Mark Clattenburg Quits job as a Premier League referee.

mosstin

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

That's very judgmental. You can't be doing that.

It's what people do......

Dirty Dingus McGee

mosstin wrote: »

It's what people do......

I know.

Mushy

Or maybe he's not gone just yet:

http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2017/0220/854064-clatternburg-to-ref-in-england-for-rest-of-season/

keeponhurling

I know it's subjective, but I think he is an excellent referee and that's why he got appointed for the biggest games.

Interesting though that players go to the EPL to earn big money, but a referee needs to leave the EPL to earn big money

J. Marston

In the news today for his comments on the way he reffed Chelsea vs Spurs 2 seasons ago. Saying "He allowed Spurs to self-destruct."

“I allowed them [Tottenham] to self-destruct so all the media, all the people in the world went: ‘Tottenham lost the title,’” Clattenburg told NBC’s Men in Blazers podcast.

“If I sent three players off from Tottenham, what are the headlines? ‘Clattenburg cost Tottenham the title.’ It was pure theatre that Tottenham self-destructed against Chelsea and Leicester won the title.”

Tottenham led 2-0 at Stamford Bridge and needed to win to retain a chance of overhauling Leicester. Their midfielder Mousa Dembélé received a six-match ban from the Football Association for gouging one of the eyes of the then Chelsea striker Diego Costa. Spurs were two goals ahead when that incident, which went unpunished on the night, occurred. Both clubs were fined for failing to control their players.

“I helped the game,” Clattenburg added. “I certainly benefited the game by my style of refereeing. Some referees would have played by the book; Tottenham would have been down to seven or eight players and probably lost and they would’ve been looking for an excuse. But I didn’t give them an excuse, because my gameplan was: let them lose the title.”

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/dec/04/mark-clattenburg-allowed-spurs-self-destruct-title-leicester-chelsea

Should refs have this mindset? Going into matches with gameplans? Although the way Clattenburg phrased it, talking about theatre, it's like he went in looking to influence a narrative.

grumpymunster

Wilfully putting Chelsea players in danger is reckless he should be charged by FIFA and banned from any involvement in the game for many years.

He was always a useless ref who hogged the limelight, which no doubt he misses thus this "revelation".

GavRedKing

J. Marston wrote: »

In the news today for his comments on the way he reffed Chelsea vs Spurs 2 seasons ago. Saying "He allowed Spurs to self-destruct."



Should refs have this mindset? Going into matches with gameplans? Although the way Clattenburg phrased it, talking about theatre, it's like he went in looking to influence a narrative.

Its funny, he didnt want to be in the spotlight by "costing" spurs the title but by being so terrible at his job, apart from the fact Spurs lost the league that night, a close second in terms of drama, was the fact Spurs managed 9 yellows and kicked Chelsea off the park all under his watch and allowing the game to flow.

It was disgraceful, Dier was on a yellow and gave away a further 3 fouls that were easilly yellows, so even when its not about Clattenburg, its always about Clattenburg.

POKERKING

i think hes just talking poo, i think he has exaggerated a situation where he is saying he just let the game flow.

Nothing to see in his comments i dont think other than him looking for a bit of attention.

bucketybuck

J. Marston wrote: »

Going into matches with gameplans? Although the way Clattenburg phrased it, talking about theatre, it's like he went in looking to influence a narrative.

Was he saying that? I read that as meaning that as he saw the game developing he could see that Spurs were struggling and decided to let them at it instead of giving them a ready made excuse.

Which makes him a **** ref, but doesn't mean that he went out there to do Spurs or anything like that.

Agent Coulson

Clattenburg just confirmed what everyone thought about him for years and was right he wanted to be the center of attention in the games not the teams.

Mocha Joe

Clown. Should never be allowed near a game at the top level anywhere.

razorblunt

So whilst not making it about Clattenburg, he's made it about Clattenburg.

boardsuser1

As a former referee at local level here in Cork I can say I have done similar to Clattenburg.

It wasn’t corruption in the sense that I was given a back hander to do it, I wasn’t.

The real reason was,team A had to win or the title was gone.

Team B had to draw at the very least to avoid relegation.

Team A gave me nothing but grief in previous matches whereas B were nothing but courteous to me, even to this day, 10 years after my retirement they are still very nice people to talk to.

Shanotheslayer

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

As a former referee at local level here in Cork I can say I have done similar to Clattenburg.

It wasn’t corruption in the sense that I was given a back hander to do it, I wasn’t.

The real reason was,team A had to win or the title was gone.

Team B had to draw at the very least to avoid relegation.

Team A gave me nothing but grief in previous matches whereas B were nothing but courteous to me, even to this day, 10 years after my retirement they are still very nice people to talk to.

Guessing Team B won?

Shanotheslayer

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Guessing Team B won?

Or it was a draw.......:)

Shanotheslayer

Augeo wrote: »

Or it was a draw.......:)

I meant won the battle against relegation

boardsuser1

0-0 draw

Team B survived relegation

Team A lost the title by 2 points.

Moist Bread

razorblunt wrote: »

So whilst not making it about Clattenburg, he's made it about Clattenburg.

It is about Clattenburg.

Nothing but haters in this thread. @clattenburg1975 Hope ur ok hun xxx

stryker mcqueen

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

0-0 draw

Team B survived relegation

Team A lost the title by 2 points.

Well unless you disallowed a few goals i reckon your in the clear

Personally I admire clattenbburg for his honesty, he's not the first ref and not the last who will do this so fair play for talking about it

boardsuser1

stryker mcqueen wrote: »

Well unless you disallowed a few goals i reckon your in the clear

Personally I admire clattenbburg for his honesty, he's not the first ref and not the last who will do this so fair play for talking about it

Disallowed one goal for an offside that wasn’t.

Clattenburg is only telling it like it really is and I admire his honesty.

Him and Howard Webb are 2 of the best in English football history.

AdamD

Yeah lets not praise refs for being biased

fullstop

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Disallowed one goal for an offside that wasn’t.

That was sound of ya.

boardsuser1

fullstop wrote: »

That was sound of ya.

Yeah.

The club never came as close to winning the league again.

eagle eye

Was never a fan of Clattenberg but this is nothing and I don't understand how people are getting so bent out of shape over it.

AdamD

eagle eye wrote: »

Was never a fan of Clattenberg but this is nothing and I don't understand how people are getting so bent out of shape over it.

This is not nothing. He has openly admitted to deliberately not sending players off, who were deserving of red cards so that one team 'wouldn't have an excuse'. That's not up to the ref. What if Spurs went on to win the game? Its an absolute disgrace.

bucketybuck

eagle eye wrote: »

Was never a fan of Clattenberg but this is nothing and I don't understand how people are getting so bent out of shape over it.

He states that he saw fouls that he deemed to be yellow and red card offences but purposely decided not to issue those cards.

That is fundamentally at odds with the very reason for the referee to even be on the pitch. What else is there to understand?

osarusan

I wouldn't immediately believe a word of it as he is just as likely to be looking for attention as anything else.

And even if it was true, I still can't think of any reason other than attention to reveal it.

boardsuser1

osarusan wrote: »

I wouldn't immediately believe a word of it as he is just as likely to be looking for attention as anything else.

And even if it was true, I still can't think of any reason other than attention to reveal it.

Far from attention.

As he is now retired he can say it without fear of retribution from the FA.

This is going on alot more than you think, fair play to Clattenburg for coming out and admitting to it.

If Howard Webb did the same all people would say is "oh sure he's united's 12th man" along with the photoshop of him in a united jersey.

David Elleray is another who comes to mind.

1994 FA cup final anyone? 2 penalties? 1 that wasn't and he later admitted it?

osarusan

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

This is going on alot more than you think, fair play to Clattenburg for coming out and admitting to it.
it?

Fair play my arse.

If a player who by his own admission shouldn't have been on the pitch ends up causing a serious injury to an opponent, where does that leave his 'gameplan'?

Or from another perspective, if a Tottenham player who by his own admission shouldn't have been on the pitch ends up scoring a winning goal in the game, and then Spurs go on to win the league, where does that leave his 'gameplan'?

What he said was a load of bollocks. At best a nonsensical attempt for attention, at worst fundamentally unprofessional behaviour.

bucketybuck

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

This is going on alot more than you think, fair play to Clattenburg for coming out and admitting to it.

He is admitting to a fact that referees are not applying the rules honestly. Fair play indeed, I imagine you and he are very proud of yourselves.

JimboJones99

There is no doubt that Clattenburg is a smug so so. Why else would he come out and admit this otherwise? But, I can understand what he did on a personal level. He was right, if he had sent off 2 or 3 Spurs players all the headlines and hate from Spurs fans would have landed right on him regardless whether he was right to send them off or not.

From what I vaguely remember of the match (and I could be wrong) none of the yellow cards were stone wall reds. Now they could have been red by the letter of the law but most were petulant and probably fall in the category of "I've seen them given before". We often complain about refs not using enough common sense so why lambast a ref when he did, even if it was to just save himself from abuse. All the headlines the next day were about Spurs imploding. Would that have been the case if he Clattenburg had sent off a couple of players, arguably, softly? Spurs fans certainly wouldnt have been blaming their players.

grumpymunster

eagle eye wrote: »

Was never a fan of Clattenberg but this is nothing and I don't understand how people are getting so bent out of shape over it.

So it is acceptable to turn a blind eye as Spurs players were kicking lumps out of Chelsea players. The referee has a duty to protect players on the pitch (different code but I well remember Rory Best having a pop at Jerome Garces in and Ireland England rugby match for the very same reason and kudos to Best for that). Clattenburg has admitted he endangered Chelsea players as Spurs were given free reign to do what ever they wanted that is negligent and I cannot understand how anyone can defend that.

Clattenburg had no issue sending off two Chelsea players against United at Stamford Bridge one of which was a blatant foul on Torres who got a second yellow for "diving" a result which contributed to Robbie Di Matteo losing his job I wonder what his gameplan was that day?

boardsuser1

bucketybuck wrote: »

He is admitting to a fact that referees are not applying the rules honestly. Fair play indeed, I imagine you and he are very proud of yourselves.

I admitted it.

The only difference between him and me is my real name isn’t in the public domain, nor when I was an active referee did I ever admit to to effectively match fixing.

As I said, I’m gone over 10 years now.

There was one manager though who used to ring the referee inspector if any decision I ever gave against his team was negative to such an extent it impacted the result. i.e penalties or red cards.

I did have a few of my red card decisions appealed also.

All in all, despite all of this I was still selected to officiate in cup finals.

Every referee commits dishonesty, just not all of them will admit to it.

bucketybuck

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

There was one manager though who used to ring the referee inspector if any decision I ever gave against his team was negative to such an extent it impacted the result. i.e penalties or red cards.

Good for him, he clearly knew that you were not an honest referee.

GavRedKing

JimboJones99 wrote: »

There is no doubt that Clattenburg is a smug so so. Why else would he come out and admit this otherwise? But, I can understand what he did on a personal level. He was right, if he had sent off 2 or 3 Spurs players all the headlines and hate from Spurs fans would have landed right on him regardless whether he was right to send them off or not.

From what I vaguely remember of the match (and I could be wrong) none of the yellow cards were stone wall reds. Now they could have been red by the letter of the law but most were petulant and probably fall in the category of "I've seen them given before". We often complain about refs not using enough common sense so why lambast a ref when he did, even if it was to just save himself from abuse. All the headlines the next day were about Spurs imploding. Would that have been the case if he Clattenburg had sent off a couple of players, arguably, softly? Spurs fans certainly wouldnt have been blaming their players.

I'd suggest finding the game in question or at least highlights of Diers tackles on Cesc and Hazard. 2 were seriously wild lunges and worthy of straight red cards alone, I've seen "softer" tackles result in straight reds since and before that and all 3 tackles occured while he was on a yellow card.

The fact Clattenburg left them get away with it was disgraceful so thankfully hes out of the game in England because if hes not in the spotlight his ego isnt being fed.

boardsuser1

bucketybuck wrote: »

Good for him, he clearly knew that you were not an honest referee.

I was honest alright for the majority of my time there.

This guy didn’t like the fact that I was a referee while still in school.

That was his biggest gripe.

Morzadec

You can tune in everyone weekend and find referees not applying the letter of the law in matches. Particularly in England there are a number of unwritten rules consistently applied that every team is aware of.

As an example, have a look at the Liverpool vs Chelsea match a couple of weeks back. There should have been about 5 yellow cards in the first half yet I don't think a single player was booked (maybe one).

Some of the unwritten rules:

1) In a crunch match (derby or big teams), you will not be booked in the first 20 minutes or so unless it is an incredibly excessively dangerous foul. Cynical fouls or excessive force that should 100% be yellow are excused

2) If you are a "destroyer" player (DM in the mould of Coquelin or Lucas, or as well someone like Kante) you get at least one freebie for a cynical foul (maybe more in a derby match)

3) The same rash tackle made in the first half of a game will likely get a yellow, yet the same one made in the second half will be more likely to get a red.

4) Not much time is never added on at end of first half

5) If it is a two legged match and the first leg is a draw or a narrow lead for one team (e.g. neither team is particularly desperate for a goal to save a tie) added time will be less (maybe just 2 or 3 mins). Time added on should not be impacted by the result, only the stoppages

There's probably a ton more.

I genuinely think points 1 and 2 make the game less entertaining. That Liverpool vs Chelsea match was 0-0 at half time, but if bookings were given out as they should be and players knew they couldn't get away with exploiting these "unwritten rules" you would have players being unable to commit cynical fouls, or be forced to go down to 10 men. This would have opened up the game hugely imo.

Kante stopped a counter attack very cynically early on and was let go, pretty much an example of point one and two. That set a precedent. Hazard was cynically fouled about 3 times soon after (one case from Klavan I remember he skinned him and Klavan just very clearly and cynically put his arm around him to stop him going). Surely any deliberate cynical foul irrespective of time on the clock should be a yellow card?

The thing that annoys me about this is that it's a lack of moral courage on the ref's part. The motivation for not holding destroyers to the same degree accountable to other players, or for being far more lenient (to the extent that the rules of the game are not being followed) in the first half, seems very much to avoid putting themselves in the situation where they have to make a difficult decision.

They don't want the stress of the limelight, they don't want Shearer et al discussing them on Match of the Day.

This is essentially what Clattenburg is saying. He didn't want to steal the narrative.

Likewise Oliver did not want to steal the narrative in the recent Liverpool vs Chelsea game (this was not a particularly dirty game and I'm not singling out Oliver, I'm just using as an example as it was on recently and I remember the incidents).

So yeah TLDR, this type of revelation is not really news, you see this every big game in the prem. Have a look out for my unwritten rules next time you watch a clash between the top 6 or a derby match.

JimboJones99

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'd suggest finding the game in question or at least highlights of Diers tackles on Cesc and Hazard. 2 were seriously wild lunges and worthy of straight red cards alone, I've seen "softer" tackles result in straight reds since and before that and all 3 tackles occured while he was on a yellow card.

The fact Clattenburg left them get away with it was disgraceful so thankfully hes out of the game in England because if hes not in the spotlight his ego isnt being fed.

Yeah I put my hand up and said I could be wrong as I was trying to recall from memory. Will have a look at the highlights.

JimboJones99

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'd suggest finding the game in question or at least highlights of Diers tackles on Cesc and Hazard. 2 were seriously wild lunges and worthy of straight red cards alone, I've seen "softer" tackles result in straight reds since and before that and all 3 tackles occured while he was on a yellow card.

The fact Clattenburg left them get away with it was disgraceful so thankfully hes out of the game in England because if hes not in the spotlight his ego isnt being fed.

I've just had a look at the highlights. Yeah of course Spurs lost the heads and some players certainly deserved at least a second yellow. Obviously Dembele and Lamela deserved reds for the eye gouge and stamp on Fabregas's hand but you have to assume those were not seen. Diers lunge on Fabregas probably deserved a red, certainly I have seem them given but I can understand the context the Clattenburg took. The highlights didnt show what time was left after that tackle but if memory serves me correct there was only a couple of mins left. Would a red card have made any difference?

Normally in a game like that a red card might settle things down but Spurs heads had gone. They didnt care, he would have had to start throwing out red cards like confetti and then the attention would have been deflected from Spurs on to him.

I can get why he did it, I just dont get why he feels the need to broadcast it. Pure arrogance is my best bet.

Deise Vu

If ever there was a case of revisionism this is it. Clearly 'Clatts' saw the highlights later and was embarrassed at all that he missed. I mean why would a ref feel the need to let Spurs 'self-destruct' rather than blaming the ref for a few reds. Surely getting a few reds is considered self-destructing anyway rather than the ref's fault? In any case, if I remember it correctly, even a win would have left Spurs 5 points behind Leicester with two games left. It was hardly the decisive moment of that campaign.

I probably shouldn't admit it but I did enjoy the Spurs players kicking lumps out Chelsea, even 'crazy' Diego looked ****less in the last schemozzle.

Laois_Man

No mention of his performance in the October 2007 Merseyside Derby where....

The Tyne and Wear official dismissed two Everton players, defender Tony Hibbert and captain Phil Neville, failed to dismiss Liverpool's Dirk Kuyt for a kung-fu style challenge on Neville and denied the home side a late penalty following an apparent foul by Jamie Carragher on Everton defender Joleon Lescott.

David Moyes, the Everton manager, also suggested that Clattenburg had been influenced by the Liverpool captain Steven Gerrard when dismissing Hibbert. The official initially appeared to produce a yellow card before issuing a red following comments made by Gerrard in the wake of the foul by Hibbert that led to the first of two successful Liverpool penalties in their 2-1 victory.

KaiserGunner

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Disallowed one goal for an offside that wasn’t.

Clattenburg is only telling it like it really is and I admire his honesty.

Him and Howard Webb are 2 of the best in English football history.

So you knew the goal was onside but still disallowed it for offside? All because you got grief from this team before and basically cost them a league title?
No wonder football referees don’t get respect with that carry on. Always suspected referees were biased, so you and Clattenburg have effectively confirmed it happening at all levels. Nothing to admire about his honesty as he’s not honest in his refereeing of matches.

osarusan

↑↑↑↑↑
Does anybody believe that story really happened though?

Insect Overlord

osarusan wrote: »

↑↑↑↑↑
Does anybody believe that story really happened though?

I've given up playing junior football in Limerick because stupid stuff like that happens every single week. The man in the middle isn't there for the good of the game. He's there for his own amusement. So yeah, I'd believe it.

boardsuser1

KaiserGunner wrote: »

So you knew the goal was onside but still disallowed it for offside? All because you got grief from this team before and basically cost them a league title?
No wonder football referees don’t get respect with that carry on. Always suspected referees were biased, so you and Clattenburg have effectively confirmed it happening at all levels. Nothing to admire about his honesty as he’s not honest in his refereeing of matches.

I've already admitted i cost them a title.

Even if a referee made every decision to the satisfaction of the laws of the game they would still get abuse.

It was a bit more than grief to be fair, the exact reason i'm not going to disclose as if i did it i could be recognised.

There was an investigation against me for that decision but i was exonerated due to lack of evidence that i did it intentionally.

It wasn't a case of just because i was the referee i was right and everyone else was wrong.

The only complaints received were from the team who were at a loss, the other team declined to make any comment except to say they were satisfied with the standard of officiating.

MrKingsley

JimboJones99 wrote: »

There is no doubt that Clattenburg is a smug so so. Why else would he come out and admit this otherwise? But, I can understand what he did on a personal level. He was right, if he had sent off 2 or 3 Spurs players all the headlines and hate from Spurs fans would have landed right on him regardless whether he was right to send them off or not.

From what I vaguely remember of the match (and I could be wrong) none of the yellow cards were stone wall reds. Now they could have been red by the letter of the law but most were petulant and probably fall in the category of "I've seen them given before". We often complain about refs not using enough common sense so why lambast a ref when he did, even if it was to just save himself from abuse. All the headlines the next day were about Spurs imploding. Would that have been the case if he Clattenburg had sent off a couple of players, arguably, softly? Spurs fans certainly wouldnt have been blaming their players.

As a spurs fan I blame the spurs players for their lack of discipline and reckless behaviour regardless of whether cards were handed out or not. They, and no one else, were responsible for losing it (their heads that is, the league was long gone) that night.

Dembele was made accountable for his actions afterwards

The same should have happened for Clattenburg as it was wholly unprofessional and also reckless behaviour on his part

boardsuser1

MrKingsley wrote: »

As a spurs fan I blame the spurs players for their lack of discipline and reckless behaviour regardless of whether cards were handed out or not. They, and no one else, were responsible for losing it (their heads that is, the league was long gone) that night.

Dembele was made accountable for his actions afterwards

The same should have happened for Clattenburg as it was wholly unprofessional and also reckless behaviour on his part

If Clattenburg was still active in the Premier League it would be all but certain he would have been the subject of retrospective action by the PGMOL.

By coming out with this he has all but made sure he won't officiate in the league again.

I wonder will PGMOL appoint him as a referee's assessor/inspector in the future though.

boardsuser1

Does anyone watch Ref Watch on Sky Sports News?

It's a fantastic segment of the channel.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11156259/decision-to-send-off-paul-pogba-was-a-tremendous-decision-says-dermot-gallagher

AdamD

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

I've already admitted i cost them a title.

Even if a referee made every decision to the satisfaction of the laws of the game they would still get abuse.

It was a bit more than grief to be fair, the exact reason i'm not going to disclose as if i did it i could be recognised.

There was an investigation against me for that decision but i was exonerated due to lack of evidence that i did it intentionally.

It wasn't a case of just because i was the referee i was right and everyone else was wrong.

The only complaints received were from the team who were at a loss, the other team declined to make any comment except to say they were satisfied with the standard of officiating.

Well no ****. Why would the team complain that the got a decision for them? You seem quite proud of the whole incident which is a bit embarrassing.

boardsuser1

AdamD wrote: »

Well no ****. Why would the team complain that the got a decision for them? You seem quite proud of the whole incident which is a bit embarrassing.

In hindsight I’m not proud. If the same thing happened today I wouldn’t have done it.

I was only 15 at the time I may add.