cant imagine they would of caused all this fuss had there not been some foundation to these accusations.

I for one think it would be absolutely crazy for a referee to make these alleged comments, but I also said the same at the time of the Terry/Ferdinand saga and look how that turned out.

Hoenstly as a football fan I cant wait for all this bs to be done with, its ruining the game.

bohsboy

Hopefully it's a case of Clattenberg just abusing them back..."f**k off, etc". If so, I believe he deserves a pay raise.

These "pro" players should be ashamed of themselves week in week out, screaming at officials, simulating, imaginary card waving, surrounding referees. Managers abusing the fourth official? FFS, what is that all about? They should be immediately sent to the stands for the slightest moan. Disgusting. Hopefully Clattenberg just used the same language back at them. Good enough for them.

I can see a case of Premier Refs getting together and deciding to clamp down 100% on any dissent or mouthing. Expect to see games finishing with 9 a side more often. A line has to be drawn in the sand, a stand has to be made against this scourge which is ruining football at all levels.

If it's non-racial, hopefully the four officials will stick together and get their story straight. But above all, players and managers need to take a long look at themselves and their treatment of refs.

TheDoc

FutureGuy wrote: »

If it is found that these stories were fabricated by players, then the players diectly involved in the fabrication should receive the maximum punishment available.

There has to be a full investigation now. Otherwise this will hang over Clattenberg for life.

He has already contacted his Union and motions are under way to take legal action against Chelsea FC, should he wish to do so.

This is a massive defamation of character, coupled with the threats he is receiving from Chelsea fans, and harrassment from the media camping his house and stalking him to work, if they do back out he will have a very strong case.

I would just as easily assume he might let is slide so that things arn't marred when he officiates a Chelsea game, but Chelsea are without doubt, a shambolic instituiotion.

They were slowly turning me around with their new young, attacking front line, but the recent incidents have turned me off them again completely.

The quicker that club gets rid of the ****e attached to it the quicker they can be reckoned as a genuine challenging club. This turmoil will do nothing but cause distractions in their domestic and European campaign.

amiable

Caveman1 wrote: »

100% agree.

I'm obviously a bit biased being a Chelsea supporter but it annoys me how everyone is already assuming that Chelsea players are lying, that Clattenburg is a victim etc.

I know Chelsea are public enemy #1 at the moment, but I cant imagine they would of caused all this fuss had there not been some foundation to these accusations.

I for one think it would be absolutely crazy for a referee to make these alleged comments, but I also said the same at the time of the Terry/Ferdinand saga and look how that turned out.

Hoenstly as a football fan I cant wait for all this bs to be done with, its ruining the game.

Lots of fans feel like their club are public enemy #1

TheDoc

amiable wrote: »

Lots of fans feel like their club are public enemy #1

But at least the **** that comes United's way is stupid un-found conspiracy theories by rivals looking for any excuse...

JimsAlterEgo

TheDoc wrote: »

He has already contacted his Union and motions are under way to take legal action against Chelsea FC, should he wish to do so.

If true and Chelsea have not made a formal complaint it would seem there is very little case to answer

Caveman1

TheDoc wrote: »

He has already contacted his Union and motions are under way to take legal action against Chelsea FC, should he wish to do so.

This is a massive defamation of character, coupled with the threats he is receiving from Chelsea fans, and harrassment from the media camping his house and stalking him to work, if they do back out he will have a very strong case.

I would just as easily assume he might let is slide so that things arn't marred when he officiates a Chelsea game, but Chelsea are without doubt, a shambolic instituiotion.

They were slowly turning me around with their new young, attacking front line, but the recent incidents have turned me off them again completely.

The quicker that club gets rid of the ****e attached to it the quicker they can be reckoned as a genuine challenging club. This turmoil will do nothing but cause distractions in their domestic and European campaign.

Apart from the Terry case why would you say this ?

FutureGuy

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

If true and Chelsea have not made a formal complaint it would seem there is very little case to answer

Yes there is, albeit a different one to what was initially required. Chelsea need to answer why some of their players players publicly stated that Chelsea FC players were racially abused by Mark Clattenberg.

These are words that could destroy a persons career. Would anyone here like a rumour to be spread across the internet that you steal from your work? Of course not, you couldn't be trusted even if you were totally innocent.

amiable

TheDoc wrote: »

But at least the **** that comes United's way is stupid un-found conspiracy theories by rivals looking for any excuse...

I'm a Liverpool fan and think the conspiracy theories are rubbish.
I also think its silly the United fans who get wound up about it.
The top teams often get the breaks. It's as simple as that IMO

FutureGuy

amiable wrote: »

I'm a Liverpool fan and think the conspiracy theories are rubbish.
I also think its silly the United fans who get wound up about it.
The top teams often get the breaks. It's as simple as that IMO

No they don't, but they do get highlighted in the media more when they do.

amiable

FutureGuy wrote: »

No they don't, but they do get highlighted in the media more when they do.

I disagree. I think United get more generous decisions than teams at the bottom.
Not on purpose or conspiracy rubbish.
It's just logic that a team that spends more time in the opposition's box will get more penalty decisions or fouls on their gifted players that lead to red cards.

For the record IMO Clattenburg got two major decisions wrong in the game. Both involved Torres and if he made the correct decision first time around this shït storm wouldn't have occurred

Your Airbag

amiable wrote: »

I disagree. I think United get more generous decisions than teams at the bottom.
Not on purpose or conspiracy rubbish.
It's just logic that a team that spends more time in the opposition's box will get more penalty decisions or fouls on their gifted players that lead to red cards.

For the record IMO Clattenburg got two major decisions wrong in the game. Both involved Torres and if he made the correct decision first time around this shït storm wouldn't have occurred

Getting decisions wrong does not give others the right to threaten to break your legs and wrongly accuse you of racism, if that's what has happened of course.

Chelsea could have just moaned about the ref in the post match interviews and the press for a couple of days and then moved on. The sh1tstorm in CFC's own doing. They may have a legitimate case or it could backfire horribly on them. Time will tell.

amiable

Your Airbag wrote: »

Getting decisions wrong does not give others the right to threaten to break your legs and wrongly accuse you of racism, if that's what has happened of course.

Chelsea could have just moaned about the ref in the post match interviews and the press for a couple of days and then moved on. The sh1tstorm in CFC's own doing. They may have a legitimate case or it could backfire horribly on them. Time will tell.

I didn't say it does.
What I said was that if he got the first decision correct then Torres wouldn't have been on the pitch to get a booking for diving.

TheDoc

Caveman1 wrote: »

Apart from the Terry case why would you say this ?

Chelsea have a track record of acting the bollox with referees.

The Graham Poll incident has already been mentioned, but so many forget the Anders Frisk one, where he was accused of courting and laughing with Barca staff and officials, which was latter proven rubbish and Chelsea fined.

Ironically in the Poll case Cole telling a fib to backup his Captain, also telling porkies...

amiable

TheDoc wrote: »

Chelsea have a track record of acting the bollox with referees.

The Graham Poll incident has already been mentioned, but so many forget the Anders Frisk one, where he was accused of courting and laughing with Barca staff and officials, which was latter proven rubbish and Chelsea fined.

Ironically in the Poll case Cole telling a fib to backup his Captain, also telling porkies...

Do you think Ashley Cole has something to hide?

Caveman1

TheDoc wrote: »

Chelsea have a track record of acting the bollox with referees.

The Graham Poll incident has already been mentioned, but so many forget the Anders Frisk one, where he was accused of courting and laughing with Barca staff and officials, which was latter proven rubbish and Chelsea fined.

Ironically in the Poll case Cole telling a fib to backup his Captain, also telling porkies...

I cant really defend the Graham Poll one tbh but you cant deny that Anders Frisk put in possibly one of the worst refereeing performances ever. 99% of the abuse he got was off so called Chelsea fans, which can hardly be the clubs fault.

You cant blame people accusing refs of favouring certain teams, theres so much money in sport these days that you can guarantee that there's some sort of corruption in every single sport.

But to call Chelsea a joke of an Institution over one or 2 incidents is a bit much IMO.

TheDoc

Caveman1 wrote: »

I cant really defend the Graham Poll one tbh but you cant deny that Anders Frisk put in possibly one of the worst refereeing performances ever. 99% of the abuse he got was off so called Chelsea fans, which can hardly be the clubs fault.

You cant blame people accusing refs of favouring certain teams, theres so much money in sport these days that you can guarantee that there's some sort of corruption in every single sport.

But to call Chelsea a joke of an Institution over one or 2 incidents is a bit much IMO.

Obviously there is more incidents and situations, in my eyes, that make them for me, the running joke at the moment.

This team should have been back challenging for the league, and winning neutrals back onside. I don't know one neutral fan who likes Chelsea, not one.

I was excited to see them in action this season, even as a rival, with their forward lineup. I've great time for Mata and Torres, and want to see what we missed out on with Hazard.

But the way in which the club is run, is managed, how senior players seem to rule the roost, it just comes across as a oddly, poorly run club. Hopefully Hazard quickly rues his decision and turns Red

astrofool

Caveman1 wrote: »

I cant really defend the Graham Poll one tbh but you cant deny that Anders Frisk put in possibly one of the worst refereeing performances ever. 99% of the abuse he got was off so called Chelsea fans, which can hardly be the clubs fault.

You cant blame people accusing refs of favouring certain teams, theres so much money in sport these days that you can guarantee that there's some sort of corruption in every single sport.

But to call Chelsea a joke of an Institution over one or 2 incidents is a bit much IMO.

What about 3 incidents?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Henning_%C3%98vreb%C3%B8

"Chelsea defender José Bosingwa also had harsh words for Øvrebø, saying "I don't know if he's a referee or a thief", though he later admitted that he regretted his choice of words Øvrebø was believed to have been smuggled out of England by police in fears for his safety after receiving a number of death threats. Chelsea quickly moved to distance the club from these threats by reporting via their website "Following media reports claiming threats have been made against the referee, Chelsea Football Club would like to make clear that it condemns any form of threat against players, officials or supporters"

And now Clattenburg is 4.

Did anyone actually publicly say that Clattenburg used racial slurs?

Caveman1

TheDoc wrote: »

Obviously there is more incidents and situations, in my eyes, that make them for me, the running joke at the moment.

This team should have been back challenging for the league, and winning neutrals back onside. I don't know one neutral fan who likes Chelsea, not one.

I was excited to see them in action this season, even as a rival, with their forward lineup. I've great time for Mata and Torres, and want to see what we missed out on with Hazard.

But the way in which the club is run, is managed, how senior players seem to rule the roost, it just comes across as a oddly, poorly run club. Hopefully Hazard quickly rues his decision and turns Red

The same could be said about United though, usually fans only dont like a club when they're winning things.

I know Chelsea is in a bit of turmoil at the moment but I'd put more blame on certain players rather than the club itself.

Oh and you can have Hazard as soon as he says something racist

Caveman1

astrofool wrote: »

What about 3 incidents?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Henning_%C3%98vreb%C3%B8

"Chelsea defender José Bosingwa also had harsh words for Øvrebø, saying "I don't know if he's a referee or a thief", though he later admitted that he regretted his choice of words Øvrebø was believed to have been smuggled out of England by police in fears for his safety after receiving a number of death threats. Chelsea quickly moved to distance the club from these threats by reporting via their website "Following media reports claiming threats have been made against the referee, Chelsea Football Club would like to make clear that it condemns any form of threat against players, officials or supporters"

And now Clattenburg is 4.

Yes 4 incidents involving players, not the club. How many times have we seen managers come out and slate a referee after a game? Jason Roberts went off on one last night after the Arsenal game but that will get no mention, if that was a Chelsea player, another thread would be started on it.

Dozen Wicked Words

Well, Clattenberg is not suspended by the FA, Northampton Town v Bradford City have the "honour" of being refereed by him for their FA Cup tie.

Wonder how he will cope without cameras to act up to.


Edit: Not 100% confirmed by FA or Club.

Edit Edit: Not confirmed because it turns out its horse manure which local rag has now taken off its website

amiable

dooferoaks wrote: »

Well, Clattenberg is not suspended by the FA, Northampton Town v Bradford City have the "honour" of being refereed by him for their FA Cup tie.

Wonder how he will cope without cameras to act up to.

Again, how many big decisions did Clattenburg get wrong?

GavRedKing

dooferoaks wrote: »

Well, Clattenberg is not suspended by the FA, Northampton Town v Bradford City have the "honour" of being refereed by him for their FA Cup tie.

Wonder how he will cope without cameras to act up to.

He got taken off the EPL ref's list for this weekend, thats how he's end up doing an early FA cup game.

I dont think they'll suspended him until some concrete evidence pops up, otherwise its just his word against a few players.

GavRedKing

amiable wrote: »

Again, how many big decisions did Clattenburg get wrong?

2 only, both Torres yellows.

1st one could have been a striaght red and the 2nd yellow was a free for Torres.

Other then that I think he could do nothing, Ivan was a red card, he was last man, he could do nothing about the offside, not his fault.

Now if he did say X, Y & Z to Mata or Mikel thats a different kettle of fish but he got 2 decisions wrong for my money in the game, I dont think Chelsea are complaining about them as a whole though.

Dozen Wicked Words

amiable wrote: »

Again, how many big decisions did Clattenburg get wrong?

Not sure, but why "again". Don't think I have ever mentioned how many decisions he got right or wrong.

Your Airbag

amiable wrote: »

I didn't say it does.
What I said was that if he got the first decision correct then Torres wouldn't have been on the pitch to get a booking for diving.

Didn't mean it to come across like that but can see how it did. Sorry but when you say this sh1tstorm would not have happened had he got them right what your saying is he wouldn't be in this media storm of accusations had he made the right calls early on. He didn't so there is no point in discussing what might have been.

He got quite a few decisions wrong that day including the Torres tackle on Cleverly but the only flash points that are being discussed are the ones that went against Chelsea and that is because they lost and that loss is being put down to Clattenburg. If somehow Chelsea won I don't think the media or Chelsea players themselves would be making anything out of this. Its the whole controversy whirlwind that the British press loves to run with and the conspiracy theorists and yob supporters lap up.

Chelsea will have seen that Clattenburg got two key game changing decisions wrong so will fell the press is with them and their complaints and grievances will hold more weight. So they are running with it.

We could be cynical here and say its a PR exercise to portray CFC as the victims after the recent bad press they have gotten but this is basically a your word against mine scenario. Mikel will have 3-4 team mates on his side saying they heard a racist remark and Clattenburg will have two officials saying they heard nothing of the sort. Unless sky can provide some rock solid audio and video evidence this is going to be one big mess where CFC will come across as bitter liars and Clattenburgs name and credibility will be in the gutter as the accused is always under suspicion, he has even been suspended from duty now I think.

CFC have effectively planted the seeds in people minds that Clattenburg is a racist and a biased ref. He will get abuse from the stands the rest of his career over this no matter the outcome. Chelsea are responsible for this sh1tstorm 100% imo.

The bad decisions would have been discussed and would have blown over by the time next weekends fixtures roll around, hell we'll probably have a whole new host of them to discuss come 10pm tonight but Chelsea have turned this into something much more serious and the whole ugly racism row has started up again, the police are involved, will black players refuse to shake Clattenburgs hand the next time he officiates?

There seems to be two groups of thought on this, Chelsea are sore losers and willing to ruin a mans name in the wake of a defeat amid accusations of racism. The ABU brigade now have rock solid proof of their delusions that refs are biased and corrupt in UTDs favour.

I can't see this ending well for anyone.

amiable

dooferoaks wrote: »

Not sure, but why "again". Don't think I have ever mentioned how many decisions he got right or wrong.

The again was because it's been dealt with several times in the thread.
But you chose not to answer it I see.
I'm just curious how he acted up in front of the camera and I'd like you to explain that comment

Dozen Wicked Words

amiable wrote: »

The again was because it's been dealt with several times in the thread.
But you chose not to answer it I see.
I'm just curious how he acted up in front of the camera and I'd like you to explain that comment

How can I answer a question about a game I didn't see? Do you want me to guess, just so you can argue with someone else? I didn't mention his decision making did I? If you want to make up what I meant by things you work away, I am sure you will have more fun in your own mind.

Clattenberg, like most other refs in the top division are only too aware of the cameras and there is plenty of posturing and over emphasis of decisions made.

what a day

Your Airbag wrote: »

Didn't mean it to come across like that but can see how it did. Sorry but when you say this sh1tstorm would not have happened had he got them right what your saying is he wouldn't be in this media storm of accusations had he made the right calls early on. He didn't so there is no point in discussing what might have been.

He got quite a few decisions wrong that day including the Torres tackle on Cleverly but the only flash points that are being discussed are the ones that went against Chelsea and that is because they lost and that loss is being put down to Clattenburg. If somehow Chelsea won I don't think the media or Chelsea players themselves would be making anything out of this. Its the whole controversy whirlwind that the British press loves to run with and the conspiracy theorists and yob supporters lap up.

Chelsea will have seen that Clattenburg got two key game changing decisions wrong so will fell the press is with them and their complaints and grievances will hold more weight. So they are running with it.

We could be cynical here and say its a PR exercise to portray CFC as the victims after the recent bad press they have gotten but this is basically a your word against mine scenario. Mikel will have 3-4 team mates on his side saying they heard a racist remark and Clattenburg will have two officials saying they heard nothing of the sort. Unless sky can provide some rock solid audio and video evidence this is going to be one big mess where CFC will come across as bitter liars and Clattenburgs name and credibility will be in the gutter as the accused is always under suspicion, he has even been suspended from duty now I think.

CFC have effectively planted the seeds in people minds that Clattenburg is a racist and a biased ref. He will get abuse from the stands the rest of his career over this no matter the outcome. Chelsea are responsible for this sh1tstorm 100% imo.

The bad decisions would have been discussed and would have blown over by the time next weekends fixtures roll around, hell we'll probably have a whole new host of them to discuss come 10pm tonight but Chelsea have turned this into something much more serious and the whole ugly racism row has started up again, the police are involved, will black players refuse to shake Clattenburgs hand the next time he officiates?

There seems to be two groups of thought on this, Chelsea are sore losers and willing to ruin a mans name in the wake of a defeat amid accusations of racism. The ABU brigade now have rock solid proof of their delusions that refs are biased and corrupt in UTDs favour.

I can't see this ending well for anyone.

A lot of crap spuewed here. Biased opinions of an obvious anti CFC fan.

So you think Chelsea fabricated that the ref is a racist because he made two mistakes in a game we lost so we will call him a racist. Brillaint idea.

However the only thing you wrote in that scribble that makes sense is the fact that this wont end well for either Clattenberg nor Chelsea and im sure Chelsea knew this but has to back up their players.

amiable

dooferoaks wrote: »

How can I answer a question about a game I didn't see? Do you want me to guess, just so you can argue with someone else? I didn't mention his decision making did I? If you want to make up what I meant by things you work away, I am sure you will have more fun in your own mind.

Clattenberg, like most other refs in the top division are only too aware of the cameras and there is plenty of posturing and over emphasis of decisions made.

You claim he acted up in front of the cameras and then proceed to claim you didn't see the game.

Dozen Wicked Words

amiable wrote: »

You claim he acted up in front of the cameras and then proceed to claim you didn't see the game.

I claim he acts up in front of cameras, your vivid imagination is reading words that aren't there, dont think I specifically said he only acted up in that game did I, bless.

Quazzie

amiable wrote: »

You claim he acted up in front of the cameras and then proceed to claim you didn't see the game.

He never mentioned which game. He mentioned in general and I think he has a point.

amiable

dooferoaks wrote: »

I claim he acts up in front of cameras, your vivid imagination is reading words that aren't there, dont think I specifically said he only acted up in that game did I, bless.

Well seeing as we were talking about a specific incident from the weekend it was fair to think you were talking about his performance at the weekend.

amiable

Quazzie wrote: »

He never mentioned which game. He mentioned in general and I think he has a point.

I've no doubt he seems to enjoy the limelight sometimes but in general he has been one of the better referees IMHO.

Predalien

If evidence emerges that the accusation is without merit then Clattenburg should sue Chelsea and the players involved for defamation. Whatever happens his career as a ref is over.

MagicMarker

Predalien wrote: »

Whatever happens his career as a ref is over.

No it's not.

what a day

BTW lads who is showing the match tonight?

Dozen Wicked Words

Mr Clattenberg doesn't have to go to the glamourous Sixfields this weekend, previous post (edited to correct misinformation) about him reffing FA cup is wrong.

amiable

what a day wrote: »

BTW lads who is showing the match tonight?

Sky

noodler

They should make like the WWE and make Clattenberg a special guest referee for the rematch tonight.

what a day

noodler wrote: »

They should make like the WWE and make Clattenberg a special guest referee for the rematch tonight.

And instead of extra time we could have Terry and Clattenberg tag team against the Ferdinand bros

markesmith

Caveman1 wrote: »

Apart from the Terry case why would you say this ?

Let me take this one:
- Ashley Cole
- Drogba's diving and general buffoonery in a Chelsea shirt
- Chelski and the managerial roundabout
- Rumours of Abramovich literally picking the team
- Longstanding associations with far-right groups
- Death threats being a weapon of choice
- Tom Henning Øvrebø incident
- Booed and sang songs through the minute's silence for Hillsborough last season
- Ashley Cole

Predalien

MagicMarker wrote: »

No it's not.

Do you really believe this? I don't see how a referee can continue with an accusation like this made against him, whatever the outcome there will now always be a question mark, that's something that could make his job impossible. Not to mention the typical collective idiocy of football fans which will result in chants and abuse that will overshadow games he officates in.