Referees Union gives Clattenburg full support...

[Karl]

...it would be wise of Chelsea to 'share the ball' as they have never done before. ...and that is all I will say about that!!!

[Paul Marin]

Suarez admitted saying it at least once. You can't change that part.

Regardless of what you think it means.

I already said that once is one thing and we have to agree to disagree on that. It is not material to the point.

There were SIX other instances that the FA manufactured against Suarez on Evra's word alone. That is where the parallel comes in, one person's word was enough for them to pass judgment in SIX instances in the Suarez case, however, this time, they have TWO people's words, yet - despite the validity that a second witness brings - I speculate that the evidence will be "inconclusive" or "unreliable". My gues is they will use the fact that Chelsea was losing and emotions high to discredite the players' testimonies. That's the kangaroo business I speculate about. We will see.

[Assasin]

"I already said that once is one thing and we have to agree to disagree on that. It is not material to the point."

That is where I see the big difference, once is too much and if proven he said it ONCE he should pay. Same for Clattenberg. If you say it once, chances are you would say it again.

[Paul Marin]

...and it is, I think, highly that the players making the charges will be punished in some form (even if the punishment is as light as to heap scorn on their integrity).

Yes my star, that is exactly within the boundaries of "fair play" when it comes to their tactics. It would not surprise me at all that the media begin to fuel Chelsea conspiracy theories with the JT case and the loss to Manu** all being heaped into the mix. Ahhh bwoy...

[Paul Marin]

"I already said that once is one thing and we have to agree to disagree on that. It is not material to the point."

That is where I see the big difference, once is too much and if proven he said it ONCE he should pay. Same for Clattenberg. If you say it once, chances are you would say it again.

Okay - now what about convicting Suarez for six other instances on Evra's word alone? Don't you see that the only way they can convict Clattenburg is on Ramirez and Luiz's words alone?

[Assasin]

it is either he said the word or not.

One thing we are sure about at the moment is Suarea and JT said it.

With or without Evra word we know at least one word that was said.

[Paul Marin]

Kangaroos don't find other kangaroos guilty. THERE IS ZERO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS CASE'S BODY OF EVIDENCE (so far as I know anyway) AND THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE SUAREZ CASE...i.e. if this is "one very hard case to prove", then the Suarez case was at least just as hard as both come down to one person's word (actually, Chelsea have two people's word, so they have a theoretically stronger case than there was against St. Suarez.)

What is pretty clear to me is that everyone was quick to accuse Suarez (media, etc.) of guilt even before the FA's tribunal published its findings...no one is as quick this time round...I hope that it's because people realise the seriousness of accusing a man of being racist. I dismiss the JT case because there is ZERO QUESTION that JT used the words he was accused of using, so there is no parallel between that case and the Clattenburg/Suarez cases.

By the way - does anyone know what Kick It Out has had to say on this one?

PM

I just checked the Kick it Out website and did a search for "Suarez"- 18 results and "John Terry" - 43 results. How much for "Clattenburg"? - ZERO! Is it just me, or is this a bit odd? I mentioned before when the Rio/Roberts/Anton t-shirt thing flared up that this was an ineffective organization. They are hellbent on proving me right. Racism in the game is at its worst the higher up you go. Any jackass can see that. By the way, how many black referrees (or minorities) are there adjudicating prem games? Anyone know? (And Uriah Rennie is long retired).

[Dunny]

You say that after watching the game with so many questionable calls? it all came down to in your mind, If Chelsea won ? not the questionable calls that even the most die hard man u fans will admit di ref tief !

I think the ref made some mistakes but that is part of football,i've got no time for the conspiracy theory. The ref made mistakes but that is normal, he can't watch replays like the rest of us.

[Paul Marin]

I think the ref made some mistakes but that is part of football,i've got no time for the conspiracy theory. The ref made mistakes but that is normal, he can't watch replays like the rest of us.

Dunny, what if the players are right and that the ref is guilty as alleged?

[Sir X]

@ Dunny

Some terrible mistakes are dismissed with an accusation of racial abuse, that is a part of the match i.e a report by two players of racial abuse.

Thrown out as conspiracy ? It is a fact ,of an alleged incident.

[Assasin]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footba...s-over-1409690

See why this maybe difficult to prove? Even Chelsea is divided.

[Dunny]

Dunny, what if the players are right and that the ref is guilty as alleged?

Paul the players are wrong, the Ref did not abuse anyone. Chelsea football Club have lost the plot!

[Paul Marin]

Paul the players are wrong, the Ref did not abuse anyone. Chelsea football Club have lost the plot!

And you come to this conclusion (that the ref did not abuse anyone) based on what evidence?

[Dunny]

And you come to this conclusion (that the ref did not abuse anyone) based on what evidence?

Do not worry about the evidence Mr Marin, everything will come to light soon!!

[Paul Marin]

Do not worry about the evidence Mr Marin, everything will come to light soon!!

I told you at the outset of this thread that ALL 3 assistant referees will say they heard nothing. "Everything will come to light soon"... I think you mussi wuk fi di FA, what happen, unu busy manufacturing evidence? LOL!