Mark Clattenburg had a plan - Chelsea 2 Spurs 2 that game

[Bazly]

Quote

I allowed them [Spurs] to self-destruct so all the media, all the people in the world went: ‘Tottenham lost the title.’ If I sent three players off from Tottenham, what are the headlines? ‘Clattenburg cost Tottenham the title.’ It was pure theatre that Tottenham self-destructed against Chelsea and Leicester won the title.

Some referees would have played by the book; Tottenham would have been down to seven or eight players and probably lost and they would’ve been looking for an excuse. But I didn’t give them an excuse, because my gameplan was: Let them lose the title.

From a recent podcast. I always wondered how Spurs ended up 11 on the field that night that they lost their mathematical possibility on the title to you know who. It was a risky strategy from Clattenburg because if they had sneaked a last minute winner they would have had lots of players who should have been on suspension then playing out the rest of the season. So, I'd have rather Spurs finished with 7 men looking like melt down idiots rather than Clattenburg not wanting it all blamed on his precious self. Maybe he has a tattoo somewhere, 'How I won LC the title'?

[Wymsey]

Quite glad he's moved on from this league.

Appeared the type that wanted all the fame/plaudits, controversy and of course money.

Edited 4 December 2017 by Wymeswold fox

[Max Wall]

I made this same post on the BBC have your say.

 

The ego on this clown knows no bounds.

Leicester City strolled to the title and didn't need any help from him.

 

 

I'm not sure I need to add anything else.

Edited 4 December 2017 by Max Wall

[hackneyfox]

Google headline above the link to The Mirror's take on this story is:
Clattenberg admits Chelsea bias during infamous clash with Tottenham.

[TheUltimateWinner]

I do think Ref's are influenced to try and keep 11 vs 11 but they were sending off offences though... no one would have argued with the red card for multiple players and I'm pretty sure every neutral came out afterwards and said how the feck did Tottenham not have at least one player sent off?

 

 

I must add though, Clattenburg is still better than any of the current set of PL referees. 

Edited 4 December 2017 by TheUltimateWinner

[kingcarr21]

2 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

Google headline above the link to The Mirror's take on this story is:
Clattenberg admits Chelsea bias during infamous clash with Tottenham.

Again this makes no sense to me as I mentioned in a previous thread.

 

How does NOT sending Spurs players off show a bias to Chelsea. Surely that shows a bias to Spurs. Or am I just being thick?

 

To me this is a complete non story.

[theessexfox]

Makes sense given Dier committed about 3 red card offences.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

19 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Appeared the type that wanted all the fame/plaudits, comtroversy

Did you read the article? He said he could have sent 3 or 4 Spurs players off in that game, but he didn't want to cause controversy and give Spurs something to blame.

[peterborofox]

Hate the ego of the man

 

 

Seemed to love playing the celebrity referee

[VLC86]

Can’t believe the hate going on here, he didn’t put them down to about 7 men so they couldn’t all say “That’s why Leicester won”.

 

He orchestrated the best 20 minutes of entertainment I will ever watch and is rightly a hero. 

[Durnerz]

I wish he hadn't come out and said this.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

8 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

He orchestrated the best 20 minutes of entertainment I will ever watch and is rightly a hero.

He allowed the game to continue, like he said in the article if he had enforced the rules to the letter it would have been farcical. 

 

People just love to blame the ref basically. Clattenburg was comfortably the best ref we had. 

[Vacamion]

 

I think John Moss should account for his bizarre refereeing decisions that season, too.

 

 

Spurs finished so far behind us we couldn't hear them. This made no difference.

 

[Bazly]

The Guardian have just picked up on this story and give a link to the podcast that I couldn't be bothered to do for those wishing to hear the man in action.

[Kitchandro]

So basically he was dishonest and purposefully didn't enforce the rules, just to save his own reputation.

 

He should get the same treatment as Blatter and anyone else of that ilk. It is pure corruption, plain and simple.

 

And people say you're being dramatic when you accuse referees of 'managing' games. This is why nobody has any respect for them.

Edited 4 December 2017 by Kitchandro

[Kitchandro]

21 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

He allowed the game to continue, like he said in the article if he had enforced the rules to the letter it would have been farcical. 

 

People just love to blame the ref basically. Clattenburg was comfortably the best ref we had. 

No, it would have been correct. It would have been the referee doing his job. His job is to enforce the rules.

 

He should be barred from taking part in the sport in any capacity. If we're letting referees decide when they want to enforce the rules properly, where does it end?

 

EDIT: And what part of that match wasn't farcical? You had players diving in with knee high challenges all game, because he didn't clamp down on them. He's actually putting players' safety at risk doing that.

 

It was a premeditated attempt to fix the match.

Edited 4 December 2017 by Kitchandro

[Babylon]

What an idiot, that's all very well Mark but what if they had got a last minute winner?

[SouthStandUpperTier]

What an idiot, that's all very well Mark but what if they had got a last minute winner?

Exactly. He didn't want the blame for costing Spurs the title, but was therefore perfectly willing to take the blame for potentially costing Leicester the title. He obviously thinks we don't matter.

 

[Footballwipe]

Not really that bothered tbh, can't even muster up faux hype.

 

Why are we crying so much over this? It did not affect the outcome of our season one iota. Let Spurs and Chelsea fans scream into the abyss.

 

[FoxesDeb]

I never used to mind Mark Clattenburg, I always thought he was the best of a bad bunch, but that's just shocking. The way he says he helped the game, like it's something he can be proud of! He's openly admitted to manipulating the outcome, and it's abuse of his position, pure and simple. 

[Kitchandro]

1 minute ago, Footballwipe said:

Not really that bothered tbh, can't even muster up faux hype.

 

Why are we crying so much over this? It did not affect the outcome of our season one iota. Let Spurs and Chelsea fans scream into the abyss.

 

Because some people care about the integrity of our game.

 

How do you feel going to watch our next match knowing that a referee won't be punished even when they've ADMITTED to giving incorrect decisions on purpose?

 

How many times could we have been undone by refereeing of this nature?

 

 

[Strokes]

1 hour ago, kingcarr21 said:

Again this makes no sense to me as I mentioned in a previous thread.

 

How does NOT sending Spurs players off show a bias to Chelsea. Surely that shows a bias to Spurs. Or am I just being thick?

 

To me this is a complete non story.

You are being thick but I'm too stupid to understand why.

[Arkie Bennett]

I'm sure many wondered why Spurs were allowed to go unpunished for countless blatant fouls and other incidents. Clattenburg choosing not to follow the rules made the match far more entertaining as a spectacle than if he'd let it go to 11 versus 8. However, as a referee, his function was to uphold the laws of the game, not to influence the entertainment value of a match. Spurs benefited  through not having players suspended. Referees forget that their leniency affects subsequent matches.

[urban.spaceman]

WHY IS NOBODY MONITORING THE SPURS FORUMS?!

[Dames]

So Spurs couldn’t even win with essentially a handicap?

 

Biggest bottle jobs of the modern era.