Why should he though? Why should the chairmen of a team give a statement with that aim? Its embarassing really. You cant dictate your referees for your games. I'd give saints Hicks every week from now on just for a laugh if thats his aim. I dont think Hicks had too bad of a game at wembley either. I've certainly seen worse.

Come on
It's one thing for the fans to have a whinge and moan and complain of bias from the ref etc but, for a club chairman, not just to comment on decisions by an official or, to say that they made a mistake (which EVERY official and player does) but, to question their integrity is clearly bringing the game into disrepute.
Coaches are fined for questioning a ref's decision (whether they are right or wrong)
Under what circumstances can it be right for someone in McMannus' position to effectively call the ref a cheat.

Sorry but you are badly wrong in backing your chairman.

Even if that decision had cost you the cup, which it certainly didn't - your coaches selection of Coote seemed to take care of Saints chances of winning - a club CHARIMAN should not EVER question the integrity of the officials.

Most people would say something along the lines of I dont think "X" had his best game but to infer some form of deliberate bias or cheating is just wrong.

Simple question for you.
Do you think that Hicks made those calls because he dislikes Saints or just made a couple of incorrect calls ??
In real time, it didn't look like try so, as a neutral, I can understand why he said no try.
However, I also believe that he should have used the VR, just to be absolutely certain.

No, fans who wanted Saints to lose will have naturally found it hilarious and seen no fault in his performance. These things will naturally only occur to the team that loses, but it would be the same whoever it happened to. Imagine that Wakefield game yesterday was the Cup Final. Do you not think Wakefield would query the referee's family being on the terraces supporting Wigan after that error helped Wigan score the try from the 20 metre restart from the wrong place? (Of course someone should have tackled him and it's Wakey's fault they lost the game and are where they are, but none of that means the ref doesn't need to do their job properly).

Fully agree.In the sewer of professional football I cannot think of any owner,American,Russia,Chinese or British who resorts to such conduct.In cricket,a sport where Australian players,and others,cheat,and where there exists an anti-corruption unit I cannot think of any outspoken remarks against umpires.Nor from the sport of rugby union.

I would think any opportunity for blue chip sponsors has now permanently been lost,all because of some Totally Wicked,libellous conduct from the guy from the Totally Wicked stadium.

Beyond despair with this sport,now.

The inference that he is accusing Hicks of bias is your own. McManus worded his statement deliberately to put the blame squarely on the RFL and Hicks' appointment. He talks about the subconscious pressure he was placed under by the death threats from the Warrington fan and how that would have meant he wasn't put into that situation in the first place. There is no talk about Hicks being deliberately biased, just condemnation at his appointment in the first place given the pressure he'd be under. McManus is also right in that Hicks was in an impossible position, were Warrington to lose with a controversial decision going against them, he would have been hammered for that as well. Again, as McManus said, it's the perception of impartiality not existing that is the issue, a position Hicks would always struggle to avoid having been put in that position.

The only criticism he does place on Hicks (Again inferred) is agreeing to do the publicity stunt with Warrington and ITV. He should not have agreed to do that when he did, he should not have been allowed by the RFL to do that. The request from ITV should have been turned down or managed better. Whilst that piece was a very important one and a discussion point the game very much needs to air, doing so in the build up to the second biggest game of the season, featuring the team involved was just utter stupidity and incompetence from all concerned. It put Hicks in an impossible and unfair position.

I'm not blindly supporting McManus either. I've said a few times we shouldn't have aired this in public. The statement should have read, "Congrulations to Warrington, RFL we'll see you next Tuesday" and he should have been at the RFL's door first thing Tuesday morning (Because it was a bank holiday on Monday, don't go inferring controversial stuff to make a story out of this ).

Come on, that is blinkered nonsense and you know it. It's a simple issue: was Hicks biased or not? If he's saying Hicks had a subconscious bias, then he was biased. If he's saying he had a conscious bias, he is saying he was biased. He is using the word "perception" as a cloak in order to use the words "Hicks was biased" and whinge about losing the final, for a decision made when there were 76 minutes still to play and the scores were nil-nil.

One thing will flow from this, if McManus gets his way. If a ref wants to referee a major final, he can forget about complaining about death threats or having any constructive dialogue with any potential finalist. Instead, he just has to suck it up. That is no position to be in.

It is also a much different position than a ref being allowed to referee a game involving a club that he is a fan of, the rule that was amended, if I recall correctly, because Ganson bleated about missing out on the big games when Saints were in most of them. Fans might complain, but you won't see Michael Carter whinging about it in his next programme notes.

Whilst McManus might have tried somewhat to hide behind the cloak of ‘perceptions’, he did outright say that the perceptions of bias ”turned into reality”. At this point, he’s accusing Hicks of deliberately making decisions in Warrington’s favour, and followigs it by saying Hicks made ”highly questionable decisions” also in Warrington’s favour. He’s not inferring Hicks was biased, he’s making an outright accusation that he was biased “in reality” (again, McManus’ own words).
In terms of officiating, I think he could have said the decisions were incorrect - some would have agreed and some wouldn’t. What he cannot do, in his position, is accuse a referee of deliberate cheating and making decisions based on favouring a particular team.

Again, Saints glossing over the fact that had Saints won We wouldn’t have heard a peep from McManus regarding the officials.

And here’s something for biased, the head of referees or whatever his title is is a Saints fan.

If nothing else, it has given me someone to root for in the play-offs: Anyone But Saints.

As a Saints fan I find all of this quite ridiculous.

I think McManus has some valid points (can you imagine the FA appointing a ref to, say, a Man U v Liverpool FA Cup Final the week after said ref had been splashed over the press meeting fan(s)/Chief Exec re: death threats from a fan of one of the finalists? It simply wouldn't happen because, frankly, it's a stupid move).

More importantly though, it is thoroughly embarrassing to be bleating about it publically and I'm disppointed in EM and the club for behaving in this manner.

A poor point badly made....and you've made it twice.

he didnt but cos of mcmanus's rant about something that happened at the beginning of the game now has saints fans believing he did, most of us have had a lot worse referee perfomances against our teams this year.

"some people may have thought the perception of impartiality had gone. not me though, i totally thought he was impartial. and that perception was consolidated by many. but again not me, in reality, when hicks incomprehensibly didnt go upstairs for morgan knowles try. Obviously i know the reason he didnt go upstairs was because he was sure in his decision that the ball hadn't been grounded, but other people might perceive it differently, i mean i cant help it if they see it the way i have just laid out, its entirely their own perception of reality. supporters (but not me) have been dissatisfied with officating standards for decades (but not me i think its great) and its driving fans away. It's not the price of a game or the rubbish on the pitch driving people away, its totally the refereeing standard doing that. or so ive heard. from spectators. i dont think that way"