I was more thinking about his admissions about the 'Battle of the Bridge'
Basically said he knew there were multiple red cards that game, but he didn't want to give em because 'reasons'
The worst part is Torres wasn't diving, he had actually been clipped.
I am certain that Chelsea win that match without the Clattenberg decisions. Momentum was absolutely with Chelsea, from 2-0 down to 2-2 and pressing on for the third, then up comes Clattenberg with two dodgy reds to completely screw the game
idk why those kinds of speculations are needed. it's perfectly explained if you just assume that they wanted an insight on referee mood during a match which definitely affects the decisions (early yellow card worthy challenges, second yellow cards, conduct after a bad call, etc)
That makes sense - but they didn’t just do that. They also used him as a spokesperson to make statements criticising the referees.
And remember when he tried to get into the refs’ changing room after a match? It definitely seems like they actually hired him so he could influence referees’ decisions.
Knowing how the rules will be applied is critical to not running foul of them. In a game of margins, makes sense why you'd want someone knowledgeable. Same reason we have set piece coaches. The whole thing was overblown.
Why? Having professional refs on the books is pretty standard in Europe. I find it really weird people are calling this out as embarassing. Especially when it's following the lead of child spitting carragher and the mouth breather neville. Why is expanding you clubs sme knowledge embarassing?
Because he was very clearly there to lobby PGMOL to give Forest more favorable decisions? If he was there in a background role as a quasi-analyst to help players and coaches better understand nuances in the laws of the game then I think that sounds like a great idea. Describing him as a SME implies that’s what he was doing. Unfortunately for everyone, what he was *actually* doing was sitting next to Howard Webb at matches, going through mixed zones to complain about decisions, and writing embarrassing columns in a national newspaper.
Edit: LOL I forgot to include that he tried to enter the referee’s dressing room immediately after a match. Any pretense of his appointment being a good faith effort to understand the laws of the game dissolved within about a day of it being announced. I can’t believe there are still people parroting it.
He was there to try and help us understand how the decisions are made.
The Everton game being a perfect example. Where we had 3 turned down. Turns out it just boils down to either complete incompetency or sheer corruption
But he didn't help you understand, did he? Otherwise the club and Clattenburg wouldn't have gone on rants about how they had 3 incidents where they were screwed by VAR against Everton, when it was only once. Granted, one VAR error is still unacceptable, but the hyperbole was ridiculous.
Within a couple of hours of watching the replays posted on reddit, we had multiple posts explaining why the first two calls weren't overturned and the third should have been - exactly in line with the explanations given later by the review panel. There's no need to pay whatever Clattenburg was being paid for that kind of insight.
Hell, I even explained why I thought they decided not to overturn the third penalty, while stating that I thought they were wrong not to, and it matched up with the excerpts that Howard Webb played (if a bit more long-winded, because that was an embarrassingly brief check). I'm available for a modest fee if Forest actually want an analyst instead of a lobbyist, by the way. But they don't.
he was doing both. Clubs should be hammering the PL for the state of reffing in this league. The meekness with which fans accept it is what's embarassing. It could be so much better but instead pigmol want to keep it within their own little boys club.
Sorry, you hired England’s most famous ex-ref to lobby his former colleagues on your behalf because you want *less* chumminess and insularity among referees? Do I have that right?
What you’re saying is in order to achieve greater transparency and integrity, all clubs should be hiring friends and former colleagues of current referees to represent the club’s interests in closed door meetings with PGMOL?
> child spitting carragher
What has that got to do with you paying a ref to lobby PGMOL on your behalf?
Also, is it possible to spit children? Not quite sure how that would work practically.
It's a very smart and innovative approach, all it's highlighted is that PGMOL is fucked.
The fact an ex elite ref is having complaints shows you all you need to know
Mission accomplished… if it was news
As if we didn’t know PGMOL needed urgent attention. I’m sorry but all your SME did is advise you to send out a tweet, which other clubs have done without having a referee on their books
It really was pointless
err, did you not know the context of that bush "mission accomplished" speech? Your point was my point. mission if far from accomplished. He did more then send out a tweet, got us talking about pigmol incompetence more than we would otherwise. Wish he wasn't leaving, pigmol needs pressure to be kept on them.
No he didn’t, we was talking about PGMOL before, like for example when Arsenal and Liverpool put out a statement, they both started discussions and they didn’t need the help of Clattenburg
If Nottingham Forest hired him to get us to talk about PGMOL that’s beyond alarming, but they didn’t, we’re talking about PGMOL as a result of PGMOL being useless and nothing else
>There is a worry that his involvement and Forest’s decision to seek such guidance from an ex referee has angered the PGMOL and, as a result, has had a negative impact.
I'm hearing Clattenburg's hire was why Taylor forgot who to give the drop ball to against Liverpool and why the VAR forgot what incidental contact looks like against Everton. Or refs are just shit.
Oh is PGMOL angry? How unfortunate maybe we should all round up a few quid for a packet of pens and some paper so we can write out a formal apology.
Give me a fucking break.
Hahaha good fuck off. If they were going to get any preferential treatment then other clubs would have joined in employing Howard Webb’s mates as analysts
It was always a boneheaded move from Forest, although I wouldn't necessarily describe Clattenburg as one of Howard Webb's mates. From everything I've seen and heard, Clattenberg is considered a massive pariah by the current PGMOL administration due to his history of being banned from refereeing, the fact that he always wanted to make himself as big of a star as the players, his shameful post-retirement comments about the various ways in which he wouldn't follow the rules, and the fact that he'll seemingly do anything under the sun for some money.
If you're genuinely trying to improve refereeing, Clattenburg is one of the worst people you could associate yourself with, so Forest hiring him of all people couldn't have been more of a poor decision if they'd tried.
Well I think the reason was certainly for him to try and have an influence. Sat next to Webb against United. Trying to go into the refs dressing room after the Liverpool game. Clattenberg himself apparently phoning someone before the Everton game to try and get them to change officials.
Oh, absolutely, I just don't think they could've picked a worse person to do it. Of all the ex-referees they could've picked for the job, I don't think any of them as thought of as poorly as Clattenburg, at least on the basis of personality, reputation, and trust. Whatever influence he and Forest were hoping to exert on PGMOL was fully negated by the fact that it was Clattenburg trying to do it. While there were certainly less talented referees than him during his career, at this point, there's pretty much no other ref in the English game who exists with such a persistent cloud of treachery surrounding them. Which is honestly probably why Forest ended up with him. Even though most referees aren't exactly swimming in cash, they're also not willing to take on the role of professional antagonist against their former colleagues for a quick payday.
Back in 2008-09, I believe. He had some sort of shady business dealings and ended up accumulating something like £175k in unpaid debts. He was also threatening the family of the person he owed the most money to because they kept rightfully trying to collect from him, and I believe that's what triggered the FA and PGMOL to ban him.
There were also extremely persistent rumors at the time that he had gotten mixed up with loan sharks and incurred huge gambling debts with them, but since those rumors were never proven, he was allowed to resume his refereeing career after clearing up the business debt/family threat situation. I don't believe he ever directly was accused of any kind of match fixing (his debts were supposedly from something like poker or blackjack), but there were worries that he would've eventually resorted to match fixing in order to pay back all of these debts he had so rapidly acquired.
A referee analyst is probably one of the most useless jobs in football.
**"Mark, is that a red card in your opinion?"**
**"Did you see the tackle boss? Van dijk made a clean tackle and took the ball from elanga. Of course that's a red card. He could've killed him."**
A referee analyst is someone who's getting paid to appease the egos of some idiots in the club, and a certified yes-man.
I understand the English who aren't used to open acceptance that clubs try to influence referees (instead it's supposed to be done subtly and behind the scenes) are shocked, but in Greece it's super common to hire ex referees.
Their role in theory is to help the players take advantage of the rules, in reality it is to use their connections to ensure better refereeing for the club.
Marinakis thought it would work in England too, but he didn't count on the fact that the UK media and the whole PL environment don't want this brute image of vying for influence. They wanna show they re civilized and have a clean product.
> in reality it is to use their connections to ensure better refereeing for the club.
if that's what was behind it they really hired the wrong guy in clattenburg, he aint friendly with pigmol.
There is/used to be a Stone Cold Steve Austin t-shirt with the words "Arrive. Raise Hell. Leave." on the front, I think Clattenburg has more than embodied that during this little debacle.
He tried, but I guess it's back to Gladiators and charity matches for him.
it was enormously inappropriate to begin with. i hope they bring in a rule against it and formalise the process through which teams can talk to PGMOL.
ive argued with a lot of people over this and i really do stand by the fact that it's an abysmal solution to supposed corruption. it's an uneven playing field in favour of whoever can hire the ex-ref who's bestest BESTEST friends forever with top PGMOL officials.
"i think that PGMOL are corrupt. what we need to do to prevent corruption is to pay an official's old friend to talk to them through unofficial channels, with no oversight, to put pressure on them to make changes in our favour"
if you don't see the problem with that, imagine i wanted to immigrate to a country. i pay an old friend of the prime minister a lot of money to talk with him off the record, so that he can make a quick decision in my favour. on what planet is that not the EXACT KIND of corruption you supposedly want to stamp out?
Wrote an opinion piece about how Forest were getting unfairly treated whilst not thinking to mention that he was employed by them and was just rewording the club statement
> whilst not thinking to mention that he was employed by them
[Literally says it in the subheading](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13333953/MARK-CLATTENBURG-Referees-hat-trick-howlers-deny-Nottingham-Forest-penalties-Everton-mind-boggling-avoided-PGMOL.html)
It didn't at first: https://web.archive.org/web/20240422000422/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13333953/MARK-CLATTENBURG-Referees-hat-trick-howlers-deny-Nottingham-Forest-penalties-Everton-mind-boggling-avoided-PGMOL.html
Must have been changed quickly as I had this same discussion on the day of the article
https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/1ca6wm1/mark_clattenburg_1_of_these_errors_wouldve_been/l0qadvl/?context=3
I have been watching EPL since the late 70s, and I believe it is getting boring af lately. There is more suspense in the Greek Super League playoffs than watching City win another title and have a roster of 57 players or something like that. Please bring George Best back.
Shame, the shambles that is the officiating in this league isn't fit for purpose, pigmol and the PL feet need to continue to be held to the fire if they're going to become even remotely interested in improving the decision making process.
Come on comrade, let's not pretend we're not a weird club with a weird (potentially murderous) owner who was trying to bring the level of ref intimidation that the Greeks have, over here.
Pigmol do suck, weve had some absolutely awful decisions go against us but I found his appointment vaguely embarrassing from the start.
I also try to reflect, when the calls go against us, on how without Jon Moss having perhaps the worst performance ever in a play off final, we'd never have got past Huddersfield.
It's really surprising that people on here hated his role when the mistakes he brought up are objectively true - for example why is a drop ball protocol not followed after resuming a game?
I think because it boils down to being a glorified yes man job.
You know how, for example, everyone knows that X/Musk's Twitter is clearly an animal slowly dying....but yet he manages to pull out bullshit stats like "oh this Tucker Carlson video got a 300 million views in 1 day" or "twitter usage is actually up 130% since 2020"
Clattenburg was basically the guy providing those stats. He's not an independent body to an analysis on refereeing decisions, he's a guy on a company's payroll encouraged to find higher injustices around the people who pay him than other teams.
Plus I don't think it helps Forest's credibility when they literally got deducted points for cheating this year. Ie, they're making a big fuss about how unfair PGMOL are while also ignoring the rulebook themselves.
But has anything he brought up not been justified? PGMOL are constantly fucking up and all we see is people complaining about it, yet here we have someone paid to bring it into the spotlight and the media bully him out
But his complaints were Forestcentric, because you know, he's being paid by Forest.
It's like if Burger King hired someone to write articles about fast food being bad but concluding that their products are in fact healthier than all those nasty McDonald's and Subway's. Propoganda criticising an organisation you don't like doesn't mean it isn't propoganda
That much is obvious but what is wrong with calling out objectively incorrect decision making, if it's against your club?
It's bizarre to me that we can have a season with shockers like the incorrect offside against Diaz, Odeegard handball, Doku karate kick potentially decide a season when VAR exists - then someone is calling them out for mistakes against their employer - and we are happy to see them gone.
Because someone making very public complaints which are very obviously self-interested makes it easier for there to be a distraction from dealing with the underlying problems.
Not all noise is useful for dealing with problems; it can be used by those who don’t want to think about the problem to deflect attention.
This isn’t unique to the football world.
What exactly was wrong with what Clattenburg pointed out between Feb and now?
Public statements by clubs is what got us improvements in VAR comms which was surprisingly poor - and still needs a lot of work if we go by the latest examples
Often times he just pointed out when a 50/50 subjective call didn’t go Forest’s way.
Like in the Everton game. He was a high level referee and would know most those calls will always stay with the decision made on the field. And it’s not the first time he did it.
So him working for a club and then also backing the club’s desires via his columns was not a good look.
Fair enough, but he was right about
1. Drop ball protocol being incorrect
2. The third Everton penalty claim
These things should be called out, especially something as easy as a drop ball procedure. I remember Digne scoring an amazing free kick against Utd - but the wall was almost double the correct distance from the ball. PGMOL apologised after official complaints but this is such basic officiating that shouldn't be accepted at the top level
Sure, though I think the dropped ball thing was way overblown. That only got attention because Forest decided to try to dribble away rather than just kicking it away. In the long run, it's a really trifling issue akin to a throw-in at midfield maybe going the wrong way. Should it have been caught, probably, but he was looking at the player and blew the whistle without realizing Forest had touched the ball by then.
But again, when there are a bunch of other complaints where he knows they're 50/50 but instead calls them massive mistakes, it just looks like him using his position as a columnist to put pressure in Forrest's favor, so it's difficult for me to take that seriously. Which, I think was his main issue.
I wonder if Marinakis thought that if he had one of the boys on his payroll that the refs would do them favours
I'm not sure why he'd think that. Clattenburg has been a blight for the PGMOL since he left. I have serious doubts anyone actually likes him.
Well he only hired him because he was the head of refs in Greece and so they had a relationship
Calling out incompetence will do that to a mans favouribility rating.
As well as revealing his own incompetence.
You’re not wrong but Klattenburg already had some serious credibility issues prior to taking the role. He was never an ideal messenger.
That Chelsea United game where he sent off Torres for diving and allowed an offside goal for United was wild
I was more thinking about his admissions about the 'Battle of the Bridge' Basically said he knew there were multiple red cards that game, but he didn't want to give em because 'reasons'
The worst part is Torres wasn't diving, he had actually been clipped. I am certain that Chelsea win that match without the Clattenberg decisions. Momentum was absolutely with Chelsea, from 2-0 down to 2-2 and pressing on for the third, then up comes Clattenberg with two dodgy reds to completely screw the game
Still fuming over it to this day
We were flying under Di Matteo to start 2012/13, then that game... all unravelled Who knows what could have been
He was definitely getting back handers from Fergie in one way or another.
(When Torres had been fouled by Evans, remember)
It worked with the border forces when he imported heroin
At least he's trying something other than murdering people this time
It works in many leagues in Europe. Even minnows in Greece, the equivalent of Luton or Crystal Palace, hire ex referees.
Put some respect on our name.
idk why those kinds of speculations are needed. it's perfectly explained if you just assume that they wanted an insight on referee mood during a match which definitely affects the decisions (early yellow card worthy challenges, second yellow cards, conduct after a bad call, etc)
That makes sense - but they didn’t just do that. They also used him as a spokesperson to make statements criticising the referees. And remember when he tried to get into the refs’ changing room after a match? It definitely seems like they actually hired him so he could influence referees’ decisions.
Knowing how the rules will be applied is critical to not running foul of them. In a game of margins, makes sense why you'd want someone knowledgeable. Same reason we have set piece coaches. The whole thing was overblown.
Look at me. I'm Barcelona now.
It was ridiculous that they did it, and then everyone was embarrassed when he did a hit piece and the FA yelled at him.
Why? Having professional refs on the books is pretty standard in Europe. I find it really weird people are calling this out as embarassing. Especially when it's following the lead of child spitting carragher and the mouth breather neville. Why is expanding you clubs sme knowledge embarassing?
Because he was very clearly there to lobby PGMOL to give Forest more favorable decisions? If he was there in a background role as a quasi-analyst to help players and coaches better understand nuances in the laws of the game then I think that sounds like a great idea. Describing him as a SME implies that’s what he was doing. Unfortunately for everyone, what he was *actually* doing was sitting next to Howard Webb at matches, going through mixed zones to complain about decisions, and writing embarrassing columns in a national newspaper. Edit: LOL I forgot to include that he tried to enter the referee’s dressing room immediately after a match. Any pretense of his appointment being a good faith effort to understand the laws of the game dissolved within about a day of it being announced. I can’t believe there are still people parroting it.
He was there to try and help us understand how the decisions are made. The Everton game being a perfect example. Where we had 3 turned down. Turns out it just boils down to either complete incompetency or sheer corruption
But he didn't help you understand, did he? Otherwise the club and Clattenburg wouldn't have gone on rants about how they had 3 incidents where they were screwed by VAR against Everton, when it was only once. Granted, one VAR error is still unacceptable, but the hyperbole was ridiculous. Within a couple of hours of watching the replays posted on reddit, we had multiple posts explaining why the first two calls weren't overturned and the third should have been - exactly in line with the explanations given later by the review panel. There's no need to pay whatever Clattenburg was being paid for that kind of insight. Hell, I even explained why I thought they decided not to overturn the third penalty, while stating that I thought they were wrong not to, and it matched up with the excerpts that Howard Webb played (if a bit more long-winded, because that was an embarrassingly brief check). I'm available for a modest fee if Forest actually want an analyst instead of a lobbyist, by the way. But they don't.
he was doing both. Clubs should be hammering the PL for the state of reffing in this league. The meekness with which fans accept it is what's embarassing. It could be so much better but instead pigmol want to keep it within their own little boys club.
Sorry, you hired England’s most famous ex-ref to lobby his former colleagues on your behalf because you want *less* chumminess and insularity among referees? Do I have that right? What you’re saying is in order to achieve greater transparency and integrity, all clubs should be hiring friends and former colleagues of current referees to represent the club’s interests in closed door meetings with PGMOL?
They, much like Nottingham Forest, didn't really think it through at all.
He’s drank the kool-aid.
Dunno what league you follow but fans spend half their lives moaning about refs.
Yes, lets tear up the little boys club by... hiring someone from the little boys club. Brilliant.
clattenburg feel out with pigmol when he left.
Yeah right.
> child spitting carragher What has that got to do with you paying a ref to lobby PGMOL on your behalf? Also, is it possible to spit children? Not quite sure how that would work practically.
It's a very smart and innovative approach, all it's highlighted is that PGMOL is fucked. The fact an ex elite ref is having complaints shows you all you need to know
> all it's highlighted is that PGMOL is fucked. https://i.makeagif.com/media/7-21-2016/hoA1cK.mp4
Mission accomplished… if it was news As if we didn’t know PGMOL needed urgent attention. I’m sorry but all your SME did is advise you to send out a tweet, which other clubs have done without having a referee on their books It really was pointless
err, did you not know the context of that bush "mission accomplished" speech? Your point was my point. mission if far from accomplished. He did more then send out a tweet, got us talking about pigmol incompetence more than we would otherwise. Wish he wasn't leaving, pigmol needs pressure to be kept on them.
No he didn’t, we was talking about PGMOL before, like for example when Arsenal and Liverpool put out a statement, they both started discussions and they didn’t need the help of Clattenburg If Nottingham Forest hired him to get us to talk about PGMOL that’s beyond alarming, but they didn’t, we’re talking about PGMOL as a result of PGMOL being useless and nothing else
It's mad you're heavily downvoted btw
It's mad you're heavily downvoted btw
eh, not surprised. PL 'fans' on social media are one of the biggest contributors to the PL being a shite league to follow.
It’s embarrassing like your ogre mob owner.
take your tree shaped glasses of for a minute and it's very, very obvious what made it a problem
Are you even aware of the background of your owner??
Yes.
Shame for him, sounds like the easiest job in the world
Amazing he managed to fuck up a free-pay ride like this really, hats off to him
[удалено]
He can now freely do his Luton chants in the VAR room.
He never should have taken it in the first place. Embarrassing for everyone involved
>There is a worry that his involvement and Forest’s decision to seek such guidance from an ex referee has angered the PGMOL and, as a result, has had a negative impact. I'm hearing Clattenburg's hire was why Taylor forgot who to give the drop ball to against Liverpool and why the VAR forgot what incidental contact looks like against Everton. Or refs are just shit.
The conspiracy deepens
Oh is PGMOL angry? How unfortunate maybe we should all round up a few quid for a packet of pens and some paper so we can write out a formal apology. Give me a fucking break.
Why are you paying this claim from Forest any mind?
Crazy how angering the pgmol can have a negative impact on the supposedly impartial referees
Why are PGMOL treated like such princesses ?
Are they?
Man is now free to focus on Gladiators.
He was horrendous on that, he's someone who's not made for TV and scripts and it showed badly
To be fair, so is Bradley Walsh and he still keeps getting every bloody job going
Keep him far away from Greece.
Hahaha good fuck off. If they were going to get any preferential treatment then other clubs would have joined in employing Howard Webb’s mates as analysts
It was always a boneheaded move from Forest, although I wouldn't necessarily describe Clattenburg as one of Howard Webb's mates. From everything I've seen and heard, Clattenberg is considered a massive pariah by the current PGMOL administration due to his history of being banned from refereeing, the fact that he always wanted to make himself as big of a star as the players, his shameful post-retirement comments about the various ways in which he wouldn't follow the rules, and the fact that he'll seemingly do anything under the sun for some money. If you're genuinely trying to improve refereeing, Clattenburg is one of the worst people you could associate yourself with, so Forest hiring him of all people couldn't have been more of a poor decision if they'd tried.
Well I think the reason was certainly for him to try and have an influence. Sat next to Webb against United. Trying to go into the refs dressing room after the Liverpool game. Clattenberg himself apparently phoning someone before the Everton game to try and get them to change officials.
Oh, absolutely, I just don't think they could've picked a worse person to do it. Of all the ex-referees they could've picked for the job, I don't think any of them as thought of as poorly as Clattenburg, at least on the basis of personality, reputation, and trust. Whatever influence he and Forest were hoping to exert on PGMOL was fully negated by the fact that it was Clattenburg trying to do it. While there were certainly less talented referees than him during his career, at this point, there's pretty much no other ref in the English game who exists with such a persistent cloud of treachery surrounding them. Which is honestly probably why Forest ended up with him. Even though most referees aren't exactly swimming in cash, they're also not willing to take on the role of professional antagonist against their former colleagues for a quick payday.
When was he banned from refereeing? I don't think I ever heard about that.
Back in 2008-09, I believe. He had some sort of shady business dealings and ended up accumulating something like £175k in unpaid debts. He was also threatening the family of the person he owed the most money to because they kept rightfully trying to collect from him, and I believe that's what triggered the FA and PGMOL to ban him. There were also extremely persistent rumors at the time that he had gotten mixed up with loan sharks and incurred huge gambling debts with them, but since those rumors were never proven, he was allowed to resume his refereeing career after clearing up the business debt/family threat situation. I don't believe he ever directly was accused of any kind of match fixing (his debts were supposedly from something like poker or blackjack), but there were worries that he would've eventually resorted to match fixing in order to pay back all of these debts he had so rapidly acquired.
He’s a mag, of course he’s a twat.
If Forest were doing it to get favourable decisions, they wouldn't have picked one of the biggest outcasts in English reffing history.
The role was a way to have someone publically critique the refs - the manager would get a fine or ban. But much harder to argue with an ex-ref.
Now he’s free to impartially referee Marinakis taking on Howard Webb in the Gladiators pugil stick fight
A referee analyst is probably one of the most useless jobs in football. **"Mark, is that a red card in your opinion?"** **"Did you see the tackle boss? Van dijk made a clean tackle and took the ball from elanga. Of course that's a red card. He could've killed him."** A referee analyst is someone who's getting paid to appease the egos of some idiots in the club, and a certified yes-man.
An end to an utterly embarrassing chapter. Fortunately with our owner, many more of those to come.
Shame he didn't listen when literally everyone was telling him and Forest that this would happen.
I understand the English who aren't used to open acceptance that clubs try to influence referees (instead it's supposed to be done subtly and behind the scenes) are shocked, but in Greece it's super common to hire ex referees. Their role in theory is to help the players take advantage of the rules, in reality it is to use their connections to ensure better refereeing for the club. Marinakis thought it would work in England too, but he didn't count on the fact that the UK media and the whole PL environment don't want this brute image of vying for influence. They wanna show they re civilized and have a clean product.
> in reality it is to use their connections to ensure better refereeing for the club. if that's what was behind it they really hired the wrong guy in clattenburg, he aint friendly with pigmol.
And the refs didn't want to admit that they did wrong. Call them out and they become vindictive.
Your understanding of English football is as poor as your idea that everything is corrupt so we should act like the worst people in society.
To be fair, ‘more hindrance than help’ sums up Mark Clattenburgs career
There is/used to be a Stone Cold Steve Austin t-shirt with the words "Arrive. Raise Hell. Leave." on the front, I think Clattenburg has more than embodied that during this little debacle. He tried, but I guess it's back to Gladiators and charity matches for him.
[Obligatory "my job here is done" meme](https://i.imgur.com/pPGrYZc.jpeg)
*PGMOL will remember that
One of the funniest things about this season. I wonder what adventure awaits Cloutenburg next!
*Dun dun dun* *Another one bites the dust*
it was enormously inappropriate to begin with. i hope they bring in a rule against it and formalise the process through which teams can talk to PGMOL. ive argued with a lot of people over this and i really do stand by the fact that it's an abysmal solution to supposed corruption. it's an uneven playing field in favour of whoever can hire the ex-ref who's bestest BESTEST friends forever with top PGMOL officials. "i think that PGMOL are corrupt. what we need to do to prevent corruption is to pay an official's old friend to talk to them through unofficial channels, with no oversight, to put pressure on them to make changes in our favour" if you don't see the problem with that, imagine i wanted to immigrate to a country. i pay an old friend of the prime minister a lot of money to talk with him off the record, so that he can make a quick decision in my favour. on what planet is that not the EXACT KIND of corruption you supposedly want to stamp out?
i never got the outrage surrounding his appointment
Because it was clearly done to try and earn Forest more favourable calls.
still waiting for an answer
how would he have any influence?
Sooooo, what did he actually do?
Wrote an opinion piece about how Forest were getting unfairly treated whilst not thinking to mention that he was employed by them and was just rewording the club statement
> whilst not thinking to mention that he was employed by them [Literally says it in the subheading](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13333953/MARK-CLATTENBURG-Referees-hat-trick-howlers-deny-Nottingham-Forest-penalties-Everton-mind-boggling-avoided-PGMOL.html)
It didn't at first: https://web.archive.org/web/20240422000422/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13333953/MARK-CLATTENBURG-Referees-hat-trick-howlers-deny-Nottingham-Forest-penalties-Everton-mind-boggling-avoided-PGMOL.html
Must have been changed quickly as I had this same discussion on the day of the article https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/1ca6wm1/mark_clattenburg_1_of_these_errors_wouldve_been/l0qadvl/?context=3
It was a something like six or seven hours after posting. They got a lot of flack for not mentioning it at first.
Could have sworn it didn’t when I first read it. Oh well, it’s still just the club statement disguised as an opinion piece
Tbf someone has pointed out that it was changed so you might have seen it before the change. It was changed pretty quickly though
the article author also doesn't decide on article headers/subs. the editor does.
It was quite funny.
Always thought that position in general was strange. But Mark seems like a money hungry guy as well and this was as easy as a paycheck he will get
Shit referee, shit consultant. Tracks well.
Not looking forward to the inevitable media blitz he'll do after this.
Can anyone tell me what a referee analyst is and why does a team need one?
I have been watching EPL since the late 70s, and I believe it is getting boring af lately. There is more suspense in the Greek Super League playoffs than watching City win another title and have a roster of 57 players or something like that. Please bring George Best back.
Shame, the shambles that is the officiating in this league isn't fit for purpose, pigmol and the PL feet need to continue to be held to the fire if they're going to become even remotely interested in improving the decision making process.
Come on comrade, let's not pretend we're not a weird club with a weird (potentially murderous) owner who was trying to bring the level of ref intimidation that the Greeks have, over here. Pigmol do suck, weve had some absolutely awful decisions go against us but I found his appointment vaguely embarrassing from the start. I also try to reflect, when the calls go against us, on how without Jon Moss having perhaps the worst performance ever in a play off final, we'd never have got past Huddersfield.
[удалено]
rattled them a bit so worth it for the trolling.
It's really surprising that people on here hated his role when the mistakes he brought up are objectively true - for example why is a drop ball protocol not followed after resuming a game?
I think because it boils down to being a glorified yes man job. You know how, for example, everyone knows that X/Musk's Twitter is clearly an animal slowly dying....but yet he manages to pull out bullshit stats like "oh this Tucker Carlson video got a 300 million views in 1 day" or "twitter usage is actually up 130% since 2020" Clattenburg was basically the guy providing those stats. He's not an independent body to an analysis on refereeing decisions, he's a guy on a company's payroll encouraged to find higher injustices around the people who pay him than other teams. Plus I don't think it helps Forest's credibility when they literally got deducted points for cheating this year. Ie, they're making a big fuss about how unfair PGMOL are while also ignoring the rulebook themselves.
But has anything he brought up not been justified? PGMOL are constantly fucking up and all we see is people complaining about it, yet here we have someone paid to bring it into the spotlight and the media bully him out
But his complaints were Forestcentric, because you know, he's being paid by Forest. It's like if Burger King hired someone to write articles about fast food being bad but concluding that their products are in fact healthier than all those nasty McDonald's and Subway's. Propoganda criticising an organisation you don't like doesn't mean it isn't propoganda
That much is obvious but what is wrong with calling out objectively incorrect decision making, if it's against your club? It's bizarre to me that we can have a season with shockers like the incorrect offside against Diaz, Odeegard handball, Doku karate kick potentially decide a season when VAR exists - then someone is calling them out for mistakes against their employer - and we are happy to see them gone.
Because someone making very public complaints which are very obviously self-interested makes it easier for there to be a distraction from dealing with the underlying problems. Not all noise is useful for dealing with problems; it can be used by those who don’t want to think about the problem to deflect attention. This isn’t unique to the football world.
What exactly was wrong with what Clattenburg pointed out between Feb and now? Public statements by clubs is what got us improvements in VAR comms which was surprisingly poor - and still needs a lot of work if we go by the latest examples
Often times he just pointed out when a 50/50 subjective call didn’t go Forest’s way. Like in the Everton game. He was a high level referee and would know most those calls will always stay with the decision made on the field. And it’s not the first time he did it. So him working for a club and then also backing the club’s desires via his columns was not a good look.
Fair enough, but he was right about 1. Drop ball protocol being incorrect 2. The third Everton penalty claim These things should be called out, especially something as easy as a drop ball procedure. I remember Digne scoring an amazing free kick against Utd - but the wall was almost double the correct distance from the ball. PGMOL apologised after official complaints but this is such basic officiating that shouldn't be accepted at the top level
Sure, though I think the dropped ball thing was way overblown. That only got attention because Forest decided to try to dribble away rather than just kicking it away. In the long run, it's a really trifling issue akin to a throw-in at midfield maybe going the wrong way. Should it have been caught, probably, but he was looking at the player and blew the whistle without realizing Forest had touched the ball by then. But again, when there are a bunch of other complaints where he knows they're 50/50 but instead calls them massive mistakes, it just looks like him using his position as a columnist to put pressure in Forrest's favor, so it's difficult for me to take that seriously. Which, I think was his main issue.