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.

"Those 1 percents" only "make the difference" if the sides are EVENLY matched.

Add 1 per cent to Carl Ablett's optimum performance and you've still got rubbish.

Take 1 per cent from James Graham's optimum performance because he had a drink a week before the game and he's still good enough to - as you say "make the difference".

If you think it's ok to deliberately pick a sub standard team against Australia then we will also have to agree to differ. In an ideal world we would have dozens of players that are good enough to beat Australia. But we don't. You are an idealist, I am being realistic and pragmatic. Would I pick Hock if we had someone better? No - but we don't.

I think you are confusing club management with International management. When you are at a club, you can sometimes take a defeat with the eye on longer term planning. So you discipline players knowing that it benefits the club in the longer term. With International management you only get one chance - there is no longer term. Therefore you can't afford to make up rules that may be professional but are unrealistic and detrimental to team spirit.

I agree with the above poster who argued that James Graham is experienced enough to decide for himself how he prepares for a game, and as a former captain should be trusted. I think that Hock polarises opinion and whilst he may have acted unprofessionally the reaction from McNamara was contrary to what was required by England. As the game proved - we could have done with those players.

I'm afraid your arguments are facile. McNamara over reacted. It should have been kept in-house. Players were disciplined. The game was lost. And with it, England's chances of winning the tournament.

You have a right to your'e opinion, but we have seen what team discipline does it makes average squads good and good squads champions. I would never want to revert back to pre Madge days at wigan and i am glad Mcmamara stood his ground and earned the respect of the players 'Ryan Hall'.

The coach sets the rules not former captains, he will be the one getting the blame not the players.

forgot to add, Picking players just because of their abilities but ignore the circumstances is for primary school not professional coaches. The only people in the wrong was the players not the coach, there big boys and can decided for them selves if they didn't agree with the rules they should of refused the invitation to the national squad.

Where in my post was I arguing about Wigan??? I have made a clear distinction between managing club players and managing international squads.

And stop putting "your'e" - it's "[uyour[/u opinion"

it makes no difference if its international or club level, if anything its more important at international level to have strong discipline in the camp. your welcome.

This comment set me thinking about how we approach Internationals generally compared to the Aussies. To me the Aussies will do anything to win. They will try and get the game played with an Aussie ref with rules interpreted their way and the last thing they would do is drop one of their best players even though they have plenty of alternatives.

We on the other had always seem to do the "right thing" when we have not got the luxury they have. For as long as I can remember we have had roughly just about enough players to form a team good enough to give us a chance but sending Hock home isn't the first time we have reduced that small number even further.

I remember years ago Joe Lydon and Des Drummond missed a tour down under because they got into a scrap at Central Park during a game that spilled over the barrier into the crowd. I can't remember if there was any more to it than that but they were kicked out of the tour squad.

I was flabbergasted. They were key players who we could not afford to leave out and I am certain the Aussies would not have done the same thing. We lost as usual. I am sure there have been other occasions were for some reason our best squad has been reduced by our own management but I just can't remember them at the moment.

As to Hock, well in my opinion had any other player done as he did I reckon that player would still be in the squad and if I am right on that score McNamara has punished Hock based on Hock's reputation not just on what he did in the England camp. If so that is wrong but either way I reckon if he was an Aussie not only would he still be in the squad but he'd have probably played in the game as well.

I totally agree with you Dave and that Aussie desire to win is ugly. Ive been to way too many international matches were the aussies refs give us nothing and then compare those to the Morley red card by Ganson. I will never part with another penny of my money to watch another international match Ive had 25 years of hurt.

I agree with pretty much everything you say about the Aussie s and have banged on for 20 year as about giving them nothing when they come here as that's what we get from them.
With regards to Lydon Etc. I'm pretty sure their were other mitigating factors and I believe iirc that there were court cases involved.

However, with regards to hock and if any other player had done the same I disagree.
There are lots of assumptions in your post re hock so I'll go off what I've been told and if that is true the camps well shut.
There were lots of rumours when he left wigan and some posters tried to have the rest of us believe he was mainly the innocent party and the other players would soon walk out and follow him. That was way off the mark and nothings changed imo with this scenario to make me believe that hocks positives would outweigh the total negatives he brings to the team environment.

. Double post

I agree Dave, but it has had me pondering just how much influence that the RFL throws into squad selection.

A few years ago, Phil Clarke left the role of GB Team manager and gave an open and honest account of the reasons why, which if I remember correctly were largely ( not entirely) to do with the RFL trying to manipulate and meddle in every decision from squad selection to which airline they use, hotels, kit etc etc !

Personal views on squad selections mean that everyone will have their own Aussie beating formula, but I bet none of them include sending your best players home before it all kicks off.

I feel for Gaz Hock, as he has worked hard to get his chance and at his age this will probably be his last chance too and whilst none of us like losing, it is a small price to pay to have a little discipline in your life to reach the pinnacle of your sport. I too think that he has been the victim of his reputation, but it has been well earned and probably deserved.

But I still think that unless we have a coach with backbone enough to pick the in-form players, rather than the big names first, 'lets fit em in' attitude, we won't win anyway, so its of little consequence.

I knew if I stuck to my guns on this thread finally someone would speak up with some good sense.

I couldn't agree more with you. The Aussies play to win - we seem to be more interested in playing by the rules. and according to the majority of posts on this thread we seem to be happy that way. The idea that the Aussies would drop James Graham is risible.

Another example. England play Australia in CARDIFF!!! The atmosphere at the game was zero. I was sat behind the posts surrounded by people who had never seen a game in their lives, including two women who spent the whole of the second game discussing which of the Italians they would like to shag!! Why not play the game in Leeds at Elland Rd? The team would have been given some loud support, instead of the game being played in near silence, punctuated by the squeals of schoolchildren. and if there was 45,000 there I'll eat my hat. There were whole areas of the ground with absolutely no tickets sold whatsoever.

Another reason why I wont part with my money - they have no idea how to market a quality product. I remember being sat at wembley v aussies in 1997, the turn out was embarassing and we got diddled by a ref. Yet a few years earlier that game attracted full capacity and we almost won. The game went backwards 1994 - 1996, which coincidenlty was the commencement of super league. This sport deserves better. Todays BBC radio has been dominated by the yawnion friendly. If England lose this match today they are out of the competition, it is a must win game and it gets less publicilty than a friendly? Its disgusting..... rant over

I do have a fading memory of there being more too it than just the fact it spilled into the crowd but even so I reckon the Aussies would have moved heaven and earth to get those two on the plane, not kick them out of the squad. Sure they would be punished in some way but not to the detriment of the national team!



I don't see what any of what went on at Wigan has got to do with it. If Hock's past influenced McNamara's decision he should never have selected him in the first place. For me it's a simple disciplinary and man management issue and one that has exposed McNamara as a bit inadequate. I have read the thread and those who were glad to see the back of Hock for whatever reason have understandably sided with McNamara but if people just stood back from that a minute and looked at what Hock (and the other players) actually did and consider how they would feel if it was Micky Mac being kicked out like this had he been the guilty party I think we would have a very different thread.

I am not condoning what he did and I have long argued drink has no place when the players are involved in any competition (and have often been told I was wrong on that score by the way). Missing the warm down session was pretty stupid as well but in my opinion McNamara shot himself in the foot by going as far as he did. Was he incapable of thinking of suitable sanctions for all the players involved that didn't mean he was leaving several of his best players out of the side and sending one home? Obviously so. I don't think the Aussies would have done this either.

While idiotic behaviour may be par for the course for Hock it's McNamara's job to manage it once he decided to select him for the squad. He may think he has laid the law down and stamped his authority on the squad but for me he's just shown himself up as a bit one dimensional without the brains to work out a way to achieve this without having to take such extreme action. If he feels the players would not respect his authority without him doing this and going as far as he did he doesn't have it anyway in my opinion.

This time it should have been "YOU'RE"

lol i changed the auto correction after somebody at my company had been using my mac and it was annoying me but couldn't be bothered to change it.

Dave
I'm not going to sit here and dissect words but nowhere did I say what went on at wigan had anything to do with what went on last week.
I didn't say that what happened at Wigan had any influence over what McNamara did last week.

Your inferring that it seems to be the people who were glad to see the back of Hock for whatever reason as you put it are condemning him here.
We'll I'll reverse it, the same people who told us what a negative effect kicking out Hock at Wigan and that Wane wasn't up to the job in not so many words are the same people sticking up for him here and criticising McNamara.

I'll say it again, "if" what I've been told is anywhere near the truth I'd have done exactly the same as McNamara, and I'm coming from the I don't rate McNamara camp so it's got nothing to do with being biased.

I'm a big Gaz Hock fan and didn't want what happened at Wigan to happen but it did. I stand by what I said back then, he brought that on himself and it was his actions that created the situation. Once that had gone too far for the management they decided to get rid and I saw Very few negatives from that decision and long term I believe we will benefit from it.

I'm not the same as Rogues in at I would have had him in the squad however I'm now beginning to think I would have been wrong.
This scenario was brought on again by himself, no-one else's actions made what he did acceptable. And as I have said if I did what he did from what I've been told I'd have been sacked as well.
McNamara needed Hock to toe the line for 6 weeks, Hock couldn't do it.

I probably didn't word it very well but I was basically trying to say I didn't see any relevance in what you said in your last paragraph that I quoted about the rumours when he left Wigan or posters saying he was innocent back then to the Hock situation with England.



I am not inferring that at all. I said I find it understandable why those who were glad to see the back of him at Wigan would agree with McNamara. What I am suggesting is had McNamara done the same thing to a different player they [imight[/i have taken a different view. That is all.



I don't think you can construct an argument to support his dismissal from the England squad based on rumours if at the same time you want to dismiss others opinions based on rumours about what went on when he left Wigan. That is double standards

. I also don't think anyone is suggesting others actions made what he did acceptable.

My opinion is that based on what I know which is he and several other players went drinking and he missed a warm down session and got the boot as a result. Based on that my views on McNamaras handling of it remain as I posted previously. If Hock had been playing up before this then McNamara should have nipped it in the bud. And as I also said, I don't think the Aussies would have kicked him out either.

But presumably you don't condone players getting leathered a few days before a big game?

You certainly never used to.

Has something changed, or is this a hangover from the 'Hock is innocent' campaign we were all subjected to after IL and SW showed him the door?

(I don't remember you participating much in that, if I'm honest, but I do seem to recall you warming to the Gareth camp the more it looked as though SW wasn't going to win us anything).

Anyway the main question stands. Is it okay to go on the razzle a few days before a very NB Test match? Or is it only okay if you're a really, really good player?