Chelsea's chairman Bruce Buck may meet referees chief Mike Riley to smooth fallout from Mark Clattenburg row Mikel has been charged with using threatening words and behaviour after the game against Manchester United, and while he has admitted the charge he has requested a personal hearing to try to mitigate the sanction. Chelsea are conscious that any apology might undermine his case. It could also prejudice their defence of any legal action brought by Clattenburg of his union. In an attempt to try to repair some of the damage the club will seek talks with Riley with the club acknowledging that Clattenburg has suffered as a result of a career-threatening allegation, and that the scrutiny has been stressful. The club would also not raise any objection to Clattenburg refereeing a Chelsea match, something Riley said was not out of the question, though it may not happen in the near future. A private expression of regret from Chelsea will fall short of the demands of his union however. Alan Leighton, general secretary of the referees" union Prospect, said he would pursue an apology and compensation from Chelsea until it was clear that there was no point. Leighton said Clattenburg was fearful that the allegation would damage his chances of officiating at the World Cup in Brazil. Mark is very keen to be England's representative at the World Cup in Brazil, and with the allegation coming from Ramires, who is a Brazilian international, he does not know how Fifa will react to this. With the globalisation of reporting millions of people have seen these allegations. I don't know if we get an apology from Chelsea. I hope we will. It would be the classy thing to do, it would be the right thing to do more importantly. There needs to be a recognition that Mark's reputation has been tarnished, been dragged through the mud, his integrity has been impugned and it's unfortunate that the Chelsea statement makes not a scintilla of recognition of the damage that has been done to Mark. Chelsea didn't need to do what they did in the way that they did it. They could have kept the reporting of the incident confidential and they didn't need to pursue it once they'd realised that the only evidence they had was the statement of Ramires when there was contradictory evidence. Professional Footballers" Association chairman Clarke Carlisle welcomed the conclusion of the process and said Chelsea were right to pursue a complaint made in good faith, but, like Leighton, regretted that it did not take place in private. "All in all, the process has shown that no one should be afraid to report allegations of abuse," he said. They will be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly. Equally, someone wrongly accused can have faith that the process is thorough enough, and not afraid, to vindicate them of any wrong doing. Where this process fell down was at two points. Firstly, the allegation was put to the press by Chelsea FC before any formal process had been concluded. This meant that a huge media frenzy whipped up around Mark Clattenburg and his family. He has stated how this was the most stressful period of his life. Peter Herbert, of the Society of Black Lawyers, said lessons had been learnt from the case, and the recording in future of officials" communication was positive. But, he said: "The FA must adopt a proper set of procedures for hate crime, and the McPherson definition of those, so that in future procedures can be dealt with consistently."