Spot on.

Ironically if this were a post on Twitter you could write it off as a heat of the moment thing. But it’s a statement in the club programme when they should have been focussed on celebrating winning the LLS and presumably the clubs media officer went “WTF” when he/she saw it prior to being published too.

Blimey just had a read on there. They really are deluded on there. Only 1 or 2 being reasonable.

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.

Eammon macmanus......multi millionair
Mike coleman .....owns 65 % of saints....multi BILLIONAIRE hedge fund manager
........
You think they give a what you losers think

I also find it funny he’s now upping the importance of the LLS now he realises that Saints might not win the GF.

Can’t believe all this, watching on tele in real time I thought, yep that’s gone dead, glad he’s not gone to the screen, let’s keep the game flowing.

Obviously a mistake, Hicks made 1 error, saints made about 20!

To blame a loss on a decision in the first 5 mins is bizarre, if it had happened in the last 5 mins maybe I’d understand more.

Is he genuinely saying Hicks didn’t give that try because he met someone who sent him a death threat?

I’ll moan about a ref decision from time to time but never would they there biased and want a team to win.

McManus is very very unlikable human being.

Just trying to move the attention away from his team of bottlers.

Really didn't care who won last week (though did enjoy the game). Belatedly, I'm delighted Warrington did. McManus has revealed his true colours; I used to think he was ok, as chairmen go, but not any more.

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.

Where does is say that in his article.

His final 3 paragraphs. They are all saying Hicks impartiality was compromised by his dealing with a death threat several months previously.

It’s a ridiculous, petty statement from a usually respectable club.

Sorry, I repeat were does he actually say Hicks was bent.

You're sounding like a politician. McManus's 'argument', if such a term can be applied to this puerile diatribe, attacks the integrity of the referee, which position can only be characterised as an accusation of corruption, or 'being bent'. As others have said, possibly understandable in a Tweet at 4.45pm last Saturday, unforgiveable in an official, printed club publication six whole days later.

What can you say.
Very, very poor form from the chairman of one of the games big names.
Mind you, with Elstone's bias towards the big clubs, nothing will be done and McMannus probably thinks he is beyond reproach.
There is no doubt that Hicks made a huge mistake but, he made far fewer than Coote and many of the other Saints players and for any SL chairman to suggest that a ref is not impartial is bringing the game into disrepute, something which is currently acceptable for the big 4/5 clubs.

Next time maybe he should just throw something and start a riot in the crowd... To which the rfl did............


As for Carney. Lol.

Each and every week sky's commentary team undermine referees.

They add to the perception of biased referees for 100's of thousands of people.

The article in the programme would have been read by a few hundred.

Its not even the pot calling the kettle black. It's the pot calling the kettle a slight shade of pink.

Personally I would rather he focused on the great efforts to finish top. But he has never been one to not speak his mind.

I wonder what would have happened if he'd said this in a post match Sky interview?
Players and coaches are often fined by RFL for this. He should too.
RESPECT