Clattenburg probe sparks debate on role of police

The Metropolitan Police decision to launch an official investigation into allegations referee Mark Clattenburg used inappropriate language against two Chelsea players has sparked a new debate over the role of police in football matters.

The pressure on Clattenburg is intensifying after police, acting on a complaint from the Society of Black Lawyers, opted to investigate whether the 37-year-old has a legal case to answer — even though the FA has already begun its own questioning of those involved.

The FA had been keen to act quickly following criticism that it took too long to deal with the John Terry case which took almost a year to resolve; primarily because police asked the football authorities to hold fire on their investigation for fear of prejudicing any court case.

This time there has been no similar request; although there is the likelihood of one in future if there is enough evidence to charge the referee with racially abusing John Obi Mikel or Juan Mata during Sunday’s match between Chelsea and Manchester United at Stamford Bridge. And that worries PFA chief executive Gordon Taylor.

He said: “Involving police or waiting causes a massive festering of the issue, which has continued to cause problems and is not good for the image of the game. Football has got to be confident enough to deal with it. I have said that to the House of Commons, the FA Council.

“We need to grasp the nettle and show we are more than capable of dealing with it. I’m quite concerned that when this happened as with the John Terry and Anton Ferdinand incident, the process got elongated. This time, I want football to learn from it and deal with it as transparently as possible. In football, the penalties can be severe. In a court of law, the penalty for racial abuse would be a small amount in comparison to what the FA could fine.”

In many ways it is a situation in which the FA cannot win.

Should the police request a halt to any investigation it would be almost impossible to ignore — but political and football pressure to deal with events quickly and to prevent a split in the game will be just as intense.

Already there is evidence that other match officials are incredulous at the claims made by Chelsea and are determined to stand by Clattenburg; who privately has strongly denied all allegations although he has not been able to do so publicly.

And Leeds United manager Neil Warnock, in his usual frank way, opened up another side to the debate by strongly criticising Chelsea for bringing the complaint in the first place.

“I’m disgusted at what has gone on,” he said. “We ask referees to deal with it and man-manage and that’s what he does, Clattenburg. If Chelsea had won that game there would not have been one iota of a complaint.

“If it is proved wrong whatever Chelsea players alleged that Mark said, I hope they get done. Would it have happened if they won the game? I don’t think it would have.’’

Peter Herbert, chairman of the Black Society of Lawyers, clearly feels differently and defended his decision to report the case to police saying: “What we don’t want is for it to be swept away under the carpet. It must be subject to a full and proper investigation.

On the pitch Chelsea and United meet again tonight in a potentially fraught atmosphere at the Bridge for a Capital Cup tie. But, off the field, as it stands, the FA investigation into Clattenburg will continue apace with sources at Wembley saying neither the police or representatives of the referee have asked them to stop.

It is worth noting an earlier investigation into reports that Luis Suarez racially abused Patrice Evra took just seven weeks to complete; and it would have been far quicker had the striker not been away in Uruguay for some of that period.

A similarly swift operation would be of benefit to football this time; but it is a sign of the times that police officers and the Crown Prosecution Service, not an FA committee, are likely to be the ones who decide.