Beaumont has another tantrum, threatens to stop investing in Leigh

[GUBRATS]

3 minutes ago, haskey said:

If Beaumont wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater , who really cares . He is just a total s--t stirrer  who thinks  just because he is loaded . his tripe carries more weight.If he wants to do something constructive . use his money to train up some top quality referees instead of the poor examples we have at the moment.

If he wants to quit good riddance 

You hope 

[Chrispmartha]

1 hour ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Derek is passionate and loves Leigh total working class person who has through hard work made a successful business and put some of  his hard earned wonga into RL.

Emotion passion nothing wrong with that in my little world have put thousands into my silly old non league football club over the last few years even though i don't really like football any more but it's a passion from my childhood having been brought up by wonderful adoptive parents in my home town.

100% certain Derek has now calmed down and ready to rock and roll at Hull KR this weekend.

Good luck to both teams:)

 

Paul

 

 

 

 

Being ‘working class’ or being ‘successful’ (I’m presuming you think making a few bob makes a person successful?) is not a ready made excuse for acting like a knob.

[Leyther_Matt]

2 hours ago, Superb Chops said:

This is my thinking. In an audience, I switch off at marketing-rehearsed comments and, off-topic, dislike when people routinely whip their phones out to record things at public events. Much better to have honest and relevant thoughts (with phones off, please).

But I think Derek Beaumont has made a mistake by not reining his comments in somewhat. To me, his excess here slightly takes the gloss off Leigh giving RL a big boost by unexpectedly reaching the play-offs, dominating the dream team and a cup win.

Could this chairman of a thriving sports club, and successful businessman, do with a lieutenant? Not a spin doctor, but someone who can tell Beaumont things he may not want to hear - in the hope of avoiding episodes like this and, maybe, returning more spotlight to the team.

Have a look at how many other directors* have come and gone over the last decade and that probably gives you your answer.

*Companies House will of course not list any of them as it is a ‘board of management’ if memory serves me right rather than being actual company directors as of course there is only one of those…

[Chrispmartha]

5 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Have a look at how many other directors* have come and gone over the last decade and that probably gives you your answer.

*Companies House will of course not list any of them as it is a ‘board of management’ if memory serves me right rather than being actual company directors as of course there is only one of those…

Derek Beaumont is only an active director of AB Sundecks (did he start that business?) he isn’t listed as a Director of Leigh, unless he has started a new company not yet on Companies House?

[Leyther_Matt]

7 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Derek Beaumont is only an active director of AB Sundecks (did he start that business?) he isn’t listed as a Director of Leigh, unless he has started a new company not yet on Companies House?

Sporting Club Leigh

[Chrispmartha]

3 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Sporting Club Leigh

Ah yes,  sorry misread the Companies house website!

[GUBRATS]

15 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Sporting Club Leigh

We must have posted that a hundred times on MBs in the last 21 years 

[daz39]

3 hours ago, Superb Chops said:

This is my thinking. In an audience, I switch off at marketing-rehearsed comments and, off-topic, dislike when people routinely whip their phones out to record things at public events. Much better to have honest and relevant thoughts (with phones off, please).

But I think Derek Beaumont has made a mistake by not reining his comments in somewhat. To me, his excess here slightly takes the gloss off Leigh giving RL a big boost by unexpectedly reaching the play-offs, dominating the dream team and a cup win.

Could this chairman of a thriving sports club, and successful businessman, do with a lieutenant? Not a spin doctor, but someone who can tell Beaumont things he may not want to hear - in the hope of avoiding episodes like this and, maybe, returning more spotlight to the team.

From what i've seen of him i doubt he would listen to anyone anyway.

[Superb Chops]

1 hour ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Have a look at how many other directors* have come and gone over the last decade and that probably gives you your answer.

*Companies House will of course not list any of them as it is a ‘board of management’ if memory serves me right rather than being actual company directors as of course there is only one of those…

A shame but thank you. Didn't know this. 

[17 stone giant]

2 hours ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

100% certain Derek has now calmed down

If so, it would be good to see him apologise and acknowledge that he made some stupid comments in the heat of the moment. I'm sure if he did that he would regain a lot of the respect that he's lost because of it. We've all said and done things in anger and frustration that we later regret, but admitting that and putting it right as best you can is the best way forwards.

[DACS]

While he'll get fined for his comments, the only ones I don't personally like are threatening to pull out of the sport. Having a crack at refs is a no no, but it happens. I can't actually remember the last time I got really upset with a referee myself? For whatever reason I can accept them making mistakes. I tend to get more upset at players, who make far more important mistakes far more often than refs. You want to look at why a team loses, look at the missed tackles, dropped balls throughout before blaming a ref.

Even in the context of that one game its ridiculous to claim Leigh lost because of a decision 20 minutes before the end. I'd understand more if it was in the last minute, but a lot can and does happen in 20 minutes, including the whole strategy of teams. If Wigan had gone behind they would not have been able to play percentages, as they would then have needed to score. Suggesting that because they didn't score in the last 20 minutes when they were ahead means they wouldn't have if they were behind is childlike nonsense - the reality is we don't know, but twenty minutes is a long time.   

[The Masked Poster]

10 hours ago, haskey said:

If Beaumont wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater , who really cares . He is just a total s--t stirrer  who thinks  just because he is loaded . his tripe carries more weight.If he wants to do something constructive . use his money to train up some top quality referees instead of the poor examples we have at the moment.

If he wants to quit good riddance 

Is it really good riddance? I mean really? 
 

There is hardly a queue to replace him is there? This doesn’t mean that he can behave as he wants but let’s keep it real, we have too few people investing in RL clubs. 

[EagleEyePie]

5 hours ago, DACS said:

While he'll get fined for his comments, the only ones I don't personally like are threatening to pull out of the sport. Having a crack at refs is a no no, but it happens. I can't actually remember the last time I got really upset with a referee myself? For whatever reason I can accept them making mistakes. I tend to get more upset at players, who make far more important mistakes far more often than refs. You want to look at why a team loses, look at the missed tackles, dropped balls throughout before blaming a ref.

Even in the context of that one game its ridiculous to claim Leigh lost because of a decision 20 minutes before the end. I'd understand more if it was in the last minute, but a lot can and does happen in 20 minutes, including the whole strategy of teams. If Wigan had gone behind they would not have been able to play percentages, as they would then have needed to score. Suggesting that because they didn't score in the last 20 minutes when they were ahead means they wouldn't have if they were behind is childlike nonsense - the reality is we don't know, but twenty minutes is a long time.   

I think this is the logical take when it comes to analysing the outcome of games. You can't control the calls a referee makes, but you can prevent tries being conceded. There were two tries that Leigh could have prevented but didn't which had a greater bearing on the outcome of that game. If you'd played a near perfect game and then the ref made an incorrect call that cost you the points you might be entitled to be upset, but that would probably also require the opposition to have played a near perfect game too.

If Wigan had lost that game then plenty of Wigan fans and possibly myself included would have still bemoaned the obstruction call against us and it not being called obstruction against French but the reality is we failed at things we could control. As much as Lam might never have reached Field the fact is Nsemba's run was too close to the outside shoulder and allowed Lam to initiate contact. That's a mistake and something the team can control. The Gildart no-try was a stroke of luck for us but we should never have allowed them to be in that position. The Lam try came from a defensively mistake from Nsemba and a poor tackle attempt from French. If the Gildart try had stood you should point the finger of blame at the poor defending for the Lam try rather than any perceived mistake by the official.

It's like when teams make a clean break, 2 on 1 with the fullback and the final pass is forward but the try is given and the fans and maybe even coach howl with outrage. That's blaming the ref for bad luck. Everyone knows in that situation a try will be scored unless the attacking team messes up. You can't control that final pass, you can't control whether the other team mess up, what can't be disputed is they shouldn't have been allowed into a position where the only thing preventing a try being scored is the attacking team making a mistake. Its not the refs fault, it's the fault of the players who allowed the attacking team to make the break.

[Harry Stottle]

16 hours ago, Jinking Jimmy said:

If the “try” had been awarded Wigan would have re-started the game from the half-way line. Henceforth anything could have happened; eg a Leigh knock-on near their line, a missed tackle. You need to go back to your parallel universe, stop complaining and enjoy life there.

Of course, Leigh could also have gone back downfield after a Wigan foul in a tackle and scored again, should we think of another possibiliies that are possible and write them down, is it the same parallel universe we are both on?

[Harry Stottle]

15 hours ago, Jinking Jimmy said:

Of course anything could have happened and either side could have won the game especially given that there were about 20 minutes left. HS just claims that had the “try” been allowed Leigh would have won and because it wasn’t they were robbed. As you say it’s better to be leading than losing but many games have been won by teams that were behind on the scoreboard eg Wigan in last season’s CCF with 3 minutes left.

 

 

What is it with you 'Humbles' and making things up, were have I ever stated and used the phrase that Leigh was robbed or Leigh would have won the game had that score been allowed, I haven't. 

It is Wigan fans who have implied that had that Leigh score been allowed, Wigan  would just have changed their game to ensure you won it comfortably.

A better example of late wins is the Jack Welsby try with seconds to go in the 2020 GF.

[redjonn]

6 hours ago, DACS said:

While he'll get fined for his comments, the only ones I don't personally like are threatening to pull out of the sport. Having a crack at refs is a no no, but it happens. I can't actually remember the last time I got really upset with a referee myself? For whatever reason I can accept them making mistakes. I tend to get more upset at players, who make far more important mistakes far more often than refs. You want to look at why a team loses, look at the missed tackles, dropped balls throughout before blaming a ref.

Even in the context of that one game its ridiculous to claim Leigh lost because of a decision 20 minutes before the end. I'd understand more if it was in the last minute, but a lot can and does happen in 20 minutes, including the whole strategy of teams. If Wigan had gone behind they would not have been able to play percentages, as they would then have needed to score. Suggesting that because they didn't score in the last 20 minutes when they were ahead means they wouldn't have if they were behind is childlike nonsense - the reality is we don't know, but twenty minutes is a long time.   

yep, 20 mins is... and here I may not be good at arithmetic so best double check everyone,  a quarter of the game time.   So yep who knows what may have happened in that large percentage of the game time if circumstances meant a team had to change their approach,,,,

What we do know is what happened in the game itself, that is Leigh had a quarter of the game time to turn it around but failed.

Now I can see frustration missing out on a home play-off and the extra revenue, but I would guess they never factored in a high percentage expectation of being in top 4 when planning for the season.

Never-the-less will be interesting to see Leigh do a Leeds and win GF from fifth in the league table.

[Jinking Jimmy]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

What is it with you 'Humbles' and making things up, were have I ever stated and used the phrase that Leigh was robbed or Leigh would have won the game had that score been allowed, I haven't. 

It is Wigan fans who have implied that had that Leigh score been allowed, Wigan  would just have changed their game to ensure you won it comfortably.

A better example of late wins is the Jack Welsby try with seconds to go in the 2020 GF.

That is a very good example and backs up what I am saying.

[Sports Prophet]

Edit, wrong thread

Edited September 28, 2023 by Sports Prophet

[Veridical]

Personally, I think this tantrum is so extreme that it’s actually weirdly endearing. 
 

Threatening to set up a whole new competition because a refereeing decision went against you is more funny than annoying in my opinion.

Edited September 28, 2023 by Veridical

[fighting irish]

32 minutes ago, Veridical said:

Personally, I think this tantrum is so extreme that it’s actually weirdly endearing. 
 

Threatening to set up a whole new competition because a refereeing decision went against you is more funny than annoying in my opinion.

Finally, common sense prevails. 

[Jim Prendle]

7 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

What is it with you 'Humbles' and making things up, were have I ever stated and used the phrase that Leigh was robbed or Leigh would have won the game had that score been allowed, I haven't. 

It is Wigan fans who have implied that had that Leigh score been allowed, Wigan  would just have changed their game to ensure you won it comfortably.

A better example of late wins is the Jack Welsby try with seconds to go in the 2020 GF.

Humbles?

Well there's certainly nothing humble about you lot is there? Right from the top down.

You lost, accept it, move on, beat Hull KR if you are as good as you all think you are and then get another crack at Wigan.

Or alternatively, just shut up whining, I can hear it from my house.

[Harry Stottle]

13 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

Humbles?

Well there's certainly nothing humble about you lot is there? Right from the top down.

You lost, accept it, move on, beat Hull KR if you are as good as you all think you are and then get another crack at Wigan.

Or alternatively, just shut up whining, I can hear it from my house.

Humbles, yes nearly the centenary.

[Jim Prendle]

15 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Humbles, yes nearly the centenary.

Dear God, are you ever going to grow up?

[Padge]

16 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Humbles, yes nearly the centenary.

You do know who the 'Wigan' miners of of October 1926 where don't you?

 

[JohnM]

Beaumont or any other can say in private what they want, about whatever they want , whenever they want, to whoever they want, provided it is not incitement/conspiracy to commit, abusive etc  He was merely exercising that right. However, people need to remember that actions have consequences.

There is no such thing as "private" any more. Wikileaks, a whole load of leaked documents and videos about government, especially over lockdown issues etc are strong evidence that someone, somewhere, will leak something. You'd have expected Beaumont to have been aware of this.....and maybe he was.

The one good thing to come out of this is that we all know that with him, what you see is what you get.

Edited September 29, 2023 by JohnM