Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 220 comments are related to the topic:
Mark Clattenburg is stood down as FA investigates Chelsea racism claim
Mark Clattenburg is stood down as FA investigates Chelsea racism claim
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 220
|
By:
Apparently the comment was made during this exchange but he didn't hear it. Luiz and Ramires did and told Mikel.
|
|
By:
Would not want my team to be facing Chelsea anytime soon. A referee would be likely to give them the benefit of any close calls otherwise they may find themselves the subject of an FA charge or a police investigation, and could be out the game for a long time even if found innocent of the charges. If found guilty then a ref loses his job of say 70k pa with his reputation in tatters whilst 'top footballers' get banned for 4/8 weeks and lose a couple of weeks wages. All this on the word of 2/3 Chelsea players with an axe to grind. A slippery path indeed......
|
|
By:
what sanctions do you suppose chelsea will face if the accusations are proven to be unfounded ...
|
|
By:
I personally don't think clattenburg would be that naive to make a racist remark and Chelsea are being incredibly sore losers, and to add to this can you imagine the abuse clattenburg got on Sunday afternoon. The referees union should back mc and refuse to referee any Chelsea games until they publicly apologise to mc IMO
80k a week football players crying over spilt milk |
|
By:
Difficult to say Donny as it is likely to be the word of MC and his assistants/4th official against the Chelsea players who claim to have heard something untoward. If it goes to court then my guess would be that MC would be foung not guilty, but with an independent FA panel who knows as 'beyond reasonable doubt' does not apply. Personally I believe many of the Chelsea players to be out of control and frankly would not believe anything they said, am I'm not a supporter of any of the big teams. Having watched football for some 60 years I'm just sad at the way things are now going.
|
|
By:
dssmith..........sounds as if you would like to see big ron back on the box
|
|
By:
Big Ron didn't call someone to his face, he made a mistake no knowing he was being haired, the n word was used more so by the older generation, but the context of what he said was probably just like 90% of people have had in conversation with their mates.
|
|
By:
Mikels a bad egg always has been was lucky not to be banned for bungs when he signed for utd then went Chelsea Most Nigerians wouldn't pis s on him if he was on fire
He wouldn't stand up for JT or anton even though he was closer than cashley no money in it for him he's not a popular guy |
|
By:
Mikel is also the guy who claimed crouch was a racist for daring to say foreign players are more prone to diving So I don't expect clatters did much
|
|
By:
blimey the brains trust and guessers are out in force on this one aren't they?
let's talk about what's actually known about this case shall we? the allegations were made immediatly by one or two players telling what they heard. they were "interviewed" by members of chelsea staff, and were repeatedly asked if they were sure about what they heard, and whether they could be mistaken or not. this went on for at least two hours and the management at chelsea seeing the conviction of the players making the allegation felt that they had no option bit to make a complaint, this decision was not taken lightly, in fact i've been told that there was a reluctance on the part of management, but that the strength of the assertions made them feel as if they had no option. so lets examine the possible scenarios. clattenberg said it and it was heard by other officials. open and shut case. clattenberg said it but it wasn't heard by the other officials. very difficult scenario for all concerned. you'd have two people testifying he said it, and the other officials saying they didn't hear it. that dosen't prove he didn't say it, but it adds credence to his case. they were mistaken. ie he said something that "language differences" between him and the people who heard it lead to a misunderstanding, if whatever was said was heard by other officials thay could say what the heard and that might explain the "misunderstanding". the players are maliciously making it up. why ???????????????????? it seems to me that if there were any pictures that lip readers could go to graft on they'd be on youtube by now. very difficult one for the fa [and the police now they've been involved]. if it came to court you'd have two people swearing on oath what he said, and fellow officials saying they heard nothing. how do we bet bearing in mind that any court case would have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, wheareas an fa enquiry would go on the balance of probability. |
|
By:
Mex it sounds like his team mates are pulling away mata don't wanna know and threatening to break clatters legs isn't to nice
|
|
By:
I can see flatten burg suing mr mikel down to the ground and charged by the police for false accusations from what I'm hearing in the last few hours
|
|
By:
what could he sue mikel for????????
any case he tried to make it would be his word against mikels. |
|
By:
in fact i believe it wasn't mikel who was alleged to have heard it, but it was alledged to be about him.
|
|
By:
Surely if the referee did say it the players would have pulled him up there and then on the spot? Its one thing for a player to say it but a referee? You would imagine they would of been outraged and in his face.
As somebody said on here the other day Chelsea have done this before with Ashley Cole and John Terry to Graham Poll. Looks like Chelsea have lost the plot and thrown their toys out the pram. Good chance it will backfire massively and if he's cleared they could be really in the shiit. |
|
By:
oh the knee jerkers on here.
do you really think that the people who run chelsea are that stoopid? they know the exact consequences for going ahead with this case. that's why it was done reluctantly. |
|
By:
To answer your question mexicano I certainly think the Chelsea management structure are not up to much - events over the past 12 months tell us that. You give them far too much credit. Their manager seems a nice guy, but very lightweight, and as I said earlier a number of the players are simply out of control. Yes, they had a poor decision with the Torres dismissal, but that's no excuse for throwing their toys out of the pram. They were lucky that there were not 1 or 2 more red cards.
|
|
By:
Well Chelsea have had 48 hours to thinks about it - and now the Met Police have got involved, so the stakes are raised.
Criminal convictions possible if proven Charge of wasting police time / perjury if not. |
|
By:
Unless there is video evidence or the other officials contradict Clattenburg than I'd be amazed if there's enough evidence for criminal charges.
|
|
By:
no they're not up to much are they? because terry has a problem that reflects on them?
ffs what planet are you on. you just dream up scenarios then base an argument on it perhaps you'd care to enlighten us about the other couple of potential red cards. |
|
By:
Luis and Ramires clearly lost the plot in the final 10 mins Mex, both could easily have been given more yellow cards.
|
|
By:
It is funny how white to black racist comment is greeted with horror and outrage and yet Ledley King's act of racism outside a London nightclub was brushed under the carpet ,no investigations by club or FA and he is now ambassador of football ,its a funny old game .
|
|
By:
ferk me you do get a load of bowlarks spouted on here don't you?
how on earth would a perjury charge follow if clattenberg got prosecuted and got a not guilty?????? if you worked on that premise every case that went through the courts would lead to another for perjury/perverting the cause of justice. we'd need more and more lawyers, and the legal profession would engulf the planet. the truth is that if the police prosecute [highly unlikely imo] it would be his word against his accusers and the judge or magistrate would deliver a verdict and that would be the end of it. |
|
By:
Can only think Spurs have no fans who are balding white ***** !!!
|
|
By:
More air time (and dollar) for Crooks, Roberts, Blisset and co.
|
|
By:
Listen guys mikel accused crouch of being a racist in 2007 for saying foreign players dive more His idea of racism is extremes. He didn't even here it luzia and rameriz said they might have ad he went charging into clatters dressing room and threatened to break his legs His manager and team mates broke it all up he lost it and now he's not getting backing he's in the s hit I be he wished he'd controlled his temper now
|
|
By:
mexicano
Joined: 13 Jan 02 Replies: 7240 30 Oct 12 18:00 ferk me you do get a load of bowlarks spouted on here don't you? how on earth would a perjury charge follow if clattenberg got prosecuted and got a not guilty?????? All very commendable this rush to be 'the voice of reason' mexicano. If (that's 'if' and I'll give your eyesight credit, so I havent bolden, underlined or italicised it) the case goes to Court - a proper court, not the pretendy FA hearing - then who said what, when and what can be proved all gets very interesting and subject to the laws of the land. Laws which cover wasting ploice time, perjury and perverting the course of justice. So Chelsea must have a rock solid case and in no way must they have players and officials lying. They must also have strong counter claims to the obvious initial line of questioning - that they were sore about perceived wrong decisions that went against them in the match. Hell a tricksy lawyer (aren't they all) could probabaly bring their alleged victim mentality following the FA's findings against John Terry to bear somewhere. I'm not a lawyer. Just giving an opinion which a few people seem to think isn't too far-fetched. |
|
By:
"Juan Mata did not hear referee Mark Clattenburg's alleged racist comments during Chelsea's controversial defeat by Manchester United"
Interesting, even if my source is The Sun |
|
By:
Cricket iPad spell errors EVERWHERE sorry
|
|
By:
you're obviously not a lawyer that's patently clear.
as chelsea, mike;l, mata or uncle tom cobbly an' all haven't made a complaint to the police, it would need a rather creative barrister to be able to prosecute a case for wasting police time.  |
|
By:
It is a crime to make a false accusation tho
|
|
By:
I do not know about Mikel but I guarantee you Mata was called a racist name and a spanish tw@t will surely be enough to see the end of Clattenburg ,however the FA should be looking into Clattenburg's performance as a referee and the influence Fergie had on him .
|
|
By:
it is a crime if it can be proved that somebody knowingly made a false accusation certainly.
|
|
By:
mexicano
Joined: 13 Jan 02 Replies: 7241 30 Oct 12 18:39 you're obviously not a lawyer that's patently clear. Thus the last line in my penultimate statement - maybe I should have italicised and underlined after all. My understanding is that the Met are now pursuing a case against case Clattenburg? Did a police officer hear any racist remarks (i.e witness a crime first hand)? Or did someone draw their attention to this 24-48 hours after the alleged incidents took place? If so who? |
|
By:
What was wrong with his performance?
Torres wasn't touched and he knew he dived - you could see his reaction. He didnt even protest. And as for the winning goal it was the linesmans error. |
|
By:
eboue ; i stopped reading when you said torres wasn't touched.
roger; a complaint has been made to the met by the society of black lawyers. but what it's got to do with them ferk nose. |
|
By:
Torres wasn't touched
|
|
By:
As I said why didn't they pull Clattenburg up at the time it happened? Surely any player of any worth who heard a teammate being racially abused would of been in the face of the ref going mental?
Or did they just realise these things happened after they lost the match  |
|
By:
Hunter- why did Torres not protest?
He sat on the floor like a little child caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He knew he went down too easy. |
|
By:
his hand was not caught in the cookie jar.
he was caught, whether he could have stayed on his feet is open to debate. the way the game is reffed now that is classed as a foul. not a dive. hope this helps. |