Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 1:27 pm  

RFL released a statement, looks like saints will have the chance to explain

The Rugby Football League is saddened by the content of the club chairman's matchday programme column of Friday 30 August and the matter has been referred to the RFL's Compliance Team.

Several inaccuracies were contained in the piece, including concerning the timeline of the death threat to an official's family and subsequent work with the police. It is a serious misreading of the situation to refer to a request by ITV for a brief news interview (concerning the threat made a month earlier) as some form of contrived stunt.

Match officials are at the centre of our sport, at all levels. Everyone in the sport appreciates that they are vital. Our match officials are hardworking, impartial, and deserving of respect and support. Theirs is a difficult job and without them there is no sport.

The Match Officials department works with and meets all clubs maturely, professionally and without fear or favour. It does this to increase understanding of the role including the system of independent review, professional training and development; consultation on rules, regulations and procedures; to promote the sport-wide 'Enjoy the Game' campaign at all levels and encourage pro-clubs to set an example for the rest of the sport; and to encourage and support referee recruitment and retention, and the mental and physical wellbeing of match officials alongside that of players and coaches

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:32 pm  

McManus says that the perception of impartiality was compromised by what happened before the final. I think that’s an opinion he is entitled to, even though I strongly disagree with him. But as soon as he says that this perception of impartiality was turned into “reality” (his exact word) due to the decision not to refer a try to the video referee and “other highly questionable decisions”, he accused the referee of cheating. And that’s unacceptable.

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:41 pm  

What an absolutely despicable piece! The man should be ashamed of himself.

Never mind the decision to send the decision up to the VR, what he’s said there should see him fined heavily.

And onto the decision:
Show me one camera shot that shows evidence Knowles definitely grounded the ball that would have definitely overturned the ref’s decision... because he would have sent it up as No Try and the camera angle the BBC showed only showed like it looked like he might have grounded it, it did not show that he irrefutably grounded it... so it would have remained No Try unless there is another camera angle other than the one that was zoomed in from 100m away on the wrong side of the ball.

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:44 pm  

nottinghamtiger wrote:

McManus says that the perception of impartiality was compromised by what happened before the final. I think that’s an opinion he is entitled to, even though I strongly disagree with him. But as soon as he says that this perception of impartiality was turned into “reality” (his exact word) due to the decision not to refer a try to the video referee and “other highly questionable decisions”, he accused the referee of cheating. And that’s unacceptable.

Spot on. I also don’t think anyone realistically thought that Hicks would be compromised by the thing with Warrington. I was surprised that was even mentioned. But like you say he can say that that perception is there and seem a bit daft but when he turns it to reality that’s way over the line. Coaches and players have been disciplined for far less.

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:20 pm  

Macmannus and hedge fund manager mike coleman should tell the rfl to go screw themselves , both men are multi millionaires and i doubt the rfl could afford to take them on in court

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:43 pm  

McManus might yet find himself sued for libel.

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:57 pm  

Clearwing wrote:

McManus might yet find himself sued for libel.

I seriously doubt it. You need to reread the content of the programme carefully. It clearly talks about other peoples perceptions.

If it went to court the rfl would end up with a big lawyer bill, but no outcome.

You may disagree with mcmanus but he is not going to leave himself open to legal action.

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 9:03 pm  

They must be furious to be millionaires yet losers and obnoxious 5h1t5 all at the same time.
Its like one step forward, two steps back, you'd think they could learn to live with the latter given the former.
There's no pleasing some people.

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 9:09 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

I seriously doubt it. You need to reread the content of the programme carefully. It clearly talks about other peoples perceptions.

If it went to court the rfl would end up with a big lawyer bill, but no outcome.

You may disagree with mcmanus but he is not going to leave himself open to legal action.

I’m not too sure.
Let’s remeber it wouldn’t be the RFL taking him to court, it would be Silverwood. And if he wins, McManus foots the bill.
He talks about other peoples’ perceptions, but then about these turning into “reality”. He makes an outright accusation of cheating, naming Silverwood, that could well be considered to be libellous.

Re: Classy : Sat Aug 31, 2019 9:18 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

I seriously doubt it. You need to reread the content of the programme carefully. It clearly talks about other peoples perceptions.

If it went to court the rfl would end up with a big lawyer bill, but no outcome.

You may disagree with mcmanus but he is not going to leave himself open to legal action.

Yeah, it was a bit tongue in cheek following on from the comment before mine. Nice thought though..