Clattenburg under investigation after Southampton accuse him of abusing Adam Lallana

Starting to regret posting now, but will carry on regardless. The relevance of the £70,000 is that it is a hell of a lot of money. If I was doing the paying of that money, I would expect them sweating blood for their money. Pure graft, leaving nothing to be questioned in terms of their fitness or performance. I would go as far as to say they should be open to interview after the games, and their ratings from the refs association (or whoever they are) put into the public arena for scrutiny all with the aim of improving performance. But it seems that I am amongst the minority that expects the referees to be fair, equal and balanced.

 

Probably said he was too ugly to play for Saints.

 

Just because I questioned something you posted, does not mean that I or anyone else doesn't want that too. I'd want that if they were part-time and earning the minimum wage. The amount of money they get paid is irrelevant. I have good days and bad days at work, but that is not down to how much I am paid but a manner of other circumstances.

I have no issue with refs having ratings published; that's a good idea.

I am just surprised that so many people have an issue with a human being (a ref) who has made a comment back at a player, especially considering the amount of back chat and swearing they receive. On the swearing front, the first ref who red cards a Premier League player for saying something like, "Oh FFS ref" will get accused of being picky and not understanding that swearing is used all the time on a pitch. At the very beginning of this, I stated that a part of me has always wanted a ref to swear back at a player; not in a racist manner or anything similar, but just to do it. Now, if in this incident, the ref has being overly abusive, then it is wrong, but if it is a simple swearing at him, or calling him a 'name' then we should be moving on. If not, then the refs should be able to issue a retrospective red card to any player who is lip read swearing; but that would be daft. Players have just as much responsibility as refs to behave in a becoming manner, but on the whole I would suggest that the balance swings against the players in terms of behavior.

 

May have been noted elsewhere, but Clattenburg said in the tunnel afterwards that he'd seen the handball but didn't believe it was deliberate.

 

In the context of the Premier League it's peanuts - all 20 refs combined cost less than the average wage of a single PL player (and you'd have enough change for most of the assistants as well). None of which is relevant to this. Neither is the question of whether it was a handball, is Clattenburg a crap ref etc.

Anyway if it was recorded then this should get resolved in quickly enough in private, where it should have stayed in the first place.

 

Think we need to wait until we know what was said until we judge. If it is personal like Lallana said who knows how bad or disgusting the insult was. To simply say Saints could be acting like spoilt kids is wrong.

 

Absolutely agree with that.

 

What's the betting it wasn't recorded?

 

Petty by us. But probably just another part of our Fergie style campaign to get a few decisions go our way.

Oh, and £70,000. Not that much when you put it next to what the players are getting. Once again, players should show "Respect" and not just wear the badge.

A decision was made, right or wrong, get on with it. I'm fed up with the excuse that its a passionate sport etc which we get from Managers when this sort of thing happens. Try playing rugby for passion. They still call the refs "Sir".

 

I will just reiterate that Saint Harry did earlier point out something along the lines (again, without checking) that the salary is reflective of the fact that a referee is expected to withstand such abuse – presumably in a professional manner. So that is where the salary is relevant. Whilst not coming down on either side of the argument, I think that much is already very clear. Referees are the arbitrators of fairness on a football field, so therefore being professional involves maintaining that facilitative role – it should allow for human error (though repeat errors should be cause for concern, of course, and are grounds for demotion), but not for handing out abuse to those who are indirectly their paymasters (especially young and handsome Saints ones) - particularly of a personal nature, as alleged in this case. That salary is of a level that compensates for the recognised abuse that a referee can expect to receive - and should professionally withstand via acceptable conduct - on each day of work. EDIT: it is of no relevance whether or not this is a fraction of a player's montly salary, as a referee's job is not really comparable to a footballer's.

I see completely where you’re coming from, FLT. Would be a joy for me to produce red cards and fire back abuse to millionaire players when they abuse me. And for the double standards you are suggesting (ie. footballers are paid extortionate amounts, so why should they be able to fling abuse), unfortunately, referees are imminently more replaceable than millionaire football players. In the real world, there is an imbalance of power, and it is just the case that a player such as Adam, or Suarez, or infact every single player, is expected to be passionate and often of course will bend the rules to achieve success – they are paid extortionate amounts to compensate their skill in achieving such success. Referees are expected to contain any rule bending in a fair way, and not allow any emotions cloud their judgement. And another point – both parties risk heavy punishment (financial or otherwise) in such instances, and Adam will find it far easier to bear any such financial punishment than a referee. And so, although it is wrong, salary does come into play here in more ways than one. And as an avowed realist, FLT, I’m sure you can see that.

 

maybe I should have used the word you did above. I have said all along that it depends on what was said.

 

Refs are terrified to give penalties this season.

 

How is petty? We don't know what was said.

 

Good post and I can accept what you've said.. I would only add that I am not sure that "the salary is reflective of the fact that a referee is expected to withstand abuse" as this suggests the authorities condone players abusing refs.

 

Officials have a responsibility to officiate matches in a responsible manner. They also have a duty of taking the higher ground so to speak. Therefore, the argument that 'tit for tat' is fine because players abuse officials therefore officials can abuse players is wrong.

As a Premier League referee, Clattenburg has a duty to set a standard for on the pitch behaviour. By abusing a player, this standard has not been set and if something of an offensive and personal nature has been said by the respected party to the player involved, there should be an investigation and the right punishment handed out.

 

So do they expect Kelvin Davis to run all the way up the pitch to question the referee's decision and then wait for him to run all the way back? If he did that, there'd be a good chance that he'd get booked for running all that way to question a decision, captain or not. Plus, Lallana has been captain for the majority of games this season, which the referee would surely have been aware of, plus being that close to the decision should give him the right to appeal for a it, and question why it was not given.

The rules are very clear that dissent is a yellow card, and insulting/abusive language is a red card. The power is clearly there for referees to stamp out the complaining and swearing that is apparently directed at them, they just need the balls to uphold what it says in the rules. All it takes is for the FA to come out and state that they will be going hard on the above at the season start, then for referees to enforce it, and it will be cut out. It might mean a large number of bookings and sending-offs in the first two weeks or so, but that's how the players will learn.

 

maybe a team shouldn't pick a keeper as a captain then.

 

I assume so, as ridiculous as it is. The idea that only the captain should be allowed to question decisions is stupid as it is - I understand that it's an attempt to stop the old Chelsea tactic of having everyone surround the ref as a form of intimidation, but still. Suppose it's an argument against keeper captains.

 

and diving
and pushing at corners and pulling shirts
etc

isn't going to happen soon.

 

Fergie will be upset; I thought it was his United teams that started that