Printable View
I don't know what the FA/EPL rules are, but if they are similar to laws, they'd need to be found guilty of malicious prosecution to be punished (as in, having no good reason to believe that they had a legitimate grievance).Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
As far as I understand, Chelsea had a duty of care to investigate the concern of their player(s) and took the correct steps in raising the issue with the FA. According to the FA anyway. What was inappropriate, however, was going public with it before concluding their own investigation, but I don't think that is punishable by the FA; just bad manners. Presumably, Clattenburg would be entitled to make a legal claim against Mikel for "compensation for loss of earnings, damage to reputation and stress", however? Or would such a claim have to be made against Chelsea? And if they were found to be performing their duty of care to their player, might that then fall flat?Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
I wouldn't presume that Clattenburg has a case to make a claim, even if he did, it wouldn't be against Mikel, wasn't it Ramires who has the eagle ears.
When you hear about yet another accusation concocted by Chelsea, you'd be forgiven for automatically assuming that it has the same value as a lying snitch trying to weasel his way out of a fix.
The referees' union in a statement said it all
"The charge was based on the flimsiest evidence that should never have got to this stage. It should never have been made public and should have been dealt with confidentially."
If we totally suspend belief and pretend that the Chelsea player sincerely thought he heard those remarks from Clattenburg, but it was later found out, that either he was grossly but genuinely mistaken or he heard right but it couldn't be proven, then why should the player have action taken against him or actions taken against his club for reporting the matter?
If that was the case, no player would feel confident about reporting a genuine complaint
If the allegations can be shown to be totally concocted, like with previous Chelsea examples, then the fines should be increased incrementally with every false allegation, even point deducting sanctions.
What has muddied the waters here, is that the allegation came out of Chelsea, who have virtually forced good refs out of the game under spurious pretenses. I think Clattenburg's status has jumped up, I hope he stays in the game.
So, what you're saying is, he should be paying Chelsea? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Payback takes many forms :)