http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/d...ist-the-club-should-be-relegated-immediately/
If Chelsea have slandered Mark Clattenburg as a racist, the club should be relegated immediately
Dan Hodges
Dan Hodges is a Blairite cuckoo in the Miliband nest. He has worked for the Labour Party, the GMB trade union and managed numerous independent political campaigns. He writes about Labour with tribal loyalty and without reservation.
Yesterday the police announced that they would not be continuing with their investigation into whether the Premier League referee Mark Clattenburg racially abused Chelsea midfielder John Obi Mikel during his side's game against Manchester United last month. Clattenburg, it appears, has escaped on the basis of a legal technicality. Namely, that there was no complaint submitted by any victim, there were no witnesses to the alleged incident, and there was no evidence any offence was committed.
I’m not a legal expert. But in my layman’s view, the absence of a complainant or a single witness or a single shred of evidence would seem to make this a fairly clear-cut case. Or non-case.
But not, it would seem, in the eyes of the Society of Black Lawyers. "It sounds remarkably like a football cover-up," the society's chairman Peter Herbert told BBC Radio 5 Live. "It sounds remarkably like the football industry wanted to have this issue swept under the carpet.” Well yes, it could sound like that. Or, alternatively, it could sound like Mark Clattenburg is wholly innocent, the victim of a grotesque slur on his character, and the Society of Black Lawyers are trying to milk this issue for all it’s worth. And on balance, I’m with Clattenburg.
Let’s recall how this alleged incident came to light. The game was 2-2, Clattenburg had already sent off Chelsea defender Branislav Ivanovic, and had also just dismissed Fernando Torres. Five minutes later Javier Hernandez scored a controversial winner. Mikel remonstrated with Clattenburg and was himself booked.
After the game a number of Chelsea players and officials confronted Clattenburg in his dressing room, and claimed he had made racially offensive comments to both Mikel and another Chelsea player, Juan Mata. Chelsea subsequently submitted a formal complaint to the FA over the alleged incident.
No one except those on the pitch – or charged with investigating what happened on it – knows what took place. That includes me, and the Society of Black Lawyers. But what we do know is this.
The police have dropped their investigation, for the reasons outlined. Chelsea submitted a formal complaint to the FA, supported by a statement supplied by Mikel. That does not strike me as the actions of an individual or organisation seeking to “have this issue swept under the carpet”. We also know that whatever evidence Chelsea and Mikel have in their possession, it was not significant enough for them to want to share it with the police.
Chelsea have also confirmed they would not be submitting evidence in relation to the comments supposedly made to Juan Mata, because, again, there was no evidence to support them. Mata himself has confirmed he did not hear any derogatory comments, nor did he refer to any such incident when he wrote a lengthy blog post on the match a few hours after returning home. He has also stated that he is happy to co-operate with any investigation into the supposed incident.
Mark Clattenburg had been officiating in football for nearly 20 years. He has been a Premier League referee since 2004, and on the FIFA list since 2006. The Premier League confirmed to me that he has never, to their knowledge, faced any accusations relating to race at any point in his career.
At the time of the supposed incident Clattenburg was standing in front of 41,644 spectators. He was also wearing a microphone audible to at least three other match officials. The game was being televised on live television. TV pictures indicate there were several players, from both sides, in the immediate vicinity when the comments were supposedly made. If Clattenburg did chose to use a racial slur against Mikel, he must have done so in the knowledge he would be unlikely to get away with it undetected.
There is also the context of the complaint. “The key decisions from the referee today influenced the result," Chelsea manager Robert Di Matteo told Sky Sports after the match, "He sent off Fernando Torres and the third goal is offside – those things have clearly decided the game in the favour of our opposition.” When specifically asked about the allegations, Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck said this to the Evening Standard: "We weren't interested in any confrontation with the referee or anybody else, had no thoughts of revenge on the referee. He made two obvious mistakes [sending Fernando Torres off and allowing Javier Hernandez's offside winner] which changed the tide. I felt we had the moral high ground, so I didn't really feel that bad about the defeat or have that feeling in my stomach.” In one breath Chelsea’s chairman says his club wasn’t interested in confrontation with Mark Clattenburg. Yet in the next both he and his manager claim Clattenburg cost them the match.
Now here’s Buck’s reasoning for why Chelsea did submit the complaint, “We were guided by obligations that are imposed by the Football Association and also as an employer … Misconduct is a defined term under the FA regulations and includes such racial behaviour. We also had to consider the Equality Act 2010, which imposes an obligation on an employer to take certain actions if an employee is subject to discrimination by third parties”. That Bruce Buck quoting the Equalities Act is the same Bruce Buck who currently employs John Terry.
Obviously we’ll have to wait for the outcome of the FA inquiry. But this is what I think.
I think Mark Clattenburg is totally innocent. Perhaps John Obi Mikel misheard his comments. Perhaps he was encouraged by third parties in his belief Clattenburg had racially abused him. Either way I agree with Sir Alex Ferguson when he said “I don’t believe Mark Clattenburg would make any comments like that. I refuse to believe it. It’s unthinkable. In the modern climate, I just don’t believe it. Simple as that”.
I also think Chelsea are a football club totally out of control. Their internal management processes have clearly collapsed. They are being run by a combination of arrogance, self-pity and self-indulgence that starts with the owner, and cascades down.
If the FA find Mark Clattenburg did racially abuse John Obi Mikel, I’ll hold my hands up. But if they don’t, then Chelsea Football Club, and those individuals involved in propagating the allegation, should face their own investigation. And if they are shown to have acted maliciously the club should face relegation and those responsible for perpetrating the false allegation the same sanction Clattenburg would have faced if Clattenburg had been found guilty.
Sorry if that sounds a draconian sanction. But a man’s livelihood – no, his whole life – could have been destroyed by this.
If Mark Clattenburg is acquitted, Chelsea Football Club should find themselves in the dock. Perhaps they could get the Society of Black Lawyers to represent them.
If Chelsea have slandered Mark Clattenburg as a racist, the club should be relegated immediately
Dan Hodges
Dan Hodges is a Blairite cuckoo in the Miliband nest. He has worked for the Labour Party, the GMB trade union and managed numerous independent political campaigns. He writes about Labour with tribal loyalty and without reservation.
Yesterday the police announced that they would not be continuing with their investigation into whether the Premier League referee Mark Clattenburg racially abused Chelsea midfielder John Obi Mikel during his side's game against Manchester United last month. Clattenburg, it appears, has escaped on the basis of a legal technicality. Namely, that there was no complaint submitted by any victim, there were no witnesses to the alleged incident, and there was no evidence any offence was committed.
I’m not a legal expert. But in my layman’s view, the absence of a complainant or a single witness or a single shred of evidence would seem to make this a fairly clear-cut case. Or non-case.
But not, it would seem, in the eyes of the Society of Black Lawyers. "It sounds remarkably like a football cover-up," the society's chairman Peter Herbert told BBC Radio 5 Live. "It sounds remarkably like the football industry wanted to have this issue swept under the carpet.” Well yes, it could sound like that. Or, alternatively, it could sound like Mark Clattenburg is wholly innocent, the victim of a grotesque slur on his character, and the Society of Black Lawyers are trying to milk this issue for all it’s worth. And on balance, I’m with Clattenburg.
Let’s recall how this alleged incident came to light. The game was 2-2, Clattenburg had already sent off Chelsea defender Branislav Ivanovic, and had also just dismissed Fernando Torres. Five minutes later Javier Hernandez scored a controversial winner. Mikel remonstrated with Clattenburg and was himself booked.
After the game a number of Chelsea players and officials confronted Clattenburg in his dressing room, and claimed he had made racially offensive comments to both Mikel and another Chelsea player, Juan Mata. Chelsea subsequently submitted a formal complaint to the FA over the alleged incident.
No one except those on the pitch – or charged with investigating what happened on it – knows what took place. That includes me, and the Society of Black Lawyers. But what we do know is this.
The police have dropped their investigation, for the reasons outlined. Chelsea submitted a formal complaint to the FA, supported by a statement supplied by Mikel. That does not strike me as the actions of an individual or organisation seeking to “have this issue swept under the carpet”. We also know that whatever evidence Chelsea and Mikel have in their possession, it was not significant enough for them to want to share it with the police.
Chelsea have also confirmed they would not be submitting evidence in relation to the comments supposedly made to Juan Mata, because, again, there was no evidence to support them. Mata himself has confirmed he did not hear any derogatory comments, nor did he refer to any such incident when he wrote a lengthy blog post on the match a few hours after returning home. He has also stated that he is happy to co-operate with any investigation into the supposed incident.
Mark Clattenburg had been officiating in football for nearly 20 years. He has been a Premier League referee since 2004, and on the FIFA list since 2006. The Premier League confirmed to me that he has never, to their knowledge, faced any accusations relating to race at any point in his career.
At the time of the supposed incident Clattenburg was standing in front of 41,644 spectators. He was also wearing a microphone audible to at least three other match officials. The game was being televised on live television. TV pictures indicate there were several players, from both sides, in the immediate vicinity when the comments were supposedly made. If Clattenburg did chose to use a racial slur against Mikel, he must have done so in the knowledge he would be unlikely to get away with it undetected.
There is also the context of the complaint. “The key decisions from the referee today influenced the result," Chelsea manager Robert Di Matteo told Sky Sports after the match, "He sent off Fernando Torres and the third goal is offside – those things have clearly decided the game in the favour of our opposition.” When specifically asked about the allegations, Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck said this to the Evening Standard: "We weren't interested in any confrontation with the referee or anybody else, had no thoughts of revenge on the referee. He made two obvious mistakes [sending Fernando Torres off and allowing Javier Hernandez's offside winner] which changed the tide. I felt we had the moral high ground, so I didn't really feel that bad about the defeat or have that feeling in my stomach.” In one breath Chelsea’s chairman says his club wasn’t interested in confrontation with Mark Clattenburg. Yet in the next both he and his manager claim Clattenburg cost them the match.
Now here’s Buck’s reasoning for why Chelsea did submit the complaint, “We were guided by obligations that are imposed by the Football Association and also as an employer … Misconduct is a defined term under the FA regulations and includes such racial behaviour. We also had to consider the Equality Act 2010, which imposes an obligation on an employer to take certain actions if an employee is subject to discrimination by third parties”. That Bruce Buck quoting the Equalities Act is the same Bruce Buck who currently employs John Terry.
Obviously we’ll have to wait for the outcome of the FA inquiry. But this is what I think.
I think Mark Clattenburg is totally innocent. Perhaps John Obi Mikel misheard his comments. Perhaps he was encouraged by third parties in his belief Clattenburg had racially abused him. Either way I agree with Sir Alex Ferguson when he said “I don’t believe Mark Clattenburg would make any comments like that. I refuse to believe it. It’s unthinkable. In the modern climate, I just don’t believe it. Simple as that”.
I also think Chelsea are a football club totally out of control. Their internal management processes have clearly collapsed. They are being run by a combination of arrogance, self-pity and self-indulgence that starts with the owner, and cascades down.
If the FA find Mark Clattenburg did racially abuse John Obi Mikel, I’ll hold my hands up. But if they don’t, then Chelsea Football Club, and those individuals involved in propagating the allegation, should face their own investigation. And if they are shown to have acted maliciously the club should face relegation and those responsible for perpetrating the false allegation the same sanction Clattenburg would have faced if Clattenburg had been found guilty.
Sorry if that sounds a draconian sanction. But a man’s livelihood – no, his whole life – could have been destroyed by this.
If Mark Clattenburg is acquitted, Chelsea Football Club should find themselves in the dock. Perhaps they could get the Society of Black Lawyers to represent them.
