I can never understand why anyone would be easily forgiving of a highly paid professional sportsman who damages his prep for a big event by going out partying.

It's not just about him. The guy may be letting down teammates, coaching staff, conditioners, medical advisers, dietary staff, employers, not to mention supporters - all of whom have invested a lot in his development and progress.

I hear it time and again that young athletes are just young lads, and should be allowed to go out and get sloshed if they feel like it. I could not disagree with that sentiment more. In fact, I regard it as the sort of hare-brained folly that could actually do harm if it reaches the ears of the young and impressionable.

Athletes are NOT like the rest of us. For the duration of their career, their body should be their temple. That isn't to say they can't celebrate victory or have a drink now and then, but there is a time and place - and the week before a massive Test match against Australia was most decidedly not it.

As for McNamara - I don't know what's been going on in that England camp to allow that bunch of players to think they could get away with this, but someone needs to investigate. As for his reaction - he did right to punish the worst offender so publicly. The others perhaps also needed more than a slapped wrist, but I don't suppose the guy could have kicked all six out - that really would have been reducing our chances in the WC. And he certainly should not have walked out of the press conference. This was a serious issue, but he could have dealt with it by being firm: "I'll make a statement regarding the disciplinary measures, take a couple of questions on it, and after that we're talking about the game."

Dave Brailsford and his aggregation of marginal gains system is legendary and why they do all that stuff. I think it was Jason Kenny who was refused permission to attend a gig a full twelve months before the olympics as it meant he wouldnt get the necessary amount of sleep thst night. He got the results too!

Not many people would be willing to devote themselves like that! It makes even more of a mockery of the fact that some "pros" cant go without a beer and then cant stop before they drink so much they cant get out of bed the following morning!

its not about hock going for a beer, its about hock not doing as requested, simple as that.

I have no connection to hock or any club, just tired of the world being sanitised by overblown press reporting.
What the players did was not illegal, immoral or even a bit risky.
My post was meant to highlight that 20 or 30 years ago this wouldn't have been considered news and shouldn't be today, it's Bo@@ocks.
It Gas hocks talent to pi@@ up against the wall, not ours and as for young lads, there wast one of them a young lad, they were all grown up professionals capable of making an individual decision.
I have no right to criticise any of them for their action, it may not have been my choice I would have made but it was theirs.

fair enough.
But they are professional athletes and their jobs are judged on performance and its well known alcohol has adverse effects on performance. And this is the present not the past they used to tell people cigarettes is good for health and stress.
Every player is invited to the England camp and they have rules to follow hock didn't he went home its not school its a job with big responsibilities.

Just because it's someone's choice, that doesn't mean they can't be criticised for it. There is such a thing as a wrong or stupid choice.

While I certainly agree that the press have relished it, it's not an unimportant issue on the eve of a World Cup tournament that might be very important for the future of the professional game in this country. The players concerned let the England team down and blew their responsibility. Therefore we have every right to be irritated with them.

Hock should watch the Sam Burgess documentary and cringe. That's a lad that's been through hell and worked tirelessly to succeed.

Hock has just as much natural ability but not even 1% of Sam Burgess's class.

I’ve always thought that Hock is a talent, at his best a very good player, but what IMO makes him different from some of the names mentioned in posts on this thread is WILLPOWER, the mental ability to stop the feeling of what he wants to do, and change it for what should be the overriding thought for what he should do, and do that. I think most world class people and sports people have this capability; it may be called strength of character.

I agree with the majority of posts on this thread.

I would go further however. I think that the team should not just go without booze for the tournament but they should go without sex too just like the old prize fighters did.

I mean Hock should be thoroughly ashamed of himself. Never mind looking within the England ranks - why not take the lead from the best players in the world.

Look at his opposite number in the Australian team, Greg Bird. When he finished his degree in Philosophy at Sydney University he joined a Benedictine Monastery and only leaves for matches and training. But Greg is not the only one who dedicates himself to his career in such exemplary fashion.

Just look throughout the whole of the NRL for more shining examples for our Gaz to follow.

I'm off on my high horse now...

That's very well put. I wonder what some of the people who thinks it's ok for players to break the squad rules and have a "few" beers do for a living themselves?

Maybe they blindly follow the rules too - who knows. Personally I don't drink - but I prefer not to judge others who do - providing they can perform on the pitch (or in the office if you prefer)

Steve McNamara had a duty to put out the best England team. He's only had 4 years to prepare for this game. He failed. If anyone seriously thinks that Lee Mossop/the other Burgess is better than James Graham or that Brett Ferres/Ben Westwood is better than Gaz Hock then go ahead, be my guest. I went to the game on Saturday and it was so obvious that England wouldn't sustain their good start because the bench wasn't good enough. That is solely down to McNamara. He chose to leave out better players. And whilst we are at it Micky Mac should have been out there too because Widdop wasn't up to it (meaning that Sinfield was moved to hooker to accommodate him).

When you manage a team you have to find ways of managing all of your disparate resources - not just the ones who are good little boys.

And I'd forgotten about Carl Ablett. Enough said surely...I rest my case.

He chose to leave out the "better players" as they had not conformed to Team instructions.
What happens if he lets them get away with it? They all go out on the Razz this week as the coach won't do anything to me etc.?
And if he did then would it be a case of you didnt pick those players last week so why pick on me this week?
It's got absolutely nothing to do with whether Gaz Hock is better than Brett Ferres, Ben Westwood or whoever. It's got everything to do with trust, preparation, team ethic etc.

Your so Wrong on this one it's untrue.

But I know what I'd have done and apart from naming & shaming the individuals by issuing a statement on the Monday/Tuesday as to what had happened then I would have done exactly the same as McNamara.
Oh, and the same as IL & SW earlier this year!

Ablett, Ferres and Westwood have all been better than Hock this season.

So because others have transgreesed it's ok for our management to let it go?
Not once, not twice but again & again?

I must have missed the bulletin were greg Bird disobeyed Team instructions twice in the lead up to a game and was still selected because he's one of the Better players?
I'm sure the whole of the NRL is littered with players who have not maximised their potential due to off the field issues and an inability to "Focus" on their careers.
Lets call that alright then and tell the rest of the players to do the same?

I'm not sure many of them will be playing in the few weeks upcoming though?
Becuase coaches want players they can TRUST, players that will obey team instructions, players that dont think theyre untouchable and can get away with what they want to as someone will always give them a 2nd,3rd 4th,5th,6th etc chance!
Because when it comes to World cup semi finals, Finals or CC Finals & Grand Finals you don't get a 2nd chance.

Wether they have or they haven't Brian that's not the point.
Gaz Hock was selected, he disobeyed Team instructions etc. and paid the price so for my money I would have selected absolutely any 2nd rower who would have obeyed team instructions that Qualifies before him and if that meant going down to Champonship level then I would have!

Because as soon as you let a player "Get Away" with something then the Rot sets in & your only going to go down a slippery slope.

I've underlined the bits that suggest you are not a fit and proper person to comment on this thread and be taken seriously.

What the Aussies' bad boys do is their own business, but I'll tell you now, I bet none of them - including Bird - were so p*ssed a few days before this Test match that they were physically unable to get out of bed the next morning.

The mind boggles that you can actually belittle the British players who did everything in their power to be as ready for one of the most important games of their lives as they possibly could. That you can mock them for not getting slaughtered on the eve of a very, very important international competition. That you can call on the head coach to dispense with team discipline on the off-chance that one of his more wayward talents might unexpectedly deliver a performance (and not get sent off).

Are you on some kind of 'working class hero' kick? Are you another of these guys who fawn over the rebels among us, regardless of how much or how little they actually have to rebel against? Maybe you're one of those advisers Gareth has been relying on for the few years to ensure that his career ends up totally on the rocks?

Sorry, but your last two posts on this thread were pathetic and you should retract them straight away.

I agree, the point I was making as that Hock was lucky to be selected in the first place and as such should have being doing everything he could to justify his selection instead of being an idiot and letting his teammates and the England staff down.

And the England fans.

Discipline.

I'd argue that McBanana didn't drop the players, it was the players' decision to go boozing that got themselves dropped.

I still can't see justification for Graham.

Graham is one of the senior guys in the England squad. Heck he was the England captain for the 4 nations in 2010! On top of that he's been a key figure in successful sides in both the NRL and SL. The guy knows the game and he also knows where the line is and when not to cross it!

Ask yourself this - if it was Lockers, Morley or Peacock who'd gone out would you have trusted their judgement to do so? Graham falls into that same category of player for me.

As a side note is this not his 1st real transgression aside from onfield incidents? Did it warrant such a severe punishment and one that also hurt the side so much?

Only if you ignore what he's done at club level. If I was McNamara I'd have concerns about that attitude of a player who had a ban for doing cocaine, then later refused to train for his club, then later turned his back on a transfer which he had demanded. Not to mention manhandling a ref, and getting bans for eye gouging and fighting in major games.

If I was him and I still gave a chance to a player with that track record, then after we suffered the worst England defeat in god knows how long that player went on to ignore a drinking ban then not turn up for training the next day, I'd send him home as well. I'm not a fan of McNamara generally but he was in the right here IMO. I wonder how many players would happily not drink all year if it meant they could pull on the English jersey.

To answer your points individually -

He overslept by ten minutes. I'm not sure that you are correct about him being physically incapable of getting out of bed.

Nothing in my post was belittling of any player or their preparation, if it was then I apologise

As I said I personally don't drink, but I don't think having a drink after a game is such a bad thing, it was a whole week before the next game

I don't personally know Gareth Hock and I'm sure he wouldn't take my advice anyway. I would have advised him to toe the line. but that he went out with six others for a drink after the game doesn't in my view warrant being thrown off the team.

Unlike yourself I actually went to Cardiff to support the team and was disappointed that we didn't win. In my view James Graham, Gareth Hock and Mickey Mac would have given us the edge over that Aussie team.

Team discipline takes many forms. Treating grown men like children and banning them from having an after match drink is in my view silly. It was the indiscipline of Burgess, Ablett and Westwood that gave away the penalties that cost England the game. Hock is always slated for this and yet I don't think he is any worse than others.

I won't take your insults personally. I was offering a view counter to the prevailing view on the thread and may have exaggerated the point a little - which is that McNamara had plenty of time to prepare the best England team to win the game and he failed to do so. That is bad management. I used the Aussies as an example of how bad boys like Greg Bird seem to be welcomed into the team ethic provided they perform on the pitch, which at the end of the day is all that matters. Look at the score - England don't get extra points for their so-called 'disciplined' approach do they? Aussie still won.

And at the end of the tournament McNamara will be out of a job - and rightly so because if a National Team manager can't mange the players at his disposal then he fails. Which is totally different from managing a club. SW and IL were right to do what they did to Hock. Managing a national team is about winning a tournament over 5 weeks then they don't play for another year so yes, there has to be room for mavericks like Hock because they help to win games. Who are the Aussies more scared of? Read Terry Newton's book about the 2006 series if you are not sure.

Sorry, but if you think it's ok for professionals to behave in an unprofessional way we will have to agree to differ.

If you believe that you will believe anything. He missed the session and medical.

You should also study the effects of alcohol it can have effects longer than a week and when your'e aiming to be at 100 percent for the biggest game of your'e life all those 1 percents make the difference.