Mark Clattenburg

[David]

Mark Clattenburg has been talking about the Chelsea v Spurs game to The Men in Blazers podcast

https://meninblazers.com/page/podcasts

Spoke about having a "gameplan", whilst I can understand the reasoning, we just want consistency, if that results in sending offs so be it, apply the rules of the game. 

Can't see referees thanking him for this one, I'm sure he's not the only one. 

Does make me wonder how much can fan abuse swing a ref, if you have 30k calling him all names under the sun are you less likely to get a decision. Will some games effect future games they ref.

"It was theatre. I went in with a gameplan - that I didn't want Tottenham blaming Mark Clattenburg that they were going to lose the title," he told the Men In Blazers podcast.

"There should have been three red cards for Tottenham. I allowed them to self-destruct.

"All the media and people in the world went 'Tottenham lost the title'. If I send three players off, what's the headlines? 'Clattenburg cost Tottenham the title'.

"It was pure theatre that they self-destructed."

He added: "I helped the game. It benefited from my style of refereeing. Some referees would have played by the book and Tottenham would have been down to seven or eight players and looking for an excuse.

"I didn't give them an excuse because my gameplan was let them lose the title."

Full Story: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/mark-clattenburg-admits-wanted-tottenham-11636668

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

He strikes me as a man that loves the sound of his own voice and the smell of his own guff.

[Bris Vegas]

Loves the attention. Still, he was deemed one of the best refs around and his personality helped him get there.

He is right though. English football is a theatre. Everyone always talks about referees even when they don’t need to.

It’s a culture thing. Refs here get far too much attention so yoy can’t blame one or two for lapping it up.

[mrdave85]

It's bad enough that the refs are actually sponsored now. 

Why does a ref need an EA sleeve logo? 

[JoetheRam]

Borderline match fixing he's admitting to here.

Utter ******.

[Boycie]

7 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

Loves the attention. Still, he was deemed one of the best refs around and his personality helped him get there.

He is right though. English football is a theatre. Everyone always talks about referees even when they don’t need to.

It’s a culture thing. Refs here get far too much attention so yoy can’t blame one or two for lapping it up.

Unlike Mexican refs

 

[Alph]

Think he's the best. But that interview makes it hard to make a connection between what he says and what he does. 

What he's saying is that he considers the club, the league position etc when deciding whether to give a red card? 

Yet when you watch him and appreciate he is making real time decisions, very rare does he leave you puzzled. 

 

[Sparkle]

Scandalous- surly that affects everything including gambling 

[Highgate]

12 hours ago, David said:

He added: "I helped the game. It benefited from my style of refereeing. Some referees would have played by the book and Tottenham would have been down to seven or eight players and looking for an excuse.

 

Yes, that's right they would, and those guys we call good referees, Mr Clattenburg.

 

[Bris Vegas]

Refs obviously play to the occasion too.

If Howard Webb had played to the book then Holland would have had about four players sent off in the 2010 WC final.

But what sort of headline would that give out? He would have been the talk of the town, and blame would have been placed on him.

[Wolfie20]

So by the sound of things, some teams will get treated differently to others. A referee in the FA Cup final decides to only dish out yellow cards to 2 players on the same side for what would usually be sending-off offences, yet another referee, by applying the laws of the game, with similar offences, gives reds to 2 Accrington Stanley players in Round 1 of the same competition. Accrington Stanley lose the match and their manager gets sacked the following day. The offending team in the Cup Final scores a winner late on in the match and their manager gets an extended contract.

All hypothetical I know but this is a very slippery slope and raises huge questions as to the integrity of referees which, long term, can only be damaging for the game. Clattenburg would have been under even greater scrutiny if the final result had been different.

[TigerTedd]

4 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:

So by the sound of things, some teams will get treated differently to others. A referee in the FA Cup final decides to only dish out yellow cards to 2 players on the same side for what would usually be sending-off offences, yet another referee, by applying the laws of the game, with similar offences, gives reds to 2 Accrington Stanley players in Round 1 of the same competition. Accrington Stanley lose the match and their manager gets sacked the following day. The offending team in the Cup Final scores a winner late on in the match and their manager gets an extended contract.

All hypothetical I know but this is a very slippery slope and raises huge questions as to the integrity of referees which, long term, can only be damaging for the game. Clattenburg would have been under even greater scrutiny if the final result had been different.

He probably wouldn’t have said anything if the final result had been different. 

[Dimmu]

We need AI to solve these problems!. Just have enough cameras around and each foul can be judged straight away.

Welcome equality, no more Fergie time.

[ViewsFromTheMiddle]

Dermot Gallagher not impressed. 

"We are duty bound to treat every player in every game firmly, fairly and consistently," said Gallagher. 

"He [Clattenburg] certainly didn't. It was all about him, wasn't it?"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42234221

[Bris Vegas]

I think Clattenburg and Webb ultimately were fortunate that the right results happened regardless of their officiating.

[ViewsFromTheMiddle]

1 minute ago, Bris Vegas said:

I think Clattenburg and Webb ultimately were fortunate that the right results happened regardless of their officiating.

Yep. Steve Claridge alluded to that saying "Say he doesn't send those Tottenham players off, they beat Chelsea and they win the league. How does his masterplan work then?"

[AndyinLiverpool]

21 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

I think Clattenburg and Webb ultimately were fortunate that the right results happened regardless of their officiating.

Webb (or any other referee for that matter in that situation) never stood a chance. As you said in another post, he could easily have sent off 3 or 4 Dutch players (a couple in the first 20 minutes) and we'd have been left with what sort of game? Every referee at a world cup will have at the back of their minds the public humiliation of one of their number by the world press and the president of FIFA after the Portugal-Netherlands match in 2006, where both sets of players behaved appallingly and 4 were sent off. Who needs that sort of ****? The Dutch coach exploited this to his (thankfully unsuccessful) ends.

Refs are always up against it.

[Highgate]

10 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

Refs obviously play to the occasion too.

If Howard Webb had played to the book then Holland would have had about four players sent off in the 2010 WC final.

But what sort of headline would that give out? He would have been the talk of the town, and blame would have been placed on him.

Or maybe the Dutch would have stopped trying to kick lumps out of their Spanish opponents once they had gone down to 10 men. It was Webb unwillingness to apply the rules that gave them free reign to behave like they did. Aggressive tactics will escalate when the referee is perceived to be weak, just as they did in the Chelsea v Spurs game.

[Highgate]

1 hour ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Webb (or any other referee for that matter in that situation) never stood a chance. As you said in another post, he could easily have sent off 3 or 4 Dutch players (a couple in the first 20 minutes) and we'd have been left with what sort of game? Every referee at a world cup will have at the back of their minds the public humiliation of one of their number by the world press and the president of FIFA after the Portugal-Netherlands match in 2006, where both sets of players behaved appallingly and 4 were sent off. Who needs that sort of ****? The Dutch coach exploited this to his (thankfully unsuccessful) ends.

Refs are always up against it.

Very tough job it's true, and it's so easy to make a mistake. Often it's difficult to judge whether a foul has been even when you are watching the reply on TV.

But i don't ever buy the ref would have had to send off '3 or 4' players argument. That's assuming teams would simply carry on recklessly fouling even after the first red card, knowing full well that a second red card would all but put an end to their chances of victory. 

In the 2010 WC final, if the Dutch had carried on fouling even when getting players sent off, yeah, the spectacle would have been ruined for sure, but at least we would have had deserved and fair victors in Spain. Nobody to blame for that but the poor behaviour of the Dutch players and presumably their manager. Imagine now the reverse scenario, where the Netherlands had actually won that game, despite fouling their way through it unpunished as they did. We would then have been left with unfair and undeserving winners of a World Cup, merely because a referee wanted to preserve the spectacle. The World Cup Champions in 2010 would be the Netherlands. Webb nearly allowed that injustice happen.

Football, and all sports actually, need referees to always to be as consistent as they can possibly be. The integrity of the sport is more important that the spectacle.

[AndyinLiverpool]

16 minutes ago, Highgate said:

Very tough job it's true, and it's so easy to make a mistake. Often it's difficult to judge whether a foul has been even when you are watching the reply on TV.

But i don't ever buy the ref would have had to send off '3 or 4' players argument. That's assuming teams would simply carry on recklessly fouling even after the first red card, knowing full well that a second red card would all but put an end to their chances of victory. 

In the 2010 WC final, if the Dutch had carried on fouling even when getting players sent off, yeah, the spectacle would have been ruined for sure, but at least we would have had deserved and fair victors in Spain. Nobody to blame for that but the poor behaviour of the Dutch players and presumably their manager. Imagine now the reverse scenario, where the Netherlands had actually won that game, despite fouling their way through it unpunished as they did. We would then have been left with unfair and undeserving winners of a World Cup, merely because a referee wanted to preserve the spectacle. The World Cup Champions in 2010 would be the Netherlands. Webb nearly allowed that injustice happen.

Football, and all sports actually, need referees to always to be as consistent as they can possibly be. The integrity of the sport is more important that the spectacle.

The Dutch had previous - that game in Nuremberg I mentioned before (it was mostly the same team). That doesn't suggest they would have stopped behaving the way they were because of one red card.