Mark Clattenburg

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

Clattencheat is the FAs go-to referee. Bent as fuck.

Expect a letter from the F.A Bert .
You can't be saying stuff like that about Mark .

Then let me just cover myself, bb. Normally, Mr Clattenberg is an excellent referee. He hates booking players and likes to let the game flow. And then suddenly, as if by magic, he has the odd game that has serious consequences for the title when he quite obviously has an appalling game completely out of character, in which he seems to favour one team over the other. It's probably just a coincidence that when one of the teams is Manchester City, it's the other team that get all the decisions.

 

[Balti]

Clattencheat is the FAs go-to referee. Bent as fuck.

Expect a letter from the F.A Bert .
You can't be saying stuff like that about Mark .

Then let me just cover myself, bb. Normally, Mr Clattenberg is an excellent referee. He hates booking players and likes to let the game flow. And then suddenly, as if by magic, he has the odd game that has serious consequences for the title when he quite obviously has an appalling game completely out of character, in which he seems to favour one team over the other. It's probably just a coincidence that when one of the teams is Manchester City, it's the other team that get all the decisions.

of course it is

 

[ROCKET80]

He shouldn't have been allowed near a City game after the comments about Bellamy and subsequent incorrect sending off at Bolton.

 

[Bluewonder]

He's a rag. It was him who had Chelsea down to 9 men against Utd 2 seasons ago.

 

[the talisman]

He's a rag. It was him who had Chelsea down to 9 men against Utd 2 seasons ago.

Was that him that sent torres off for diving and then gave the scum 2 penalties?

 

[Thenumber1blue]

There seems to be general shift, that was certainly evident in the World Cup, by Referees to avoid blowing up too quickly and letting play develop. The only problem with this however is that it can then move quickly into the next phase of play and things turn against the team that perhaps was suffering the initial infringement that the referee considered not too serious to blow up.

I think that this happened twice against us yesterday. First Aguero was being nibbled at but still appeared to be control. The ball then ran away from him and Aguero then pulled up wanting to complain (rightly or wrongly so) whilst play quickly turned against City. Now with the hindsight of knowing City would concede almost immediately I am sure he would have called the initial foul.

Believe me, as a Referee myself, your priority is to avoid making calls that lead to controversy. In short it's easier to blow up at any infringement during an attack than it is to let play wrongly develop only to then get it in the neck from the defending team who concede a controversial goal. Yesterday Clattenburg got it wrong because he never saw the potential for play to switch and City concede.

The push on Kompany again would have not been even noticed if 2 touches later the ball wasn't sailing into our net!

These things happen in fast moving sport and I don't for one moment consider Clattenburg a cheat although his courting of player popularity and daft haircuts do annoy me.

Time to move on and not slip into the oppressed moaning mode we have witnessed for years with Wenger, Mourinho and Ferguson. Slightly disappointed Pellegrini got drawn in to discussing it as his cool head has been part of his appeal to date.

not so, i called foul the second they collided, as i did on aguero. i was 50 yards away in the stand and it was as clear as day.this ref is a cheat, not poor, not a homer, a cheat. always has been.

Rubbish,any half wit could immediately see it was foul it was so fuckin blatant !

 

[Paladin]

There seems to be general shift, that was certainly evident in the World Cup, by Referees to avoid blowing up too quickly and letting play develop. The only problem with this however is that it can then move quickly into the next phase of play and things turn against the team that perhaps was suffering the initial infringement that the referee considered not too serious to blow up.

I think that this happened twice against us yesterday. First Aguero was being nibbled at but still appeared to be control. The ball then ran away from him and Aguero then pulled up wanting to complain (rightly or wrongly so) whilst play quickly turned against City. Now with the hindsight of knowing City would concede almost immediately I am sure he would have called the initial foul.

Believe me, as a Referee myself, your priority is to avoid making calls that lead to controversy. In short it's easier to blow up at any infringement during an attack than it is to let play wrongly develop only to then get it in the neck from the defending team who concede a controversial goal. Yesterday Clattenburg got it wrong because he never saw the potential for play to switch and City concede.

The push on Kompany again would have not been even noticed if 2 touches later the ball wasn't sailing into our net!

These things happen in fast moving sport and I don't for one moment consider Clattenburg a cheat although his courting of player popularity and daft haircuts do annoy me.

Time to move on and not slip into the oppressed moaning mode we have witnessed for years with Wenger, Mourinho and Ferguson. Slightly disappointed Pellegrini got drawn in to discussing it as his cool head has been part of his appeal to date.

This is all well and good, but what about the ability now to play an advantage (though I fail to see that holding the ball running towards your own goal is advantageous compared to a free kick, thus transferring the pressure) and to go back to the original foul if the advantage doesn't accrue?

The referee:- allows play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalises the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time

Why do you think this was not applied for either of Arsenal's goals? It's OK sticking up for fellow referees, but you cannot argue against such blatant failures to correctly apply the laws.

There were other occasions when he awarded a foul for City when an advantage could have been applied, and this stopped the flow of the game and allowed Arsenal to regroup. It is hard to argue that this is wrong in law, but it clearly is. It is applying the wrong interpretation of the law, to the detriment of one team in the main, and that can only be described as a quite subtle but effective form of cheating.

In the same way, Mason sending off Kompany at Hull was correct, but does he apply the same interpretation in all cases? Absolutely not.

This is so subtle that the pundits (ref. Danny Murphy above) are easily taken in by the deceit. Saying it was a foul on Kompany but not enough to warrant a free kick! Well that has absolutely no basis in the laws of the game. I also recall last season's MOTD expert Roberto Martinez, who said the assistant referee did well to not award the offside for Villa's offside goal against us! And yet these ridiculous comments are accepted without question. And these poor decisions are accepted as being just part of the flow of the game.

Some Arsenal fan used to carry out an analysis of referees performances to see how many decisions go incorrectly for and against certain teams. If there is an analysis of this game, with the Wilshire non-penalty, I am sure they would have this ending up 3-0 for City.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

He's a rag. It was him who had Chelsea down to 9 men against Utd 2 seasons ago.

Was that him that sent torres off for diving and then gave the scum 2 penalties?

In the season we beat the rags 1-6 and looked like running away with the league, we came unstuck against Chelsea at their place thanks to an incredibly partial refereeing display. Now what was the name of that referee?

 

[I'm With Stupid]

...Yields around half a million results on google from a few different clubs/fans/sources. Just sayin.
I'm surprised such an assertion with no basis in the truth is so widespread on the net - even 'savile paedo' only yields about 85k results.

Just out of interest, how many results when you type in other refs? Does Clattenburg get significantly more results?

Chris Foy and Lee Mason both get nearly 500k results. Martin Atkinson, 400k. Mike Dean, 266k. Lee Probert, 766k. Phil Dowd, over 800k. Andre Marriner, 1.2m. Howard Webb is the standout winner though with well over 1.4 million. It's possible, of course, that he just happens to have refereed more games featuring Darren Bent than anyone else. Interestingly, in almost every search, this forum comes near the top of the search results, which probably says a lot about us.

Actually the standout winner is Roger East (who?) who gets 163 million results. Although it's possible that not all of those are related to football.

 

[moomba]

Believe me, as a Referee myself, your priority is to avoid making calls that lead to controversy. In short it's easier to blow up at any infringement during an attack than it is to let play wrongly develop only to then get it in the neck from the defending team who concede a controversial goal. Yesterday Clattenburg got it wrong because he never saw the potential for play to switch and City concede.

Surely the priority is to make the correct decision. A foul in the leadup to a goal is exactly the same as a foul that doesnt. To me Clattenburg is one of the worst for letting factors other than application of the rules to determine his decisions. Whether thats the crowd, the occasion, the flow of the game he all too often forgets that his job is to adjudicate on the rules of the game.


For me I would have called it a foul even though it was on the soft side. The push on Kompany I would have called play on. But if I had spent the last hour giving soft free kick after soft free kick to Arsenal players I would have felt obliged to show some sort of consistency in my decision making.