The Clattenburg Conspiracy

[smokie36]

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRrr interupted me copying bob seger!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ok Enlighten me, what would you expect them to do?

Come on rij....surely you want them relegated/docked points/placed in the stocks for a week.......!

Ide luv 2 do a double yoker on abramoivic's ugly mug. But seriously, the chavs did the right thing and still people get irrate!! but can u imagine if they didnt report it the morally correct brigade would have a field day and jacky would need at least a double bypass !!!!

Is it the right thing in Clattenburg's mind?

Or the rest of the refs?

I doubt it.

[smokie36]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the refs taking a line much more similar to rugby soon.....which would be no bad thing imho....

[rijit]

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRrr interupted me copying bob seger!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ok Enlighten me, what would you expect them to do?

Come on rij....surely you want them relegated/docked points/placed in the stocks for a week.......!

Ide luv 2 do a double yoker on abramoivic's ugly mug. But seriously, the chavs did the right thing and still people get irrate!! but can u imagine if they didnt report it the morally correct brigade would have a field day and jacky would need at least a double bypass !!!!

Is it the right thing in Clattenburg's mind?

Or the rest of the refs?

I doubt it.

Probably not smokes, in fact definitely not, but by not recording the refs 'conversations' they've left themselves open andI I'M NOT AGREEING WITH THE COMPLAINT OR JUSTIFYING IT but once it was made, there was really only one option 4 the chav's, and that was to refer it to the fa, and if you want to be really really picky ,probably the cops as well, . and yeah zero tolerance by the ref's on gobby spoilt brat footballers is well overdue.

[carmine]

So calling for a Mikel ban, huh? Do some of you possess logic and rationale or just a tub of lard between your ears?

What we know.

1. Mikel was told he was racially abused on the pitch.

In light of the Terry saga, what are CFC supposed to do?

Option 1.

Tell Mikel to forget about it. This would probably been the best suggestion in the light of the evidence BUT, I can see the headlines, Chelsea tell Mikel to ignore racial abuse! Yeah, that would be good for the club.

Option 2

Pursue the case to show they agree that racial abuse needs to be stamped out.

As for jacknd arguement that why it wasn't sorted out on the pitch. Yeah good idea. Mikel finds out what Ramires and Luiz heard after the incident, so Mikel stops playing football to go and argue with the ref. Brilliant!

As for Mikel being sued. Well, the case is on his behalf by the club, not by him personally, duuurrr...

Do you really think professional players (also in the case of those involved, players that are not known as troublemakers) would cook up a story that would potentially end their careers??

Sorry my friend but you are hopelessly off the mark.

The police have now dropped their investigation due to LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE....<deleted>

So your club filed charges against a match official in the knowledge that there was infact no evidence.Clearly happy to tarnish his career in pursuit of your own murky agenda

Then it leads to the conclusion that your club has pursued another agenda linked to their dismal disciplining of your captain in showing sour grapes over his abuse of ferdinand, which also blatently gives the finger to the "Kick racism out of football".

The FA is going to have to make an example of CFC and no amount of russian backhanders will "hopefully" get in the way of this. Perverting the course of justice and bringing the game into disrepute. A fitting punishment should be relegation to the championship. Do i expect it to happen? No, because you are not a Soton or a Wigan. Should it happen? Without a doubt..

Just edited to add what a pathetic, woeful response by Bruce Buck saying that if they hadn't complained they would have been crucified!!!!!!! For what you idiot? There was no evidence of anything in the first place! Now he's treating anyone like they're a complete idiot!

Idiot, I think not, Buck is right if they hadn't lodged the players complaint they would/could have later been open to accusations of covering up racial abuse.

But there was absolutely no evidence whatsoever of anything be said or infact anything even heard bar the musings of a brazillian that can't speak english. That makes Buck a complete tit

[carmine]

The complaint was made to the FA, not the police.

So basically the complaint was made by Chelsea. It was made without any evidence. the police have had their time wasted and the FA should deal with Chelsea accordingly

The 'evidence' was the statement made by the player, and irrespective of anyone's personal

opinion, once the statement was made to them, it wasn't the clubs place to question it , its

duty was to hand it over to the fa for them to investigate and for them to make a ruling on

it..

hand over what? An opinion from a brazillian bloke who can't speak english who reckoned that something "might" have been said!

Why are people still talking about evidence handed over? THERE WASN'T ANY!!! They basically decided to throw one in because they were behaving like sore losers.

[carmine]

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRrr interupted me copying bob seger!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ok Enlighten me, what would you expect them to do?

Come on rij....surely you want them relegated/docked points/placed in the stocks for a week.......!

Ide luv 2 do a double yoker on abramoivic's ugly mug. But seriously, the chavs did the right thing and still people get irrate!! but can u imagine if they didnt report it the morally correct brigade would have a field day and jacky would need at least a double bypass !!!!

How did they do the right thing when not a shred of evidence was offered?

They have wasted police time and brought the game into disrepute. Thats it, nothing else to add bar the punishment

[rijit]

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRrr interupted me copying bob seger!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ok Enlighten me, what would you expect them to do?

Come on rij....surely you want them relegated/docked points/placed in the stocks for a week.......!

Ide luv 2 do a double yoker on abramoivic's ugly mug. But seriously, the chavs did the right thing and still people get irrate!! but can u imagine if they didnt report it the morally correct brigade would have a field day and jacky would need at least a double bypass !!!!

How did they do the right thing when not a shred of evidence was offered?

They have wasted police time and brought the game into disrepute. Thats it, nothing else to add bar the punishment

Maybe you're right carmine but once the player made the complaint IT WASNT THE CLUBS PLACE TO JUDGE IT , it was clubs place to hand it over to their ruling body to judge it. Which they did.

[StevieH]

Brace yourselves! It gets worse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/20321225

peter herbert is a dangerous idiot.

what kind of lawyer makes an unprompted complaint to the police about an incident he cannot possibly have heard? an insane one, that's what kind. he's neither helping chelsea nor helping the football anti-racism movement here either.

[StevieH]

The 'evidence' was the statement made by the player, and irrespective of anyone's personal opinion, once the statement was made to them, it wasn't the clubs place to question it , its duty was to hand it over to the fa for them to investigate and for them to make a ruling on it..

that's not evidence, that's a wildly unfounded accusation. made by someone who doesn't speak english about someone who does speak english. chelsea's 'duty' was to think for a moment before they dragged a referee's career and reputation through the <deleted>.

[rijit]

Brace yourselves! It gets worse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/20321225

peter herbert is a dangerous idiot.

what kind of lawyer makes an unprompted complaint to the police about an incident he cannot possibly have heard? an insane one, that's what kind. he's neither helping chelsea nor helping the football anti-racism movement here either.

Steve what he's doing and using this case,as an example, is really he's questioning/challenging how appropriate the fa's current policy and its infrastructure on how they deal with racism is, he's saying they dont have a good enough system in place and unfortunately he has a point if someone is accused of breaking a law of the land surely the fa should automatically report it to the police?

Edited November 15, 2012 by rijit

[StevieH]

Steve what he's doing and using this case,as an example, is really he's questioning/challenging how appropriate the fa's current policy and its infrastructure on how they deal with racism is, he's saying they dont have a good enough system in place and unfortunately he has a point if someone is accused of breaking a law of the land surely the fa should automatically report it to the police?

no he isn't, he's courting publicity for himself and his organisation on the back of a very serious unfounded accusation. he has no idea whatsoever what happened in that incident and yet he feels compelled to go to the police about it? he's point-scoring and while the FA has plenty of faults, including how it often manages race issues in the game, this attention-seeking pillock isn't helping.

[rijit]

No steve HE'S HIGHLIGHTING A FLAW IN THE SYSTEM However on the face of it, he's sort of shot himself in the foot, cos to bac his argument up he's chosen this case, seemingly solely, because of its high media profile, which now has backfired on him, cos it seems the case was completely unfounded. But on the other hand he's now brought his broader argument into the public domain so you could look it from a moral stance as sort of job done.

[smokie36]

No steve HE'S HIGHLIGHTING A FLAW IN THE SYSTEM However on the face of it, he's sort of shot himself in the foot, cos to bac his argument up he's chosen this case, seemingly solely, because of its high media profile, which now has backfired on him, cos it seems the case was completely unfounded. But on the other hand he's now brought his broader argument into the public domain so you could look it from a moral stance as sort of job done.

Chelsea....moral stance.....come off it rij....!

[carmine]

No steve HE'S HIGHLIGHTING A FLAW IN THE SYSTEM However on the face of it, he's sort of shot himself in the foot, cos to bac his argument up he's chosen this case, seemingly solely, because of its high media profile, which now has backfired on him, cos it seems the case was completely unfounded. But on the other hand he's now brought his broader argument into the public domain so you could look it from a moral stance as sort of job done.

Do me a favour mate, that total b*llocks!!

[rijit]

No steve HE'S HIGHLIGHTING A FLAW IN THE SYSTEM However on the face of it, he's sort of shot himself in the foot, cos to bac his argument up he's chosen this case, seemingly solely, because of its high media profile, which now has backfired on him, cos it seems the case was completely unfounded. But on the other hand he's now brought his broader argument into the public domain so you could look it from a moral stance as sort of job done.

Chelsea....moral stance.....come off it rij....!

His argument isn't really with Chelsea it's with he F'A.

Edited November 15, 2012 by rijit

[MrRed]

These Black lawyers should be told politely to do one,having a legal association based on just colour is wrong in its very essence.

How can lawyers be deemed to be fair when they attach themselves to a particular association that's fundamental claim is to be Black?

They should stay well out of it and hopefully it has done this guy more bad publicity than good.

[StevieH]

No steve HE'S HIGHLIGHTING A FLAW IN THE SYSTEM However on the face of it, he's sort of shot himself in the foot, cos to bac his argument up he's chosen this case, seemingly solely, because of its high media profile, which now has backfired on him, cos it seems the case was completely unfounded. But on the other hand he's now brought his broader argument into the public domain so you could look it from a moral stance as sort of job done.

what FLAW in what SYSTEM?

there is no system. nobody has ever accused a referee of racism before, so this is totally without precedent. peter herbert has absolutely no place tossing his two bob worth into this process because a] it's nothing to do with him and b] he has literally no idea what happened. so the only logical conclusion is that he's publicity-hunting for himself and his organisation.

and what broader argument? that racism is bad? that's sort of a given now.

[MrRed]

The FA are now in negotiations with Clattenburg as to receiving a public apology from CFC and the players involved.

Clattenburg will except it for the good of the game and not press any charges of a personal nature.

The shit really hits the fan ....what happens to Clattenburg now as a referee? how can he referee CFC again?? If he carries on if they never give him a Chelsea game again how would that work!!

It will breed bias against CFC and imagine if he has to ref a game at the end of the season involving a team that is fighting for the league with CFC.

Chelsea want fuc_king good and proper for this because there is NO possibility in my eyes that he can referee again at the top level,what they have done is crucify a mans career without any thought at all.Joke of a football club.

[carmine]

Incidentally did anyone see a brief interview with a member of the Assoc of Black Lawyers on CNN sport this morning?

Talk about a ranting obsessed twit with an enormous chip on his shoulder.

Believe me folks, dudes like this won't help the "anti racism in Sport issue...if anything they'll fuel it

[MrRed]

I must add that as a United fan ....how they could persecute one of our employees is beyond me,he will be missed!

[carmine]

These Black lawyers should be told politely to do one,having a legal association based on just colour is wrong in its very essence.

How can lawyers be deemed to be fair when they attach themselves to a particular association that's fundamental claim is to be Black?

They should stay well out of it and hopefully it has done this guy more bad publicity than good.

Good point Red. Its just a totally flawed concept isn't it

[rijit]

No steve HE'S HIGHLIGHTING A FLAW IN THE SYSTEM However on the face of it, he's sort of shot himself in the foot, cos to bac his argument up he's chosen this case, seemingly solely, because of its high media profile, which now has backfired on him, cos it seems the case was completely unfounded. But on the other hand he's now brought his broader argument into the public domain so you could look it from a moral stance as sort of job done.

what FLAW in what SYSTEM?

there is no system. and what broader argument? that racism is bad? that's sort of a given now.

Quite simple really, His argument is that the fa have a duty to report incidents of racial abuse to the police and have no system in place to do so and then what he backs that up with is that he says there have been 104 players sent of for racial abuse, and not one of them were reported to the police. Cover up or just pure negligence, either way the fa have foolishly left themselves wide open and it needs addressing

Edited November 15, 2012 by rijit

[Chicog]

he says there have been 104 players sent of for racial abuse, and not one of them were reported to the police. Cover up or just pure negligence, either way the fa have foolishly left themselves wide open and it needs addressing

He can say what he likes, where's the evidence? He wants to report every Tottenham fan for singing "Yiddo" - what a douchebag.

He's yet another self-entitled black man trying to correct perceived wrongs. He things he's Martin Luther King. Newsflash: He isn't, he's just an opportunistic publicity seeker.

I'll accept The Association for Black Lawyers when we are allowed to publish crime statistics by ethnic group.

[rijit]

he says there have been 104 players sent of for racial abuse, and not one of them were reported to the police. Cover up or just pure negligence, either way the fa have foolishly left themselves wide open and it needs addressing

He can say what he likes, where's the evidence? He wants to report every Tottenham fan for singing "Yiddo" - what a douchebag.

He's yet another self-entitled black man trying to correct perceived wrongs. He things he's Martin Luther King. Newsflash: He isn't, he's just an opportunistic publicity seeker.

I'll accept The Association for Black Lawyers when we are allowed to publish crime statistics by ethnic group.

Yep agreed he's been proved wrong with the yid thing and I dont disagree with him being accused of publicity seeking,but with the fa having a duty to report racial incidents to the police and failing to do so, surely he's got a point.

[rijit]

These Black lawyers should be told politely to do one,having a legal association based on just colour is wrong in its very essence.

How can lawyers be deemed to be fair when they attach themselves to a particular association that's fundamental claim is to be Black?

They should stay well out of it and hopefully it has done this guy more bad publicity than good.

Surely the essence of having lawyers is that they are 'paid' to represent one sides view,and your saying that they cant represent a mans view or side cos he's black? really!!!

[MrRed]

Yes really rijit,without getting involved in the race relations act or equality act take a look at reverse discrimination and follow the twisted path.

"Reverse Discrimination can be defined as the unfair treatment of members of the majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities.Conceptualizing efforts as reverse discrimination began to become popular in the early-mid 1970s, the time period that focused on under-representation and affirmative action as a good faith effort or due diligence to remedy the effects of past discrimination"

All lawyers have a code of responsibility to the public.

Edited November 15, 2012 by MrRed

[mjj]

Lawyers.

Responsibility.

Public.

55555555555

[rijit]

Interesting red , <deleted> talk about a profession protecting itself by making the lingo difficult to access!!!! yeah ide say that that little statement probably covers clattenberg, but not sure it covers a group of black lawyers representing another group of black' proffesionals' who deem themselves as unrepresented.

[Chicog]

he says there have been 104 players sent of for racial abuse, and not one of them were reported to the police. Cover up or just pure negligence, either way the fa have foolishly left themselves wide open and it needs addressing

He can say what he likes, where's the evidence? He wants to report every Tottenham fan for singing "Yiddo" - what a douchebag.

He's yet another self-entitled black man trying to correct perceived wrongs. He things he's Martin Luther King. Newsflash: He isn't, he's just an opportunistic publicity seeker.

I'll accept The Association for Black Lawyers when we are allowed to publish crime statistics by ethnic group.

Yep agreed he's been proved wrong with the yid thing and I dont disagree with him being accused of publicity seeking,but with the fa having a duty to report racial incidents to the police and failing to do so, surely he's got a point.

He's got a point if he has evidence of 104 incidents of racial abuse.

[rijit]

Thank f--- some one else can see it!!!!! Yeah i agree would be interesting to see where he's got his info from.

Edited November 15, 2012 by rijit