- Nottingham Forest appointed Mark Clattenburg, 49, as an advisor in February
- The club reacted furiously at officials after losing 2-0 against Everton last month
- Were Jude Bellingham’s Allianz antics out of order? Listen to the It’s All Kicking Off! podcast
Mark Clattenburg has resigned from his role as a consultant to the Nottingham Forest board after admitting it had become ‘more hindrance than help’ to the club.
The former Premier League referee took up the position in February and it was intended he would help players and staff understand better the workings of VAR and how decisions are made.
However, Clattenburg’s presence has courted controversy amid a series of key decisions that have gone against the team. There is a worry that his involvement and Forest’s decision to seek such guidance from an ex referee has angered the PGMOL and, as a result, has had a negative impact.
The 49-year-old also believes he has been unfairly targeted by sections of the media, and Forest are considering legal action against Sky after comments made by pundit Gary Neville.
Clattenburg said: ‘This is to announce that I will no longer be providing match analysis services to Nottingham Forest Football Club. Since February this year, I have been proud to have done so under a consultancy agreement between NFFC and Referee Consultant Ltd.
Former referee Mark Clattenburg has resigned from his role as a Nottingham Forest consultant
Forest were furious with three refereeing decisions during their 2-0 defeat by Everton last month and alleged that VAR Stuart Attwell was showing bias towards relegation rivals Luton
The club released this incendiary statement after the controversial defeat at Goodison Park
‘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.
‘However, it is now clear that the existence and performance of these consultancy services has caused unintended friction between NFFC and other participants, to the extent that it has become more of a hindrance than help to NFFC.
‘It has also 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.
‘I am grateful to NFFC and wish them all the best during the remainder of the season and in the future. It’s been an honour.’
Clattenburg soon became a conduit between the club and the PGMOL when Forest felt aggrieved by decisions against them in games. He had spoken to PGMOL boss Howard Webb prior to the team’s 2-0 defeat at Everton last month and flagged concern over VAR Stuart Attwell being a supporter of Luton Town, Forest’s rivals at the bottom of the Premier League.
Forest were then denied what they were believed were three penalties at Goodison Park and Attwell did not send referee Anthony Taylor to his pitchside monitor to review any of the incidents. Webb admitted this week that one of three should have been a penalty.
But Forest, whose Greek owner Evangelos Marinakis was furious, caused a furore when they released a statement on X immediately after the game, which read: ‘Three extremely poor decisions – three penalties not given – which we simply cannot accept.
Clattenburg, 49, doubled down on the Midlands club’s criticism in his column for Mail Sport
Attwell, left, was on VAR duty at Goodison Park with Anthony Taylor, right, the on-field referee
‘We warned the PGMOL that the VAR is a Luton fan before the game but they didn’t change him. Our patience has been tested multiple times. NFFC will now consider its options.’
Clattenburg was not involved in the statement but it triggered an explosive fallout, and the club have since been formally requested for their observations by the Football Association and Premier League.
So, too, was Clattenburg, and he has been asked to explain his comments in a Daily Mail column in which he analysed the three decisions. They have until next week to respond.