breadandcheese Posted 6 November 2012 Posted 6 November 2012 So Clattenburg saying "I couldn't give a monkey's. Go away." is construed as racism by Chelsea. Go figure. Where did you read this? I haven't seen it reported anywhere and would like to know what Chelsea's official accusation is, as at the moment, it's all hearsay.
MooseBreath Posted 6 November 2012 Posted 6 November 2012 This racism issue over the last year is all absolutely ****ing pathetic, embarrassing, and shameful. Not to mention deeply offensive to all the people who worked so hard over many years to take racism out of football, to now have a few bored idiots undo all of that work over what amounts to absolutely nothing - just petulant handbags and the reckless playing of the race card by a minority of worthless imbecilic footballers. What a shambles.
Raj Posted 6 November 2012 Posted 6 November 2012 This racism issue over the last year is all absolutely ****ing pathetic, embarrassing, and shameful. Not to mention deeply offensive to all the people who worked so hard over many years to take racism out of football, to now have a few bored idiots undo all of that work over what amounts to absolutely nothing - just petulant handbags and the reckless playing of the race card by a minority of worthless imbecilic footballers. What a shambles. ^RACIST! Actually agree with ya....All the black footballers who DID get pelted by bananas and insluts must think the world has gone mad. Summed it all up when you had Rio not wearing the Kick it our T shirt but then Suarez wearing one! (Cant remember if John T did wear one or was he banned anyway....what was he banned for???..Oh yeah RACISM!!!...Thing is he WOULD probably HAVE worn one if he wasnt banned!!!)
Guesty Posted 6 November 2012 Posted 6 November 2012 I heard somewhere else "I don't give a monkeys" was what he said. I understand how 2 Brazillian players could have got the wrong end of the stick - but to allegedy threaten to break Clattenbergs legs after the match and chuck a massive hissy fit making it all public is so stupid. Surely people running the club should have taken statements and done an investigation before going public - unless they had ulterior motives. If I was Clattenberg I'd want to sue them for the damage its done his reputation. I actually think maybe a points deduction is worthy in this instance. Also the simple fact is whenever any ref gets something wrong aganist Chelsea from now on, the clubs going to go 'You are against us after the Clatternberg incident'.
anotherharboroughfox Posted 13 November 2012 Posted 13 November 2012 The police are no longer investigating Clattenburg. Chelsea
marko Posted 13 November 2012 Posted 13 November 2012 Surprise surprise. Hopefully Chelsea are held to account for their actions now.
Jimothy Posted 13 November 2012 Posted 13 November 2012 Still the FA investigation to be sorted though surely.
Bayfox Posted 13 November 2012 Posted 13 November 2012 Still the FA investigation to be sorted though surely. Yep and we all know the fa is above the law. Ask john not a racist in the laws eyes terry. But john the racist terry in the court of fa.
davieG Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 BBC Chelsea and the Football Association have been accused of a "cover-up" for not referring alleged comments by referee Mark Clattenburg to the police. The Metropolitan Police has dropped its investigation into a complaint that Clattenburg used "inappropriate language" towards two Chelsea players. The complaint was made to the police by the Society of Black Lawyers. "It sounds remarkably like a football cover-up," the society's chairman Peter Herbert told BBC Radio 5 live. http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/20321225
breadandcheese Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Yep and we all know the fa is above the law. Ask john not a racist in the laws eyes terry. But john the racist terry in the court of fa. Wow, what a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Please disregard relative levels of burden of proof between a criminal investigation and a sporting tribunal. Please disregard the judge's summing up from the criminal case where he basically discredited Terry's version of events but said that there was not enough evidence to pass the criminal prosecution barrier. I have sympathy for the FA as they are being put in this position by idiot players. Whilst the FA's handling has not been great, they haven't asked for any of this.
Number 6 Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Not sure who I dislike more, Chelsea or Peter Herbert.
notnow john Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Can't dislike Peter Herbert, he's spotted a gap in the market, a union for black players. He's recognised the wealth generated by Peter Tayor and wants a slice. All he has to do is drive a wedge between white and black players and the money comes rolling in.
marko Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Can't dislike Peter Herbert, he's spotted a gap in the market, a union for black players. He's recognised the wealth generated by Peter Tayor and wants a slice. All he has to do is drive a wedge between white and black players and the money comes rolling in. Exactly! A black players' union would require legal representation and I wonder who that could be?!
notnow john Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Pardon, of course meant Peters brother Gordon Taylor.
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Can't dislike Peter Herbert, he's spotted a gap in the market, a union for black players. He's recognised the wealth generated by Peter Tayor and wants a slice. All he has to do is drive a wedge between white and black players and the money comes rolling in. He should be shot that bloke, he is damaging everything he claims to stand for in the name of a bit of public recognition and a few quid. He is worse than a racist, he is insighting racial hatred which is far worse.
breadandcheese Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 He should be shot that bloke, he is damaging everything he claims to stand for in the name of a bit of public recognition and a few quid. He is worse than a racist, he is insighting racial hatred which is far worse. Peter Herbert is the greatest threat to a separate black players union. If I was a black footballer, I wouldn't want anything to do with a union that he sought to represent. The man's an embarrassment.
Guesty Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Hopefully some leading players will come out against this oppertunist Peter Herbert, he's doing more harm than good. He's a lawyer so he must have some defence but I wouldn't be suprised if Clatternberg and the F.A take him to court for defamation with some of the accusations he's coming out with.
Guest ttfn Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 This Peter Herbert character has managed to become a parody of himself. Which given that he has been a Z-list celebrity for about 5 minutes is extraordinary.
Raj Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Imagine if the White players had their own union??? Hhhmmmmm
notnow john Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 I can't see why black players shouldn't have their own union or a black section of the PFA but is self imposed apartheid really a step forward?
Raj Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 If its for the RIGHT reasons then fair enough(even the Coppers have a Black coppers union) BUT it seems that the only reason this would be is for some unscrupelous(sorry spelling) would make some £££££
Bayfox Posted 14 November 2012 Posted 14 November 2012 Wow, what a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Please disregard relative levels of burden of proof between a criminal investigation and a sporting tribunal. Please disregard the judge's summing up from the criminal case where he basically discredited Terry's version of events but said that there was not enough evidence to pass the criminal prosecution barrier. I have sympathy for the FA as they are being put in this position by idiot players. Whilst the FA's handling has not been great, they haven't asked for any of this. Dress it up how you want jt walked free from a court of law. Why do the fa think they are above it. They waited for the courts outcome. Then felt pressured to show leadership. Cant wait to see what nonsense they come up with this time.
Guest MattP Posted 15 November 2012 Posted 15 November 2012 Two questions about the "association of black lawyers" 1. How did someone as simple and as thick as him get to the top of the organisation? 2. How did someone that white get there? I'm darker than him.
notnow john Posted 15 November 2012 Posted 15 November 2012 Two questions about the "association of black lawyers" 1. How did someone as simple and as thick as him get to the top of the organisation? 2. How did someone that white get there? I'm darker than him. 2. His may be permanent !
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.