Quote: MPhil12 "I’m no Saints fan but what McManus has said there is nowhere near as bad as people on here are making out. Whilst it does come across as sour grapes and could have been worded better, I think he makes some fair points. As controversial as it maybe I agree with the publicity stunt part also, I’ve seen a lot of comments saying this should have been done privately but so should the Hicks death threat meeting. As someone who has put millions into the game I think McManus is fine to voice his displeasure at the quality of officiating.'"
But that’s not what he’s done. He’s not said the quality is poor, that referees make too many mistakes, that there appears to be little accountability etc.
He’s said Hicks was bent. That’s what his statement said. That he appeared bent because of the death threat and then proved it on game day.
Firstly I find it bizarre to conflate impartiality with the death threat. It’s utterly strange to think that could affect a referees mindset. Only someone desperately looking for a link would create one in their own heads.
Secondly to describe a death threat and how it is dealt with as a publicity stunt is crass, inane drivel.
Thirdly I don’t care whether he’s put millions of pounds into the sport or 50p. He has only the same right as anybody else to voice his opinions. Just because he puts money in doesn’t mean he understands the game better than anyone else (©️ Marwan Koukash). He proves this by then going on to say it was a clear definite try. If he thinks that was a clear decision in real time then he’s a moron. The argument isn’t that Hicks should’ve given a try, it’s that he should’ve gone to the video ref.
This type of pathetic, insular, self-serving nonsense from the chairman of one the sports top clubs demonstrates why the sport is where it is. Too much passion, not enough nous on show. Too many owners/chairman/CEO’s acting like fans instead of leaders in the sport.
