Another Bellingham Saga

[Prestwich_Blue]

Clattenburg was a bent bastard on and off the field, including in his personal business dealings.
Convinced there is a real reason he suddenly fucked off abroad when he did

I did a KOTK article a while ago about the different treatment we got from Clattenburg while Thaksin was in charge and after he went. Based on our average points per game while Thaksin owned us (and had his honorary position for a while post the ADUG takeover), we should have had around 15 more points in the games he reffed after Thaksin was finally cut free.

When I went back and looked at those post-Thaksin games in more detail, you could pin that down to a number of bullshit decisions from him. Decisions like denying us a clear and obvious penalty at Chelsea in 2011, that would have put us 2-0 up, then sending off Gael Clichy and giving the penalty that saw us lose 2-1.

The Football Is Fixed guy used to infer there was a relationship between clattenburg and Thaksin, one that was allegedly somewhat more sinister than them sending each other Christmas cards. When you see how he treated us after Thaksin was ousted, you can well believe it.

 

[LongsightM13]

I did a KOTK article a while ago about the different treatment we got from Clattenburg while Thaksin was in charge and after he went. Based on our average points per game while Thaksin owned us (and had his honorary position for a while post the ADUG takeover), we should have had around 15 more points in the games he reffed after Thaksin was finally cut free.

When I went back and looked at those post-Thaksin games in more detail, you could pin that down to a number of bullshit decisions from him. Decisions like denying us a clear and obvious penalty at Chelsea in 2011, that would have put us 2-0 up, then sending off Gael Clichy and giving the penalty that saw us lose 2-1.

The Football Is Fixed guy used to infer there was a relationship between clattenburg and Thaksin, one that was allegedly somewhat more sinister than them sending each other Christmas cards. When you see how he treated us after Thaksin was ousted, you can well believe it.

The Silva non-penalty at Stamford Bridge was scandalous.
Also this one

Roberto Mancini questions Mark Clattenburg's role in Gareth Barry ban | Roberto Mancini | The Guardian

Roberto Mancini has questioned Mark Clattenburg for reporting comments by Gareth Barry that led to the midfielder accepting a Football Association charge

www.google.co.uk

 

[LongsightM13]

A referee absolutely desperate for money you say? What could possibly go wrong?….

EXPOSED: Here’s why top ref Mark Clattenburg has been banned

Top referee Mark Clattenburg was suspended after allegations he had sent an email threatening the family of a business associate.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The Silva non-penalty at Stamford Bridge was scandalous.
Also this one

Roberto Mancini questions Mark Clattenburg's role in Gareth Barry ban | Roberto Mancini | The Guardian

Roberto Mancini has questioned Mark Clattenburg for reporting comments by Gareth Barry that led to the midfielder accepting a Football Association charge

www.google.co.uk

I've found the article. Here's the incidents I noted:

Here are the games under his control where we may have lost points due to incorrect decisions:

• 12 Dec 2009: Bolton 3-3 City. This was in the period when we did well in the games under him but was still a very controversial game in which Craig Bellamy was fouled and Clattenburg then produced a second yellow against him for a supposed dive. Prior to that, at half-time, Clattenburg is alleged to have asked one of Mark Hughes’ coaching team “How do you work with Bellamy all week?”
• But here’s some of the controversial incidents involving Clattenburg that could well have cost us points since 2010:
• 18 Sep 2011: Fulham 2-2 City. These were the only points dropped in the first 12 games of the first PL winning season. Fulham’s second goal came after a breakaway, following what appeared to be a foul on Dzeko that wasn’t given. Had it been then we probably would have got all 3 points in this game so that’s 2 possibly lost.
• 12 Dec 2011: Chelsea 2-1 City. This was the first defeat of that season and we went ahead early on, then Silva was fouled in the area in the 15th minute. It was a clear penalty yet Clattenburg inexplicably waved play on. Chelsea won the game late on after a penalty was awarded against us for a handball by Lescott but by that time we were down to ten men, Gael Clichy having been sent off for a second yellow card early in the second half. Had we been awarded the penalty and gone 2-0 up, it seems highly likely we would have won so I’m going for 3 points lost on this.
• 15 Sep 2012: Stoke 1-1 City. Stoke’s goal came via a close range shot from Peter Crouch but he had juggled the ball with his hands at least twice before scoring and the goal should clearly have been disallowed. Roberto Mancini claimed Crouch’s goal ‘belonged in the NBA’. A game we would have almost certainly won without their handballed goal so 2 points lost here.
• 13 Apr 2014: Liverpool 3-2 City. The supposed title-decider at Anfield, which fortunately (no thanks to Clattenburg) didn’t decide anything. The first controversial decision came when Dzeko was fouled by Sakho in the Liverpool box late in the first half but no penalty awarded. We were already 2-0 down at this point and a penalty would have brought us back into the game at a crucial time. In the second half, having drawn level, there was further controversy when Suarez, already on a yellow card, threw himself theatrically to the floor following a challenge. He had clearly dived and Clattenburg wasn’t fooled, giving us a free kick, but he also failed to produce a second yellow. Liverpool got a third, winning goal but there was a deliberate handball by Skrtel late on which was again missed by Clattenburg. Had all those decisions gone in our favour, I believe we would have won that game and virtually settled the title race there and then. So that’s 3 points lost possibly.
• 13 Sep 2014: Arsenal 2-2 City. After we went ahead, Arsenal scored twice, before a late Demichelis equaliser. However Pellegrini was upset with Clattenburg after the game as he felt there were fouls on City players in the build up to both Arsenal goals, although I think his case was much stronger for one than for the other. There was a clear handball in the area by Wilshere that went unpunished. We’d have certainly won this with proper refereeing so 2 points dropped.

Note: Thaksin was finally removed in early 2010 if I remember correctly.

 

[LongsightM13]

I've found the article. Here's the incidents I noted:

Here are the games under his control where we may have lost points due to incorrect decisions:

• 12 Dec 2009: Bolton 3-3 City. This was in the period when we did well in the games under him but was still a very controversial game in which Craig Bellamy was fouled and Clattenburg then produced a second yellow against him for a supposed dive. Prior to that, at half-time, Clattenburg is alleged to have asked one of Mark Hughes’ coaching team “How do you work with Bellamy all week?”
• But here’s some of the controversial incidents involving Clattenburg that could well have cost us points since 2010:
• 18 Sep 2011: Fulham 2-2 City. These were the only points dropped in the first 12 games of the first PL winning season. Fulham’s second goal came after a breakaway, following what appeared to be a foul on Dzeko that wasn’t given. Had it been then we probably would have got all 3 points in this game so that’s 2 possibly lost.
• 12 Dec 2011: Chelsea 2-1 City. This was the first defeat of that season and we went ahead early on, then Silva was fouled in the area in the 15th minute. It was a clear penalty yet Clattenburg inexplicably waved play on. Chelsea won the game late on after a penalty was awarded against us for a handball by Lescott but by that time we were down to ten men, Gael Clichy having been sent off for a second yellow card early in the second half. Had we been awarded the penalty and gone 2-0 up, it seems highly likely we would have won so I’m going for 3 points lost on this.
• 15 Sep 2012: Stoke 1-1 City. Stoke’s goal came via a close range shot from Peter Crouch but he had juggled the ball with his hands at least twice before scoring and the goal should clearly have been disallowed. Roberto Mancini claimed Crouch’s goal ‘belonged in the NBA’. A game we would have almost certainly won without their handballed goal so 2 points lost here.
• 13 Apr 2014: Liverpool 3-2 City. The supposed title-decider at Anfield, which fortunately (no thanks to Clattenburg) didn’t decide anything. The first controversial decision came when Dzeko was fouled by Sakho in the Liverpool box late in the first half but no penalty awarded. We were already 2-0 down at this point and a penalty would have brought us back into the game at a crucial time. In the second half, having drawn level, there was further controversy when Suarez, already on a yellow card, threw himself theatrically to the floor following a challenge. He had clearly dived and Clattenburg wasn’t fooled, giving us a free kick, but he also failed to produce a second yellow. Liverpool got a third, winning goal but there was a deliberate handball by Skrtel late on which was again missed by Clattenburg. Had all those decisions gone in our favour, I believe we would have won that game and virtually settled the title race there and then. So that’s 3 points lost possibly.
• 13 Sep 2014: Arsenal 2-2 City. After we went ahead, Arsenal scored twice, before a late Demichelis equaliser. However Pellegrini was upset with Clattenburg after the game as he felt there were fouls on City players in the build up to both Arsenal goals, although I think his case was much stronger for one than for the other. There was a clear handball in the area by Wilshere that went unpunished. We’d have certainly won this with proper refereeing so 2 points dropped.

Note: Thaksin was finally removed in early 2010 if I remember correctly.

The Anfield one was another ridiculous performance but totally forgot he was the ref for Crouch’s basketball goal, was behind the goal for that one, absolutely ridiculous. Even Pulis admitted as much afterwards

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

A referee absolutely desperate for money you say? What could possibly go wrong?….

EXPOSED: Here’s why top ref Mark Clattenburg has been banned

Top referee Mark Clattenburg was suspended after allegations he had sent an email threatening the family of a business associate.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I did a KOTK article a while ago about the different treatment we got from Clattenburg while Thaksin was in charge and after he went. Based on our average points per game while Thaksin owned us (and had his honorary position for a while post the ADUG takeover), we should have had around 15 more points in the games he reffed after Thaksin was finally cut free.

When I went back and looked at those post-Thaksin games in more detail, you could pin that down to a number of bullshit decisions from him. Decisions like denying us a clear and obvious penalty at Chelsea in 2011, that would have put us 2-0 up, then sending off Gael Clichy and giving the penalty that saw us lose 2-1.

The Football Is Fixed guy used to infer there was a relationship between clattenburg and Thaksin, one that was allegedly somewhat more sinister than them sending each other Christmas cards. When you see how he treated us after Thaksin was ousted, you can well believe it.

The football is fixed guy is an absolute mentalist and fantasist. Which anyone who has spent a few minutes reading his blog would realise. It doesn't help your argument to bring him into the discussion.

Whilst I don't believe it anyway, your argument was somewhat convincing up until the last paragraph.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

A referee absolutely desperate for money you say? What could possibly go wrong?….

EXPOSED: Here’s why top ref Mark Clattenburg has been banned

Top referee Mark Clattenburg was suspended after allegations he had sent an email threatening the family of a business associate.

www.dailymail.co.uk

He wasn't personally in debt though was he?

It was through a ltd company, he could have let it get wound up and unless there was evidence that Clattenburg had been negligent or fraudulent in managing the finances there wasn't much likelihood of him being liable to repay any of the debt.

Seems his mate didn't get a personal guarantee either.

If he wasn't reliant on this business to maintain his and his family's lifestyle why would he take bribes and risk his career that earns him money to save a business that he had failed at?

 

[Paladin]

What makes him entitled? Or a rag?

The referee has been found guilty of match fixing before.

He did ruin the match with several very bad decisions.

Haaland spoke out about it too, and if he hadn't sent of the manager you'd imagine he'd be getting in trouble for saying the truth as well.

He will get a fine and maybe a ban, but I imagine everyone at his club is going to pat him on the back for saying publicly what they were all saying privately.

The referee might have had a poor game, but that does not equate to being guilty of match fixing. Nor does a previous conviction for match fixing some fifteen years ago mean that he deliberately manipulated the outcome of this game.

Bellingham seemed to imply that the referee's conviction of an offence many years ago means that we can expect him to commit the same offence again at some point in his career. This just isn't an accurate statement, and he should be punished.

 

[domalino]

The referee might have had a poor game, but that does not equate to being guilty of match fixing. Nor does a previous conviction for match fixing some fifteen years ago mean that he deliberately manipulated the outcome of this game.

Bellingham seemed to imply that the referee's conviction of an offence many years ago means that we can expect him to commit the same offence again at some point in his career. This just isn't an accurate statement, and he should be punished.

Bellingham is in the wrong and shouldn't have said it. He's defamed the referee and will probably pay for it.

But I also think the DFB have made this situation for themselves by firstly covering up the match fixing scandal and this referee's ban, then not addressing it properly when a newspaper uncovered it in 2014.

I think the fact Bellingham knows about this despite being an 11 year old English kid when the paper uncovered it means that Dortmund are talking about it in depth at the club, in the dressing room and they think they're playing against a bent ref.

I dont think it makes Bellingham and "entitled rag ****". Just a bit hit headed and his club have put him in a bad position becuase if they think a referee is corrupt they need to lodge a complaint before the match (maybe in the last 7 years since it became public knowledge)

 

[Northblue]

I think the fact Bellingham knows about this despite being an 11 year old English kid when the paper uncovered it means that Dortmund are talking about it in depth at the club, in the dressing room and they think they're playing against a bent ref.

I thought he was still an 11 year old kid?