• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Mark Clattenburg

Chelsea will resist demands from the referees' union for an unreserved apology and financial compensation for Mark Clattenburg after he was cleared of directing a racist comment at Mikel John Obi.

The Premier League referee spoke of his huge relief after the Football Association found he had no case to answer, describing the "frightening" allegations as the most stressful experience of his life. But Chelsea will resist calls for a direct apology, believing they acted in good faith at all times and had a duty to support Ramires. The Brazilian claimed he heard the referee say "shut up you monkey" to Mikel in the wake of the sending off of Fernando Torres during Chelsea's home defeat to Manchester United on 28 October.

"We are seeking a full and unreserved apology and compensation for loss of earnings, damage to reputation and stress. We are also asking for a sizeable donation to Show Racism the Red Card and Kick it Out," said Alan Leighton of Prospect, the referees' union. "The charge was based on the flimsiest evidence that should never have got to this stage. It should never have been made public and should have been dealt with confidentially."

In an effort to avoid any ambiguity in future, all conversations between referees and with players will now be recorded. The new equipment will be brought in "as soon as possible" and should be in use within a fortnight, according to Mike Riley, general manager of PGMOL, the referees' body. Asked whether the club should apologise, Riley said: "I hope Chelsea will do the right thing."

An hour before Chelsea prepared to unveil Rafael Benítez as their new interim manager following a tumultuous week, the club was informed by the FA that Clattenburg did not have a case to answer.

Coming in the wake of the John Terry case that hung over Chelsea for 12 months and prompted criticism when he remained as club captain despite being found guilty of racially abusing QPR's Anton Ferdinand, the case added to the already febrile atmosphere at Stamford Bridge even before this week's sacking of Roberto Di Matteo. Chelsea immediately came under fire for not apologising directly to Clattenburg, who had been accused of using "inappropriate language".

Ramires continues to insist that he heard the offending term. While accepting the verdict, the club said they were right to back their player and merely said they hoped "all concerned can continue to carry out their duties without prejudice".

Benítez said he had not had time to form a view, having flown in on Thursday morning and met the squad for the first time in the afternoon. "I just arrived and went straight to the training session. I didn't have time to think about other issues, just to think about the things I want to do," he said.

Mikel was charged by the FA with using threatening or abusive words and/or behaviour "in or around the Match Officials' changing room" following the fractious 3-2 home defeat to United, during which Torres and Branislav Ivanovic were sent off. He has until Friday 30 November to respond.

Clattenburg, who has been omitted from the refereeing list for four weeks paid tribute to the support of his colleagues and said he "couldn't wait" to get back to officiating.

"The messages of encouragement from those inside and outside of the game have helped me through the most stressful time of my professional life. To know you were innocent of something but that there was the opportunity for it to wreck your career was truly frightening," he said.

The FA's investigators found that neither Clattenburg nor the three other match officials – who could hear everything being said in their earpieces – heard the comment. Nor did Mikel, who was much closer to the referee than Ramires, hear what it is suggested was said to him. It was only after the match that Ramires was able to explain fully the allegation, prompting Mikel to furiously confront the referee. Nor was there anything in the video evidence to support the allegation and nor did two other players near the incident, one of whom was Ashley Cole, hear anything untoward.

"Having considered all of the available evidence it was the opinion of David Waters QC, independent counsel, that the evidence of Ramires was not supported by any other evidence. Moreover it was contradicted by other witnesses and does not cross the evidential threshold required to bring a charge against Mark Clattenburg," the FA said.

Riley said: "It is PGMOL's considered view that Mark is completely exonerated of the allegation and he will return to active duty shortly without any stain on his character or reputation. The verbal and visual facts do not support any of the allegations made against him. They make it clear that Mark did not use any inappropriate language towards any Chelsea player."

It is understood that neither Clattenburg nor his colleagues recall him using any language that could have been misheard by Ramires as "monkey". However, the FA underlined that it believed the Brazilian had acted in good faith.

Chelsea, under intense pressure following criticism of their handling of the fallout from the Terry case, said they accepted the FA's verdict but defended their decision to pursue the complaint.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/nov/22/chelsea-compensation-mark-clattenburg
 
The FA won't do a thing. They'll declare another investigation, take 6 months over it, everyone will get bored and just accept the (non) decision they come up with. They do it every fudging time.
 
What a fudging disgrace this whole affair has been. And what a bunch of spineless ****s the FA is.

What have we learned from this? It's prefectly fine to accuse referees of racist behaviour. It doesn't matter if you have proof or not, it doesn't matter if you slander the referee's name and reputation in public, because you don't risk any sort of punishment if the accusations are left unproven. It's shocking.

Now the unproven accusations hang in the air - everyone thinks "could it be that he actually said it?", when in fact there is no evidence. If anything, the pathetic excuse of a governing body that is FA should force Chelski to publicly apologise to Clattenburg for falsely accusing him of being a Terry, or they will deduct them 20 points.

Then they should deal with the incident of the steward that was attacked by fans, and make sure Chelski are punished severly for that as well.

The racism allegations from Chelski are bloody serious, and the ****fudgers don't even have the decency to apologise when the authorities discover that there's not any evidence to back up the claims at all. But then again, why should they bother? They know they will get away with it - again.

Chelski should be fudging abolished, Stamford Bridge demolished, and Roman sent back to Russia to spend the rest of his days corrupting whatever else he feels the need to corrupt besides football.

****s.

[/rant]
 
Referees union Prospect are to pursue Chelsea on behalf of Mark Clattenburg after the club were shown to have wrongly accused the Premier League referee of racially abusing John Mikel Obi.

Alan Leighton, the national secretary of the union, insists the case is being pursued on two grounds, both that the allegation has affected Clattenburg's life and professional standing, and in order to deter any such claims being made public in the future.

Clattenburg returns to action as fourth official on Sunday for the London derby between West Ham and Tottenham, while he'll take centre stage on Wednesday for the Southampton v Norwich clash at St Marys.

Leighton yesterday called for 'a full and unreserved apology and compensation for loss of earnings, damage to reputation and stress'.

Leighton also called on Chelsea to make a 'sizeable donation' to anti-discrimination bodies Show Racism The Red Card and Kick It Out.

Leighton, today speaking to the Today programme on BBC Radio 4, said: 'I don't know if we get an apology from Chelsea. I hope we will. It would be the classy thing to do, it would be the right thing to do more importantly.

'There needs to be a recognition that Mark’s reputation has been tarnished, been dragged through the mud, his integrity has been impugned and it’s unfortunate that the Chelsea statement makes not a scintilla of recognition of the damage that has been done to Mark.

'Chelsea didn’t need to do what they did in the way that they did it. They could have kept the reporting of the incident confidential and they didn’t need to pursue it once they’d realised that the only evidence they had was the statement of Ramires when there was contradictory evidence.'

And Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson has also offered his support.

The Scot said: 'I didn't believe it anyway. Everyone in the game is pleased for him now, apart from Chelsea.'

On Thursday, the Football Association concluded their three-week investigation into events during the explosive clash between Manchester United and Chelsea at Stamford Bridge on October 28 by completely exonerating a match official who, it was alleged, had called Mikel a ‘monkey’.

Mikel was charged by the FA over the angry confrontation in Clattenburg’s dressing room following the match.

But even after the FA exposed the irrational nature of the accusations, Chelsea officials did not have the decency to say sorry to a 37-year-old family man who spoke of this being the most stressful time of his professional life and feared the case would wreck his career.

After a visit from a member of the FA’s governance team in the wake of the association's announcement, Clattenburg emerged from 26 days of personal turmoil to issue a statement.

‘I am looking forward to putting this behind me and concentrating on refereeing in the Premier League and other competitions,’ he said.

‘The messages of encouragement from those inside and outside of the game have helped me through the most stressful time of my professional life.

‘To know you were innocent of something but that there was the opportunity for it to wreck your career was frightening.

‘Racism has no place in football and this experience should not discourage those to speak out if they genuinely believe they are a victim of abuse. However, there are processes that should be adhered in order that any investigation can be carried out in a manner that is fair for all parties involved.

‘I know first-hand the ramifications of allegations of this nature being placed into the public domain ahead of a formal process and investigation. I hope no referee has to go through this in the future.

‘We are fortunate to be working in the world’s most watched and scrutinised football league. With that comes a responsibility in regard to how the different parts of the game work together.’

Clattenburg’s statement highlights the fact that Chelsea’s briefing of the media prior to a formal process and investigation offended him deeply.

Prospect had also said in the aftermath: 'There was no doubt he was innocent.There are lessons to be learned. Mark is very upset his reputation has been dragged through the mud by this process. There was no need for Chelsea to make the public aware of the allegation.

‘There is also an issue of flimsiness about the evidence provided. We need Chelsea to accept the verdict, apologise to Mark and compensate him for that.’

The FA statement highlighted ‘the essential facts’ that proved there was no substance in Chelsea’s allegations.

It said: ‘The evidence for the allegation came from one witness, Ramires. Ramires, whose first language is not English, explained that his instinctive reaction was to seek confirmation from John Mikel Obi as to what the referee had said.’

’John Mikel Obi, who was being spoken to by the referee, was much closer to the referee than Ramires and did not hear what it is suggested was said to him.

’Three other witnesses, i.e. the other match officials, to whom everything said by referee was relayed via their communication equipment, are adamant the alleged words were not uttered. There is nothing in the video footage to support the allegation.’

’For completeness, but of lesser weight, two other players, whose first language is English and were in the vicinity, did not hear anything untoward.’

The FA said they had to re-interview Ramires ‘to show him the previously unseen video footage provided by the club’.

‘At this stage, for the first time, the exact point at which the comment was alleged to have been made was established,’ the statement continued.

The complaint collapsed with the emergence of that video. All the witnesses were then interviewed again, with Ramires even unsure as to when the alleged incident occurred.

Mike Riley, general manager of Professional Game Match Officials Limited, said: ‘It is PGMOL’s considered view that Mark is completely exonerated of the allegation and he will return to active duty shortly without any stain on his character or reputation.

‘Regrettably, Mark has had to endure four weeks that have brought massive disruption to his professional and personal life through no fault of his own.’


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2237281/Mark-Clattenburg-sues-Chelsea-referee-returns-Spurs-v-West-Ham.html

Graham Poll said:
I didn’t referee Chelsea for three months after they attempted to discredit me in 2006 – and I can see Mark Clattenburg being kept off their games for a similar period.

Ashley Cole had accused me of having told Chelsea’s players that I wanted to 'teach them a lesson', and Terry said I had said one thing to him on the pitch and changed my story in the dressing room after the game.

It was all simply untrue but I was subject to an FA investigation which lasted three weeks from the match on November 5 at White Hart Lane.

I was finally handed a Chelsea match again in February 2007 against Blackburn. Jose Mourinho had instructed his players not to talk to me – about anything.

I didn’t hear a peep from one of them until during the second half when Didier Drogba sidled up to me, turned his back to the bench and said: 'It'll all be back to normal soon. We know you’re a good ref really.'

Chelsea's players won't have a big problem with Clattenburg. They are professional footballers who just want to get on with playing.

The official won't be comfortable not refereeing the Blues. He already has declared an allegiance to Saudi Sportswashing Machine, so he is unable to officiate their matches and Sunderland's – due to the north-east rivalry.

If he's kept off Chelsea, does that mean he’ll have to miss Manchester United, City and Arsenal fixtures because he may have an influence on the title race. That thinking does not sit easily with referees.

No ref wants to miss out on big fixtures.

He will also want to prove to Chelsea that their slurs have not affected him – he's a chin-out type of character and referees in the same vein.

Remember when Sir Alex Ferguson hammered Martin Atkinson after the Portsmouth FA Cup tie at Old Trafford? Atkinson didn’t referee United again for over a season.

Chris Foy has Chelsea this Sunday for the first time since the race-row match at Loftus Road when he sent off Jose Bosingwa and Drogba – that's well over a year.

Clattenburg didn’t take charge of Everton for over two seasons when he was criticised for failing to send off Dirk Kuyt at Goodison in the Merseyside Derby.

I was kept from Arsenal home matches for more than two seasons. I was happy with that. David Dein suggested it was for the best that I only take Arsenal away. I agreed, something had gone wrong in my mind.

I returned to Arsenal for the visit of Manchester United – then it was all about the fixture, not me, the referee.

I didn’t even warm up on the pitch. Gary Lewin gave me a massage instead. The match was well underway before anyone had realised I was in the middle.
 
Can't help drawing similarities in my mind between Terry and Rupert Murdoch, they've both had a massively corrosive effect on the industry they're in and society as a whole. Every piece of brick coming out of Chelsea seems to have Terry in the background pulling the strings, Bruce Buck has even blamed him for bringing about Mourhino's dismissal. To say Ashley Cole isn't far behind would be an understatement.
 
Can't help drawing similarities in my mind between Terry and Rupert Murdoch, they've both had a massively corrosive effect on the industry they're in and society as a whole. Every piece of brick coming out of Chelsea seems to have Terry in the background pulling the strings, Bruce Buck has even blamed him for bringing about Mourhino's dismissal. To say Ashley Cole isn't far behind would be an understatement.

I understand the contempt for Terry and Cole as individuals. But I think the clubs position is what is the real problem. Get rid of Terry and Cole and the culture where hounding referees out of the game, using accusations of racism or making excuses for any functional player is still there. Terry and Cole are symptoms.

The scary thing is that the more I think about Chelsea, the more I respect Arsenal, unless we go back to 1919.
 
The scary thing is that the more I think about Chelsea, the more I respect Arsenal, unless we go back to 1919.

Tottenham-Arsenal is just a good solid rivalry. To us, we're the good guys, to them, they're the good guys. It's what makes the game fun.

Chelsea, on the other hand have a true nasty and evil element. It's not the whole element, they have some nice fans, some decent men on their playing staff. But they have racists, cheats and liars, physical and verbal abusers. More so than any other club I know of. There is a problem, which probably starts at the top. Who knows what crimes a chairman is capable of?
 
I understand the contempt for Terry and Cole as individuals. But I think the clubs position is what is the real problem. Get rid of Terry and Cole and the culture where hounding referees out of the game, using accusations of racism or making excuses for any functional player is still there. Terry and Cole are symptoms.

I'm not so sure, when Bruce Buck admits that Terry cost Mourhino his job then you have to whether he's not a symptom but a driving force, how a mere player ever achieved this is quite remarkable. Terry is a pantomime villian at the moment but for someone to exert so much influence and gather such a following means he should not be dismissed lightly.

Mr Godwin, I salute you. ;)
 
Last edited:
I'm not so sure, when Bruce Buck admits that Terry cost Mourhino his job then you have to whether he's not a symptom but a driving force, how a mere player ever achieved this is quite remarkable. Terry is a pantomime villian at the moment but for someone to exert so much influence and gather such a following means he should not be dismissed lightly.

Mr Godwin, I salute you. ;)

I'm sure there is plenty of blame that can be put at Terry's door. But you have just pointed out that Chairman admits a player cost a manager his job and that player is still there five years later. So its the top people - chairman or above who condones the behaviour. The message is anything is acceptable if you get the results.
 
Tottenham-Arsenal is just a good solid rivalry. To us, we're the good guys, to them, they're the good guys. It's what makes the game fun.

Chelsea, on the other hand have a true nasty and evil element. It's not the whole element, they have some nice fans, some decent men on their playing staff. But they have racists, cheats and liars, physical and verbal abusers. More so than any other club I know of. There is a problem, which probably starts at the top. Who knows what crimes a chairman is capable of?

This 100%. As Mark Twain once famously said, the offspring of riches are pride, vanity, ostentation, arrogance and tyranny. This is why I detest Chel$ea with a passion that far exceeds my dislike of Arsenal.
 
This 100%. As Mark Twain once famously said, the offspring of riches are pride, vanity, ostentation, arrogance and tyranny. This is why I detest Chel$ea with a passion that far exceeds my dislike of Arsenal.

I said much the same before the Chelsea match and was pillioried on here who still see Arse as the worst team/supporters and who they want to beat the most.
I would want to stuff Chelsea more any time.
 
I said much the same before the Chelsea match and was pillioried on here who still see Arse as the worst team/supporters and who they want to beat the most.
I would want to stuff Chelsea more any time.
Really? I would agree 100%, really took hold of me after the semi-final loss with their booing of Hillsborough etc. I'd rather beat Chelsea than the Arse I fudging dispise them with an absolute passion.
Saw quite a few people with Chelsea hats on etc in Rome and I have no doubt as to why.

Also, in a documentary about Mourinho Terry said that him 'Didier and Frank contacted Roman to try and stop Mourinho going'. Not sure if true, but thought I'd mention it.
 
So

1, Have Chelsea apologised as yet ??
2, Have the FA done anything about Chelsea's fans throwing stuff at the United players and injuring their own stewards ???

No, surprise surprise
 
So

1, Have Chelsea apologised as yet ??
2, Have the FA done anything about Chelsea's fans throwing stuff at the United players and injuring their own stewards ???

No, surprise surprise

Any more news on this? I guarantee the FA will just keep quiet and pray that the water just passes under the bridge, it's the same thing they do with every single bit of controversy. just bury there heads in the sand and hope it goes away or people forget about it.

I hear Chelsea met with clattenberg yesterday for clear the air talk$.
 
I'm sure there is plenty of blame that can be put at Terry's door. But you have just pointed out that Chairman admits a player cost a manager his job and that player is still there five years later. So its the top people - chairman or above who condones the behaviour. The message is anything is acceptable if you get the results.
You're right.
 
A joint statement made by all parties said: "There was a constructive and open discussion. The club regrets not having given more consideration before issuing a statement on the evening of Sunday 28th October.

"The club also regrets the subsequent impact the intense media scrutiny had on Mark Clattenburg and his family.

"The referees accept that, given Chelsea FC had received a good faith claim from one of their employees, the club had an obligation under FA rules to report the allegation.

"There was recognition by all parties that the impartiality and integrity of refereeing in this country remains paramount.

"Chelsea FC made it clear they would welcome Mark Clattenburg back to Stamford Bridge in the future and PGMOL would have no issue in appointing him to a Chelsea FC match going forward.

"It was a thoroughly professional meeting. All parties now believe it is time to draw a line under this incident, learn from it and move on for the good of all Premier League clubs, players and match officials."
 
That's still not an apology...


Jees, how hard is it, seriously?
It's not but I've never heard him express an ounce of regret for making a complete abortion of some of the matches he's officiated though. I know that doesn't in any way excuse any of Chelsea's behaviour but it's easy not to feel a lot of sympathy for the ****.
 
Back