FAO MR Jonathan Jackson, Chief-Executive Of WAFC.

I’m doing this as an open letter, as obviously I’m putting it on a messageboard! I believe the club look at this site, so I would like to put forward the following to the powers that be at our club.

Dr Mr Jackson,

Much has been said and written about in the aftermath of the events that took place during the game versus Newcastle on Sunday. It is common knowledge that there are parties looking to seek punishment for our player, Callum McManaman, following his robust, and perhaps clumsy, challenge on the Newcastle player who unfortunately received an injury in the process of the said challenge.

The fact that the player was injured, is not in doubt. What is questionable is the reaction of the match officials. The referee claims he was unsighted. The linesman (I refuse to call them referees assistant) had a very clear side-on view of McManaman actually facing towards him, and yet he did not see fit to call a foul at all. I think this is a key point in defence of our player.

The aftermath has seen many people put their opinion in, and most have seen fit to condemn our player. However, I genuinely believe that the level or media coverage and discussion, has resulted in a biased leaning towards condemning McManaman and finding him guilty. I believe that elements of the press have had a biased, and some would say, alternative motive. Take for example, the Daily Mirror reporter Alan Nixon. To my belief, Mr Nixon is a Newcastle United supporter. I seem to recall seeing him being shown as one on tv previously. And yet yesterday I found the Daily Mirror to use a carefully chosen still photo of the challeng, which in my mind makes it look far worse than it was. In fact, the image was used twice in the same newspaper, on the back page, and in the match write up, which was blatantly worded in favour of Newcastle United. Alan Nixon wrote BOTH pieces. And again today, same image on the back page, headline “The challenge that shocked football” or words to that effect, and again, it’s written by Alan Nixon.

I genuinely believe with all that has been said, and printed in the media, Wigan Athletic have a fair case for claiming that any decision on retrospective punishment for Callum McManaman has clearly been highly prejudiced, and therefore any case against him should be thrown out. If it was a criminal case and one of the parties saw fit to try and coherse the jury into a decision, the case would be thrown out for contempt of court. I believe we as a club have a very strong case here.

May I also suggest that we no longer allow Mr Nixon into our club, as he has not once tried to offer a balanced opinion, has saw fit to readily condemn our player and club, and nobody seems to actually realise or admit that Callum McManaman is a young player with not a lot of experience. I believe that so far, much has been written and said, but not much common sense has been shown.

I also eagerly await to see the actual extent of the Newcastle players injury, as surely this needs to be released and proven before any action could be considered against our player. I have see it referred to as ‘potential ligament damage’, but surely any tackle could be labelled as causing ‘potential’ damage?

Incidentally, I was sat directly in-line with the challenge, about 20 yards away in the East stand. I thought it was a very hard, but fair challenge. There were no immediate great claims from Newcastle players, and none of them attempted to approach or reproach McManaman, as you might have expected had the challenge been a clear foul. I thought McManaman got the ball.

I feel we have a really good case of defence.

Also, I would advise you to take a look at comments made on http://www.nufc.com which are slanderous and libellous towards our player, club, and especially our manager and chairman.

Thank you

ABL