Just another scumbag journalist having a go at Chelsea, as they do with City, it's their way of trying to help you no who win the league. The c**t says that if found guilty you should be relegated and then goes on to agree with Sir drunken c**t that the Chelsea people involved are liars, then he says if he's wrong Quote"I'LL HOLD MY HANDS UP", I would suggest that a comparative punishment would be that he is immediately sacked and never allowed to write such **** again.
Relegating Chelsea on the assumption that a couple of Chelsea players made up allegations against Clattenburg is a strange conclusion but on the otherhand it would be entertaining if Chelsea got relegated saving QPR.
You open up the door for other clubs to be relegated as well, nobody would ever report a racist incident again.
As is mentioned. Do the Police get punished if they falsely convict someone of a crime? Do alleged rape victims get punished if they fail to get a conviction against an alleged rapist?
Bottom line is, Dan Hodges is a total cock and should never write articles of such magnitude in the world of football ever again. Relegated for reporting a racial incident .
Chelsea are hiding behind a loophole in the rulebook... This may save you in court but it won't in the public's eye... Do you really not think this will in any way tarnish the image of your club? Once (yes once, not if) Clattenburg is proven innocent, your club will look like a bunch of utter ****s... and it will come back to haunt you many times. You are the racist club of the nation from now on end. And you almost ruined a man's career and life by lying and acting out of revenge... Expect many "unfair" refereeing decisions going your opponents way because you've cried for wolf. The FA won't take Chelsea seriously anymore... Maybe in 10 years you can start acting like martyrs Oh wait that's you've been doing for decades now
Who gives a **** what you or whatever your simpleton mind thinks would damage Chelsea's reputation. I could comment that your septic view of Chelsea's fantastic success has left you a very bitter twat but I would say your just a dick head.
Funniest thing about this is that you are all biased and your opinions should be ignored... Chelsea fans cry for conspiracy theory from the media and FA... citeh and liverpool fans unsurprisingly join their ranks... man u fans are left to defend their corner. Now I support neither team. Ironically though I probably live closer to stamford bridge than any Chelsea fan on this board. I suppose I am slightly biased in the sense that I see chelsea fans in the street every time they play at home and you are all a bunch of ignorant inbreds. Honestly what makes you lot so thick? Anyways back to the subject matter. Most "neutral" fans I've spoken to agree with me. It's all bull**** made from sour grapes. You may want to disguise it whichever way you want but at the end of day, that is most likely what happened. As far as the game went, personally I thought the two red cards were deserved but it was undoubtedly offside for their 3rd goal. This should in no way have created such a mess though. What will most likely happen is Chelsea will backtrack and say this was all one big coincidental misunderstanding caused by language barrier , despite clear support from people throughout the club that there was no doubt Clattenburg racially abused Mikel... Never mind what the rule book says... Chelsea showed 100% support and backed Mikel all the way. Which must mean they were happy to do so. If Torres cries to the FA and says "the linesmen gang raped me in the showers" or some other bull**** lie you can bet your house that the club wouldn't back him and make it go public, knowing full well the damage it could cause the club. There's no way Chelsea were "forced" to support Mikel because it said it in some book. What it would entail is too big for them to risk on one player's word. So in my opinion Chelsea were hurt by the defeat, spat their dummies out, were hoping they could redeem themselves for having a racist captain and pretend they were for once on the receiving end of racist remarks (this point was cancelled out the following day by your average chelsea fan and his monkey antics) and they simply didn't think it through. There is no way Clattenburg said anything. No chance whatsoever. Chelsea's dodgy mafia boss will find a way to get them out of it from a legal point of view and nothing will happen other than the club's credibility being heavily tarnished This is just as plausible as those stupid conspiracy theories that everyone is out to get Chelsea. As a Chelsea fan your opinion should be mute in this context... just like a jury would be impartial and have no affiliation when it comes to making a verdict.
What a little bore you are. Please enlighten us to the evidence that 'proves' Clattenburg's innocent. If you really think the club would pursue a racist charge against a ref cos he got a couple of calls wrong in a releatively meaningless game in October, you are seriously and frightningly deluded. Could be a misunderstanding but there is a 0%chance the club would have brought yet further scrutiny on themselves on this issue if there wasn't a reason more than to get back at the ref. Seriously, where are you morons breeding? Stop reading the Daily Mail.
Gee whiz you're one boring little fella. Anyone else finding this racism bollocks terribly tiresome? What a shambles our game has turned into.
You're a bit of a hypocrite no? Calling our fans thick inbreds then claiming you have a neutral stance? Clearly another Chelsea obsessed cockend with an agenda burning brightly.
I only got half way through this and was pissing myself laughing so much I had to give up. Where are the facts, such as I am an inbred and thick just because I support a certain football team, you much be the thickest of us all to even bother wasting your time writing that load of old crap.
This article was way over the top but some of you still have not got the hang of the difference between a criminal trial and an FA hearing. The first needs evidence beyond reasonable doubt and the second is decided on the balance of probabilities. Three outcomes in the latter are possible. 1) Clattenburg can be found to have abused Mikel and the penalty on Clattenburg will be severe - he will lose his job probably; 2) the evidence is honest but not sufficient - nothing will happen; 3) The evidence is shown to have been made up. In this last case then the penalty on the person or Club who made it up should be as severe as that on Clattenberg.
