Former referee Mark Clattenburg has explained his rationale for quitting Nottingham Forest as a consultant following a row over the club's 0-2 defeat at the hands of Everton on April 21.
The Tricky Trees were defeated at Goodison Park but were left fuming after referee Mark Antony didn't award a penalty despite three separate calls involving Ashley Young.
This prompted the club to send out a rather controversial post on X. Forest claimed that a VAR official was a fan of relegation rivals Luton Town and shouldn't have been involved in the game.
Following the remark, former Manchester United right-back Gary Neville had said (via Metro):
"Mark Clattenburg must resign tonight. If words go out which question the integrity of a referee and claims someone is a cheat for supporting another club, then he’s supporting what is being said. He would lose all credibility with referees in the game. He should stand down tonight and distance himself from that statement."
While speaking to the Daily Mail, Clattenburg revealed why he left his role at Nottingham Forest. Here's what he said:
"[My job] has led to the unmerited targeting of me, personally, by certain participants and pundits. Such reactions and outcome was not expected and is regrettable, as it is my sincere belief that there is a place for and value in such a role in the modern game."
He continued:
"I will no longer be providing match analysis services to Nottingham Forest Football Club. I performed my services under the consultancy agreement in good faith, to the best of my abilities and in the hope of using my extensive experience as a match official to help NFFC understand how decisions in relation to key match incidents are made amid the workings of VAR."
Be that as it may, gaffer Nuno Espirito Santo, defender Neco Williams and referee analyst Mark Clattenburg will be hit by four FA charges for their response to the game against the Toffees.
Howard Webb admits that Nottingham Forest should've been awarded at least one penalty
While speaking on the Mic'd Up TV programme, Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) chief Howard Webb claimed that Nottingham Forest should have been awarded at least one penalty.
Webb stated that the first two calls were 'subjective'. However, he stated that the third one, which saw Young challenge Callum Hudson-Odoi, should've resulted in a penalty for Santo's team. Webb explained:
"The referee waves away the penalty appeal. The VAR looks at it and asks himself the question, 'Was the non-award clearly and obviously wrong?' and concluded it wasn't. He doesn't see a clear action by Young that he considers to be worthy of intervention, one that reaches the threshold of being very clear."
He added:
"But we would have preferred an intervention for the referee to go to the screen to make a judgement for himself in this situation and probably would have come out with a different outcome if that would've happened."
"The game is played by human beings, it's officiated by human beings. And obviously, our job is to try to ensure that we have a positive impact on the game by identifying correct decisions on the field. This wasn't one."
An admission that they were wronged once will be of little consolation to Nottingham Forest, whose Premier League status is still hanging in the balance. Forets currently occupy the 17th position on the Premier League table with 26 points after 35 games.
Luton Town are currently in the relegation zone with as many points but have played a game extra. Forest will be hoping to return to winning ways when they take on an already relegated side in Sheffield United on Saturday, May 4.
