The Chelsea Thread

[redterror39]

So the best thing was for us to just over look the whole situation and just say "you know what, it probably didn't happen lets not report it as it may ruin him".

No, that isn't what I am saying at all. Stop putting words in my mouth. What I am saying is that due to the false allegations of racism as well as Chelsea's actions making the situation blow up out of proportion, that they played a huge part in the mental suffering of Clattenburg and thus he should be able to claim damages.

Surely if a Chelsea player was wrongly accused of being racist and felt mentally affected by the ordeal that he should try to claim compensation? Or would you tell him to get on with it as he was paid despite not being allowed to play for a while (similar to Mr Clattenburg)?

 

[CJACKO11]

I think this comment shows just how little everyone DOESN'T know about. There are hundreds of incidents just like this happening every day. We don't hear about them because, amazingly enough, even if the media gets hold of them (which is hard enough if you want to keep it quiet) there are plenty of ways of preventing them from publishing it.

Where did I say you shouldn't have published a statement? I don't give a **** about your statements. I care that Chelsea football club are taking a callous and immature approach to a serious incident instigated by one of its employees that could have led to an innocent man's life being ruined.



Not to mention defamation of character.

Majority not to do with a side as big as Chelsea and it's one of the things they want to change, Kick it out want to make it more public.

 

[Tyton]

8 game ban? What? No.

 

[JDY]

There was literally no solid evidence that did anything wrong. By most standards that's false.

No, not really. If a player is racially abused on the pitch by another player and it isn't picked up by the camera's, it's one word against another. There is no evidence he said anything. Doesn't make it false.

 

[redterror39]

Suarez was banned for 8 games for racially abusing Evra. An equally serious, false allegation should incur similar penalties. At least, in my opinion, but that is different to how the FA run things and they not be able to enforce any sort of penalty.

 

[GodCubed]

Majority not to do with a side as big as Chelsea and it's one of the things they want to change, Kick it out want to make it more public.

No, but there are a sizeable number that ARE to do with businesses as large or even larger than Chelsea. That's just how it is.

 

[CJACKO11]

No, that isn't what I am saying at all. Stop putting words in my mouth. What I am saying is that due to the false allegations of racism as well as Chelsea's actions making the situation blow up out of proportion, that they played a huge part in the mental suffering of Clattenburg and thus he should be able to claim damages.

Surely if a Chelsea player was wrongly accused of being racist and felt mentally affected by the ordeal that he should try to claim compensation? Or would you tell him to get on with it as he was paid despite not being allowed to play for a while (similar to Mr Clattenburg)?

Anton took Terry to court and that was thrown out did Terry seek damages? He cleared his name in a court of law or as you say was not significant evidence which is the same reason the Clattenburg case was dismissed.

If you are going to start charging people for making racist allegations which in the end are thrown out of court or the FA because there was a lack or evidence you will stop people from talking and taking the right action over it.

 

[CJACKO11]

Suarez was banned for 8 games for racially abusing Evra. An equally serious, false allegation should incur similar penalties. At least, in my opinion, but that is different to how the FA run things and they not be able to enforce any sort of penalty.

Suarez was banned for the amount of times he racially abused Evra.

No, but there are a sizeable number that ARE to do with businesses as large or even larger than Chelsea. That's just how it is.

There was a report on SSN a week a go or so about a U15 game which had a racist complaint. Things like this in my opinion should be out there in the media.

 

[redterror39]

No, not really. If a player is racially abused on the pitch by another player and it isn't picked up by the camera's, it's one word against another. There is no evidence he said anything. Doesn't make it false.

In this case it really IS, false. Ramires, a man who has a limited understanding of English was able to perfectly discern that Clattenburg called Mikel a "Monkey"? Especially considering the large distance between them? I call bullshine (forgive me) on that one, at least with the Suarez and Terry cases we have evidence (Suarez's confession and video evidence for Terry)

 

[Joel`]

I care that Chelsea football club are taking a callous and immature approach to a serious incident instigated by one of its employees that could have led to an innocent man's life being ruined.

Probably will cause some lasting damage anyway. In the same way McAlpine will have to live with his name somewhat damaged, and is now suing every media outlet in the country. As the saying goes, **** sticks.

 

[GodCubed]

No, not really. If a player is racially abused on the pitch by another player and it isn't picked up by the camera's, it's one word against another. There is no evidence he said anything. Doesn't make it false.

Yes, actually, it does. We work on a principle of innocent until proven guilty. The law doesn't work on a "oh well we couldn't prove anything but some guy said he did it and so therefore we're going to retain some shade of grey to this rather than black or white". It's the reason why Terry didn't get charged first time round even though there was quite a bit of evidence against him. So for all intents and purposes, the statement remains false.

 

[CJACKO11]

Yes, actually, it does. We work on a principle of innocent until proven guilty. The law doesn't work on a "oh well we couldn't prove anything but some guy said he did it and so therefore we're going to retain some shade of grey to this rather than black or white". It's the reason why Terry didn't get charged first time round even though there was quite a bit of evidence against him. So for all intents and purposes, the statement remains false.

Yet JT was treated as guilty before innocent with the majority even with the FA.

 

[GodCubed]

There was a report on SSN a week a go or so about a U15 game which had a racist complaint. Things like this in my opinion should be out there in the media.

And yet in this same thread we have people saying that the media are just 'escalating' things unnecessarily. Can't win.

Probably will cause some lasting damage anyway. In the same way McAlpine will have to live with his name somewhat damaged, and is now suing every media outlet in the country. As the saying goes, **** sticks.

And they **** well deserve it. Hugely libellous.

 

[redterror39]

John Terry wasn't guilty not because he wasn't proven not racist, but because there wasn't enough sufficient evidence for the courts to decide. Practically everyone has state this as fact. And yeah you're right about Suarez, although I still think considering the severity of the allegation that an equally severe punishment should be made. This would hopefully clamp down on people making allegations of racism without thinking of the repurcussions of doing so.

 

[GodCubed]

Yet JT was treated as guilty before innocent with the majority even with the FA.

Don't be ridiculous. This 'JT AGAINST TEH WURLD" attitude is getting tiresome.

However, given that the FA actually found him guilty, I'd say it was actually somewhat justified.

 

[CJACKO11]

And yet in this same thread we have people saying that the media are just 'escalating' things unnecessarily. Can't win.

I think they need to report it, Chelsea put out a statement on their website and the media ran with it and a story like this is massive. You may say it's out of order as the media come across as they are saying he is guilty but they treat everyone the same, they did it with JT and Suarez too.

 

[Tyton]

Suarez was banned for 8 games for racially abusing Evra. An equally serious, false allegation should incur similar penalties.

Sure , but that's only if you can prove (which you can't) it was intended as false from the start, rather than reporting what they thought was a genuine complaint. If a baby next door is crying for hours every day i can report abuse , and it may turn out it was just sick , these things happened all the time.

I wonder why you guys weren't so worried about defamation of character and public image when it was Terry being slandered.

 

[CJACKO11]

Don't be ridiculous. This 'JT AGAINST TEH WURLD" attitude is getting tiresome.

However, given that the FA actually found him guilty, I'd say it was actually somewhat justified.

Im not worried about the whole JT against the world thing because i admit he is far from innocent. My gripe was the stripping of the captaincy but still allowing him to play in the Euro's. It was like yeah we reckon your guilty and can't have you bringing down the reputation and name of this job but we still need you because your quite good, their attitude towards him at the start was disgusting.

 

[redterror39]

I never immediately assumed John Terry was racist and would defend him at times, if that's what you're trying to imply... Also, is it required that intention needs to be established in terms of defamation of character? I don't think it does but I'm not entirely sure...

 

[CJACKO11]

Actually i don't even know why we are even bothering talking about the FA. This is the same FA that believes a Tweet slating them is more criminal than a racist tweet.