Peter Herbert does the cause no favours

I am distressed and disbelieving of Peter Herbert's stance on the Mark Clattenburg incident.

Mr Herbert is the chairman of the Society of Black Lawyers.

After the Metropolitan Police dropped the investigation into a complaint that Clattenburg used "inappropriate language" towards two Chelsea players, Mr Herbert is claiming that Chelsea and the Football Association have manufactured a "cover-up" for not referring alleged comments by referee Mark Clattenburg to the police. I guess, with such a referral, the Police would have continued with their investigation.

Mr Herbert said to BBC's FiveLive: "It sounds remarkably like the football industry wanted to have this issue swept under the carpet."

But I think Mr Herbert is reading it all wrong. The point is: THERE IS NOTHING TO INVESTIGATE.

Chelsea - let's be charitable - have made a huge mistake. Mark Clattenburg never made any racial comments, not said anything inappropriate. It was all a mistake.

What troubles me is that Mr Herbert seems determined to make something out of nothing. Why? I can't believe he is doing the cause of anti-racism any favours with his aggressive stance.

I do not for one second believe that Mark Clattenburg said anything the like of which he is suspected. I don't believe any referee at (almost) any level would. And to think he would do so in the light of recent eventsis beyond all right-minded thinking.

The inappropriateness in this case has been:
1. Chelsea making the complaint.
2. Anyone believeing it for a second.
3. Mr Herbert perpetuating the wrong.

Let's put it to rest.

Clubs should get their own house in order before complaining about officials

Distractions, distractions, smoke and mirrors.

Managers have for years sought to blame everyone else for their woes. Now whole clubs are at it.

Rarely do you get a manager admit that it was his fault or his team are just useless (as fans, we know that most of them are!). It's always somebody else's fault - nearly always the officials'.

Now Chelsea, as a club, are seekinbg to blame the officials for their defeat by Manchester United last weekend.

"It was never a sending-off."

"Hernandez was offside."

Referee Mark Clattenburg used "inappropriate language" to player(s) "containing a racial element".

I didn't hear Chelsea complaining when they were given two offside goals against Wigan Athletic last season or when a ghot "goal" turned the FA Cup semi-final in their favour against Tottenham Hotspur.

Managers and clubs only moan when they lose - have you noticed that? Of course you have.

They're not interested in fairness, only winning.

A referee using "inappropriate language"! He didn't swear, did he? Heaven forbid. Players swear at referees, assistant referees and fourth officials all the time. Well, that's all right, isn't it? No, actually, it's not. If referees are at fault at all, it's because they don't deal properly with players who break this law.

Law 12, sending-off offences (bullet 6):

• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures.

Hmmm, watch how often that happens in a game. And see how many times it gets punished.

So, before players or clubs start accusing officials of inappropriate behaviour, I think they should get their own house in order.

As a final point: was John Obi Mikel's handling of Mark Clattenburg's arm (as often shown on Sky Sports News) in that game "appropriate"?