The Official Thread of Chelsea FC

[Dinny Breen]

Read back.

All this is covered. Did the Chelsea groundsman sue United when they accused him of being racist towards Evra? Nope.

Maybe he should have got his union involved.

[Main Street]

As expected there was not an iota of evidence to support and  even evidence to contradict the allegation against Clattenburg

"Having considered all of the available evidence it was the opinion of David Waters QC, independent counsel, that the evidence of Ramires was not supported by any other evidence. Moreover it was contradicted by other witnesses and does not cross the evidential threshold required to bring a charge against Mark Clattenburg," the FA said. "Having considered counsel's opinion, and in view of all the circumstances of the case, the FA does not believe that there is a case for Mr Clattenburg to answer.

Chelsea manage to escape sanction here, despite yet another absolutely groundless and  serious allegation made against the integrity of a referee whose only crime was that he managed to make questionable decisions in a game which did not go Chelsea's way.
This time, Chelsea are only passing on the absurd allegation made by a player, when this all could have been dealt with in the referee's room after the game.

[EC Unique]

Mikel charged with misconduct. Relates to his behaviour after the game in and around ref's room.

[Jonah]

Chelsea really are a horrible club,rotten to the core.
Fans,players and owners are all the same at that club.

[Norf Tyrone]

Sweet geezus boys. Park your anti- Chelsea agenda, and that of the media and deal with what happened.

1. Ramires mistakenly heard Clattenburg call Mikel an abusive name, rumoured to be 'monkey'.
2. Ramires tells Mikel what he heard post the game. Remember Mikel has just lost an important game, and with the major fuel of a racist allegation heads to confront Clattenburg.
3. Chelsea's Ron Gourley is summoned to the scene, however the damage is done, and the allegation is already doing the rounds in media circles.
4. Within minutes Chelsea's PR dept are fending off stories from the media.
5. Chelsea are forced to issue a statement re what happened, and the allegation. Failure to act quickly would've seen Chelsea accused of a cover up.
6. Chelsea, and this is important, follow the FA's guidelines and report the incident to the FA's observer at the game. They followed the FA's own guidelines.
7. Chelsea seek independant legal advice on the Monday who state that they should and are obliged to follow through on the accusation.
8. Chelsea comply with all the FA's requests re the case, and the case is dropped.

Chelsea probably should've added to their statement that 'we apologise to Mark Clattenburg for any offence caused etc etc'. However the onus on this is probably with Ramires or possibly Mikel. In addition Mikel should'nt have charged into the ref's room. However ask yourself if you'd just lost a game, and someone had said that the ref had called you 'a Paddy' something or another. How would you have reacted?

Chelsea as a Club did nothing wrong in this instance. They were damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.

What could Chelsea have done differently?
Why should Chelsea compensate Clattenburg for following FA rules!?
Did United compensate the Chelsea groundsman for accusing him of the same offence?
Was Mike Phelan asked to apoligise to the Chelsea groundsman?
Should Torres sue Clattenburg who accused him of being a cheat?

[laoislad]

Good man Norf   
Do ever take these off!

[Norf Tyrone]

Good man Norf   
Do ever take these off!

Only when Rafa's boss.

[ONeill]

You have to ask though - Is John Terry behind this all? Did he start the rumour?

[ziggy90]

Sweet geezus boys. Park your anti- Chelsea agenda, and that of the media and deal with what happened.

1. Ramires mistakenly heard Clattenburg call Mikel an abusive name, rumoured to be 'monkey'.
2. Ramires tells Mikel what he heard post the game. Remember Mikel has just lost an important game, and with the major fuel of a racist allegation heads to confront Clattenburg.
3. Chelsea's Ron Gourley is summoned to the scene, however the damage is done, and the allegation is already doing the rounds in media circles.
4. Within minutes Chelsea's PR dept are fending off stories from the media.
5. Chelsea are forced to issue a statement re what happened, and the allegation. Failure to act quickly would've seen Chelsea accused of a cover up.
6. Chelsea, and this is important, follow the FA's guidelines and report the incident to the FA's observer at the game. They followed the FA's own guidelines.
7. Chelsea seek independant legal advice on the Monday who state that they should and are obliged to follow through on the accusation.
8. Chelsea comply with all the FA's requests re the case, and the case is dropped.

Chelsea probably should've added to their statement that 'we apologise to Mark Clattenburg for any offence caused etc etc'. However the onus on this is probably with Ramires or possibly Mikel. In addition Mikel should'nt have charged into the ref's room. However ask yourself if you'd just lost a game, and someone had said that the ref had called you 'a Paddy' something or another. How would you have reacted?

Chelsea as a Club did nothing wrong in this instance. They were damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.

What could Chelsea have done differently?
Why should Chelsea compensate Clattenburg for following FA rules!?
Did United compensate the Chelsea groundsman for accusing him of the same offence?
Was Mike Phelan asked to apoligise to the Chelsea groundsman?
Should Torres sue Clattenburg who accused him of being a cheat?

Or you could say as Roy Keane is supposedly to have retorted to Paul Ince when he supposedly said this to him. "Could be worse".

[Lecale2]

Has this anything to do with Roberto di Matteo being sacked?

[Captain Obvious]

Clattenburg unlikely to ref another Chelsea game and the blues will be happy with that outcome.

[Norf Tyrone]

Clattenburg unlikely to ref another Chelsea game and the blues will be happy with that outcome.

Do you think this was some conspiracy that Mikel and Ramires dreamed up to stop Clattenburg reffing another Chelsea game?

Again, bar Mikel losing his temper post game, no one can reason what Chelsea, in the circumstances, couldv'e done differently.

[EC Unique]

Clattenburg unlikely to ref another Chelsea game and the blues will be happy with that outcome.

Do you think this was some conspiracy that Mikel and Ramires dreamed up to stop Clattenburg reffing another Chelsea game?

Again, bar Mikel losing his temper post game, no one can reason what Chelsea, in the circumstances, couldv'e done differently.

True Norf, Chelsea's hand was sort of forced on it but they should of bad the decency to mention Clattenberg in today's statement. He has been dragged through the muck on this a seems he did nothing wrong.

[Norf Tyrone]

Clattenburg unlikely to ref another Chelsea game and the blues will be happy with that outcome.

Do you think this was some conspiracy that Mikel and Ramires dreamed up to stop Clattenburg reffing another Chelsea game?

Again, bar Mikel losing his temper post game, no one can reason what Chelsea, in the circumstances, couldv'e done differently.

True Norf, Chelsea's hand was sort of forced on it but they should of bad the decency to mention Clattenberg in today's statement. He has been dragged through the muck on this a seems he did nothing wrong.

I agree with that.

[under the bar]

Chelsea FC = pig
Todays statement = grunt