Clattenburg under investigation after Southampton accuse him of abusing Adam Lallana

I imagine Lallana went ****ing mental as it's a nailed on penalty. If Lallana swore excessively at Clattenburg then he can't really complain much. We don't really know what happened to make a proper judgement. But you shouldn't be able to raise both arms above your waist to block a ball and get away with it. Especially in that position, the Everton player knew raising his arms was going to help him block a cross. Clattenburg has no excuse for not giving a penalty. Tom can whine all he wants again about the handball rule. The rule is deliberate handball. It's pretty ****ing deliberate when you're raising both arms above your waist, to unnatural position, to increase your chances of blocking the ball. The Everton player knew what he was doing by raising both arms. The Everton player is also a pussy for half turning away rather than blocking the ball properly so late in the game. I'd have thought he's getting paid enough to put 100% effort in to block the ball.

 

Well he did. He even raised his arms, for good measure, to make sure the ball was blocked. It worked.

 

This is something that will keep happening while referees aren't supported to make basic decisions. We all see players week in and out directing volleys of verbal abuse at match officials, and none of them do anything about it.

All refs have to power to caution or dismiss for this but for some reason choose not to. Most probably because they know that the number of players getting carded and sent off will increase very, very quickly and "big" players will start missing big games, qualifiers, etc and the clubs, managers and premier league will pressure them not to do it. Usual story of the Premier League carrying too much weight.

I find it hard to believe a club like Saints would complain without good reason, and Lala and club should expect a hefty fine if nothing is proved. However, clattenberg should expect a hefty punishment if found guilty. He has the power to punish players, and if he chooses not to, he can't choose instead to verbally abuse them in return.
He is a professional who gets about a £70,000 retainer for his services, not a school child in the playground.

 

That's all very nice SaintHarry. This is the real world where some people drive in motorways at over 70 mph, companies pay their invoices a little later than expected, people get drunk and misbehave in town centres, and shock horror, a referee might swear at a player.

I'm not sure what relevance the 70k has to do with anything. I think someone earning 20k would also know what is right or wrong to say, but using your wage analysis, a footballer earning anywhere from 20 to 100 times what the referee earns is surely then expected to understand that he must accept the refs decisions and carry on with the game in a polite manner without questioning anything?

Life just isn't like that though.

 

Depends what was said. If Adam was told to eff off...not desirable, but can happen in heat of moment in response to Adam's vociferous appeal. Not so acceptable if he said something personal. I hope we have a real complaint and haven't just complained because of the penalty appeals. On the other hand, being unreasonable never did Fergie any harm....perhaps this is all part of a plan to keep refs on their toes.

 

Obviously, I appreciate that this is the real world, but we've got to start with the basics.

If we accept that referees are ok to verbally abuse players, where do we stop? Favouritism of certain players or clubs, referees choosing which clubs or grounds they referee at?

In my job, if I verbally abuse my clients, and am found guilty then I get fired. End of story. Despite the fact I often face a lot of provocation, I am a trained and paid professional that needs to know better than accepting certain behaviours from others.

We all know that a footballers wage has nothing to do with reality, common sense or levels of intelligence, self control or knowing right from wrong.

My point is and was that if either side is proven guilty of having done something wrong, they deserve punishment, but clattenberg cannot use the excuse of it being acceptable to dish out what he recieves as an alternative punishment when he hasn't done anything to help himself.

 

sexually?

 

I don't like Clattenburg that much - he acts like a smart ass and seems to think he's right all the time.

But hey, think yourselves lucky Saints fans that you weren't on the wrong end of Martin Atkinson the other day. Imagine being Stoke on Boxing Day...

 

All through this I've said it's wrong. You mentioned 70k wage. What relevance is that? My point is, although it is wrong, a small part if me says, "fair play"

 

The biggest weakness in Lallana's case is that he wasn't captain for that game, so had no real grounds to question the ref's decision. Whatever Clattenburg said to him may well be overlooked because of that.

 

My point with the money is that prem refs in my opinion are very quick to act the victim in situations like this. In any walk of life that is a lot of cash, he needs to be able to stand up to the rigour of his job, plenty of people put up with far more grief a lot better for a fraction of the money....

 

Two points..

If Clattenburg talked to Lallana in an 'insulting and abusive' manner which implies more than just being sworn at then he should get demoted. The position of a referee is analogous with the position of a policeman. He cannot be seen to be breaking the rules he is there apply.

My understanding is that although a referee is 'miked up' he can only be heard by other officials and there is no audio record of what is said. It follows then that the only people who can judge a referee are his fellow officials.. Just a bit like the Police Complaints Commission. Both situations being, in my view, an affront to natural justice. Therefore whether the allegations are true or not the chances of them being proved are negligible unless there is an independent witness.

 

... but footballers don't have to? Sounds like double standards to me.

I'd also ask where has the ref acted like the victim in this? It sounds to me that Saints have acted like a spoilt child here, unless of course it comes out that there was some over the top abuse. I wouldn't consider "f**k off, you t**t" as over the top in modern day football parlance.

I wonder if we would have complained if we'd scored a late equaliser?

 

Shame. Our society seems to have shifted all responsibility for behaviour to those who are paid to uphold the rules/law. Sounds like its ok to break them, just don't get caught or make sure that those catching you have to step outside the rules to do so.

 

Adam Lallana says the comment was not generalised swearing or insults, but something personal.

 

He was the Saints player who kicked the ball that the Everton player handled. He has every right to question the ref. There is no rule in the laws of the game saying only the captain can approach the referee.

 

The whole argument with footballers wages being out of proportion with all reality has been done to death, I'm not going to go there again. Of course they need to behave. I certainly don't mean to endorse double standards but when 17 year olds are paid tens of thousands for doing very little, I would understand but not excuse their sense of reality being slightly warped.

Clattenberg hasn't acted the victim in this case, and without checking I don't think I said he did. However, in the past in similar cases, the referee has acted the victim.

 

To be fair to Saints we have done it all privately and it's only a leaky sod (probably some FA lackey) who has got it in the media. If we went Brendan/Moyes style (examples from the last week) and spouted about it 10 minutes after the game, that would be a bit sad. The club has the right to make the point to the FA if they felt it wasn't quite right.

I do agree with you though. If he just told him to f off or similar, who the hell cares.

 

The "respect the referees" guide (which is basically part of the laws of the game) says that only the captain is allowed to question the referee on decisions.