|
Post by joanna on Feb 16, 2016 13:53:39 GMT
Ok, David; will oblige: From The Telegraph: it has been suggested Clattenburg has forged an undesirable reputation among players and coaching staff as the overfamiliar referee who loves the limelight and is too ‘matey’ with the stars.
From The Independent: Referee Mark Clattenburg and Southampton
The club have complained about comments allegedly made by the match official to Southampton's England midfielder Adam Lallana.
PEDRO MENDES 'GOAL' NOT GIVEN
Clattenburg failed, along with his assistants, to spot Tottenham midfielder Mendes' shot had been fumbled clearly over the line by Manchester United goalkeeper Roy Carroll in a match at Old Trafford and a goal was not given.
TONY HIBBERT SENT OFF
The Durham referee sent off Everton defender Hibbert in a Merseyside derby. After initially appearing to be about to show him a yellow card, Clattenburg seemed to change his mind and pulled out a red after a brief exchange with Steven Gerrard. He later did not send off Dirk Kuyt for a two-footed lunge at Phil Neville. Clattenburg did not referee another Everton match until 2012.
STERLING INCIDENT
It was the second time this season Clattenburg had frustrated City in a Spurs clash after two controversial offside decisions in the 4-1 loss at White Hart Lane in September.
Pellegrini said: "Everyone saw what happened. Unfortunately for us it was the same referee, Clattenburg, as when we lost against Tottenham in the first round with two clear goals offside.
'It was a penalty that was decisive for the game."
SACKED OVER BUSINESS DEALINGS
He was suspended pending a probe into his business affairs following allegations he owed £60,000 as a result of a failed venture. He was pulled out of the FA Community Shield clash between Manchester United and Portsmouth as a result and later sacked by the Professional Game Match Officials board. In February 2009 he was reinstated as a Select Group Referee on appeal, but suspended for eight months from August 6, 2008, - the date of his original ban - for "issues relating to his private business affairs".
CRAIG BELLAMY ACCUSATION
It is alleged, in a match between Bolton and Manchester City, that Clattenburg asked the City bench: "How do you work with Craig Bellamy all week?" He then sent Bellamy off for two yellow cards in the game.
NANI GOAL STANDS
Clattenburg allowed a goal to stand between Manchester United and Tottenham when Nani tapped the ball in after Spurs goalkeeper Heurelho Gomes put the ball down, believing his side had a free-kick. Clattenburg had not blown his whistle.
RACIST ABUSE CLAIM
Clattenburg was accused of using "inappropriate language" towards Chelsea midfielder John Obi Mikel during their 3-2 defeat to Manchester United - a game in which Clattenburg sent off Branislav Ivanovic and Fernando Torres, while replays showed United's winning goal was offside. The allegations were the subject of investigations from both the FA and the Metropolitan Police
|
|
|
Post by davidm on Feb 16, 2016 15:41:21 GMT
Did he ref our match at Tottenham in 2011 when he awarded 3 pens in the first half against us?
He changed his mind on one because of an earlier offside.
He also did not give us a pen when Gary Cahill was clearly tripped in the box. That would have put us 2-1 up as Spurs had missed pen no 2 but he booked Cahill for diving when it was a clear trip.
Just to rub it in Spurs scored a 90th min winner.
|
|
|
Post by andyl on Feb 16, 2016 15:59:40 GMT
To develop ,David. I was at the Spurs game All three decisions were spot on in my opinion and the one revoked for offside was fine. They actually scored a first attempt at the one missed but he ordered it retaken for encroachment. I felt that the Cahill trip should have been a penalty although he ran at them and tried for it. The Krancjar winner was a sickener because Sturridge had equalised after the penalty carnage and we had done quite well.
Re the agent why not?His choice who to employ only possible conflict if players have same agent. But clubs have agents. And Deano ' s Sportshield business makes money from agents
But if we are scraping the barrel for Clattenburg controversy he got a reprimand for leaving a ground alone to go and see an Ed Sheeran concert. Now that really is beyond the pale!!!
|
|
|
Post by davidm on Feb 16, 2016 16:14:35 GMT
All three decisions were spot on in my opinion Seems like a few players disagreed:-
"The first spot-kick was given in the fourth minute after Jussi Jaaskelainen parried Michael Dawson's header straight to Vedran Corluka, whose prod towards goal was stopped by the arm of Kevin Davies.
The Bolton players were incensed by the decision but referee Mark Clattenburg, who was in line for a busy day, waved away the protests and Van der Vaart placed his 12th goal of the season into the top left corner. "
Was this the one where Kevin Davies was on the floor and the ball was kicked against his hand?
It's quite good fun this "get at Clattenburg" session. I'm sure I'll think of more examples to dig at him. By the way, I thought that he had a cracking game in the Eastleigh cup tie.
|
|
|
Post by davidm on Feb 16, 2016 16:19:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Feb 16, 2016 17:02:56 GMT
This man continues to make seriously flawed judgements, both on and off the pitch and it's clear from the examples above and here that he cannot be trusted:
Referee Mark Clattenburg faces probe over conflict of interest after he joins agency who represent Premier League players
Mark Clattenburg agreed to let Catalyst4Soccer looker after his on-field affairs
The football agency also represent Premier League players
Clattenburg will be required to explain why he has created a potential conflict of interest
Referees must get permission from Mike Riley to carry out extra work
Follow us: @mailonline
|
|
|
Post by andyl on Feb 16, 2016 17:29:33 GMT
David
Thanks for this. It confirms my memory. Clattenburg had a good game! If you look at his positioning he is spot on for everything in the highlights. He gives three penalties in the first half hour and correctly rescinds one ( not on the highlights) on the advice of his linesman. He correctly orders a retake. All those things alone took courage and consistency.
The Kevin Davies incident is a perfectly reasonable decision. His hand is outstretched and it stops a goalbound shot. He was very lucky not to be sent off but players were behind him. OK he has fallen over. He does not deliberately decide to put his hand in the way of the shot but it stops the shot. This is what I mean about the law. The word deliberate and before it intentional have to be interpreted. We said earlier in the thread that if the Sterling incident were transported to the nearpost there would be less argument. Most times when players handle the ball on or near the line they don't do it deliberately. It strikes them. If that had been Crouch on the line doing the same thing we would all have been clamouring for a penalty and complaining furiously. I had and have no problem at all with that being awarded.
Re Cahill, I thought at the time it was a penalty and it fooled me completely.But not Clattenburg.Cahill runs into his opponent. Yes there is contact and yes I've seen those given. But Cahill throws himself over in an elaborate dive which puts the lie to the whole situation and Clattenburg from me gets full marks for not giving in to pressure and a set up.
Re Joanna's list how on earth is a referee to see that Carroll let Mendes' shot in? Even the assistant had no chance. And re the earlier Spurs victory over City one of the offsides is not cut and dried but again it's the assistant's job to spot offsides.A referee running a diagonal has no chance unless by chance he is in line and if he is in line watching for that he's not watching for fouls. The Nani goal was correct much as Garry Jones' was at Rotherham against Jim McDonagh when he played for them. some here may remember that.
Re Craig Bellamy if true then stupid but understandable when he's been in your ear the whole match. We have seen Bellamy in action at Bolton!
The Gerrard one looked bad and attracted comment. But as I recall the decision was in the end correct and we should remember that whilst he is answering Gerrard he is also consulting his assistant and giving himself time to think.
The business venture that went wrong was difficult for him. I wasn't sure at the time what it had to do with his refereeeing . Maybe Caesar's wife again. Our whole club is bust. We are in a glasshouse on this one.
Re Mikel he was cleared after enquiry. And this at Chelsea!
re Lallana, Rooney etc too familar but that's his style. Referees are allowed to be idiosyncratic. I once listened to a talk by Ken Aston, 1963 Cup Final referee and no stranger to controversy in 1962 refereeing the World Cup battle of Santiago! He had a story of a game when Denis Law came up to berate him for a decision which he had got wrong and he replied yes, Law ( not Denis)I made a mistake but you've had an absolute stinker. At which Denis laughed and said ' fair enough'. Was he too matey?. Not sure how such relationships can be forged in an era of feigned injury, dives, group outrage and all the other disquieting features of modern football but the sort of dialogue in which Clattenburg indulges seems to go down well with players most of the time. He doesn't stand afar and summon them. He doesn't lecture them
I think Mark Clattenburg is a really good referee, the best we have and he's better now as he goes along. OK I as most others disagree with the Sterling decision but it wasn't dishonest and it wasn't completely wrong. Would I like him if I met him? Probably not but so what- unles and until he does something off field that calls his integrity into question I think he can be allowed a mistake or error of judgment or two. Hhe makes very few and he gets alot right that others miss. He lets a lot go too if it's unimportant and his games almost always flow end to end- no coincidence
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Feb 16, 2016 19:14:14 GMT
Some final points, Andy:(and this time, I do mean final!)
1.Are you a relative of Clutz or somehow in his thrall? Maybe you are the secret son of Dougie, having inherited all his characteristics.....
2. Were you like this at school? If so, you must have driven teachers to distraction, arguing against all the evidence. Did they make you stand in the corner with your finger pressed to your lips?
3. Don't you get sick of being wrong all the time? Your opinion on the SKD incident, for example, is preposterous.
4. Letting the game flow, positioning etc are all very well and good but if you can't get the important decisions right, the rest is just decoration. There is a huge catalogue of errors as evidence of incompetence and the above are just the tip of the Clattenburg,,,,,sorry of the iceberg.....
His judgement on diving is particularly bad (thanks for reminding me!), and he repeatedly lets pulling and pushing in the area go unchecked. His attempts to be matey, gesturing as if to say, "Sorry, lads, what can I do? I didn't want to, but you left me no choice. Forgive me." are pathetic and simply irritate.
It is just not credible that everyone else is out of step except you, I'm afraid, Andy....but we still love you and admire your stubbornness in defending your views. I have booked you an appointment at Specsavers and another at the behavioural psychologist's.
PS: The examples I quoted above are not my views, but newspaper reports of the generally agreed views of the media and public.
|
|
|
Post by andyl on Feb 16, 2016 20:26:25 GMT
I get that you disagree with me,Joanna and respect your right to differ. But you cannot claim to speak for 'everyone "You are asserting your view of the incidents. For starters on these issues a group of current referees would be expert witnesses. I'm not sure others can claim overriding legitimacy of argument?
But anyway enough for one day!
|
|