I spend a lot of time defending McNamara. He seems to be the coaching equivalent of Sinfield, getting a lot of unnecessary stick from people who either don't have a clue or blame everything wrong on him. Apparently the players going on the lash before the WC was his fault, as was Brough's sudden Braveheart conversion. OTOH all the good things about England's performances are down to the players alone. Except Sinfield of course.

I think McNamara deserves another chance.

But I would absolutely love it if McDermott got it, and it was full time.

I would be hapy for McNamara to stay on. Firstkly, he has done a good job, and got god performances out of the squad. Secondly, he wants the job, and is happy doing it (I assume). Thirdly, it provides continuity.

For there to be a case for getting rid of the coach who has just overseen (whoever you give the credit to - and it still always seems disingenuous in the extreme that we can hang all the blame on the coach when things go wrong and all the credit on the players when they go right) probably the best GB/England performance I can remember, there needs to be an obviously stronger candidate. Tony Smith is probably a better coach, but we never produced that performance under his tenure.

I'd like to see McNamara thrown the ball to build for the next world cup, and I'd like that process to start next week and be properly resourced. If they could tempt Wayne Bennett over to do a bit of mentoring of the type he seems to have done with Kearney (without doing it in a way that undermines McNamara) then I wouldn't object to that.

It's reverting to part time. Should MacNamara want it, I'd have no problem with his contract being renewed. There are rumours that he may switch to the other code though. I can't imagine McDermott needs the hassle; were he to take it, he'd not only be receiving the flak over Leeds' performances/selections but England ones as well. Also, he comes across as a very focused individual and I doubt he'd welcome the distraction from his role with us. Ditto Wane with Wigan, probably. Anderson's lack of experience would worry me a little although this season suggests he might have what it takes. However, he didn't lift his side at the point of the season when it mattered. He's probably smart enough to have learnt a lot (as Wane did the previous season) but it'll be another year at least until any of us knows that.
Having said that, all the above could probably do ok. I worry that they'll all turn it down and that the likes of Iestyn Harris might land the job through default.

England look more like a team these days. Club rivalries seem to have evaporated and they all seem to be working together as a unit. There have been issues with some not getting the message about when they can't have a drink but if anyone is in any doubt now then they must be exceptionally thick. McNamara may not have handled the press or the questions particularly well but he dealt with the players involved absolutely correctly IMO.

Many, including myself, have questioned the half back pairing and the seemingly late change with Chase. Looking back I think McNamara gave Chase a chance because he believed in his quality and his ability to do something nobody else could do. Chase was solid on defence against Australia but didn't sparkle on attack, that was enough to keep his place. However, Chase simply didn't deliver against weaker opposition on attack and I think McNamara gave him those chances to do so. After the QF he must have thought that was enough, we needed to change things. Hence Widdop got his go.

On selection we could say that Ferres was a big success while not even in the original party, but few would have argued that Hock offered something other than a hard working back row. Selection is not easy, you just won't please everyone and there will always be things you could do better looking back. McNamara won't be the first coach in any team sport to find a player he originally didn't select went on to be a big success.

I would give the guy an extension.

McNamara definitely deserves another deal imo he set up the ETS & got the Knights back into competitive fixtures.
I was never completely convinced by him but he's done a decent job thus far and with 85% of the squad still young enough to be around for the next WC then lets back him and see how they develop.

If he wants it, he should be reappointed.

Reverting to part time is a big retrograde step IMO. If we are to compete next time round there is a lot of work to do.

Not sure mac Namara has proved the doubters wrong, but think he still would be better as director of England coach working alongside a new coach.

I don't get where fans make their assessments of coaches and other people within the game with regards to their percieved strengths and weaknesses? As well as the post above, I've seen any number of people touted for the coaches job, as well as Gary Hetherington suggested as team manager!

I believe he should stay on as the changes to infrastructure he's clearly lead have made sustainable improvements and the playing performance peaked higher than in a decade on Sat, I'd see continuity as the best way forward.

Might an issue be whether he wants to stay on in what is now effectively a part time role? How much of a challenge or feeling of satisfaction is he going to get out of 3-4 ETS squad sessions over the next 10 months?

McNamara seems to enjoy the broader role as well - the sorts of things that were England playing regularly he wouldn't have time for.

TBH right now if I were the RFL I'd be banging on NZ's door to have a test series next year either in England or NZ - and yes, sod the existing international 'calendar' which has been drawn up based on NRL demands to diminish the role and frequency of internationals.

That single game and the general success of the WC to date have shown a massive appetite for internationals in England. NZ always seem fairly keen to be involved as well.

As ever its the Aussies who'll take some convincing. Quite frankly the media coverage here has been appalling at times - belittling the whole tournament and particularly Oz's easy passage, and in some cases virtually ignoring the entire event.

Let him carry on for me! He did a decent enough job despite some players letting him down off the field. Why they couldn't be professional enough to behave for a month during a tournament that comes around once in a blue moon beggars belief. I hope they are ashamed of themselves.
I like the idea someone mentioned of a 3 game series with NZ especially if they spank the Aussies again.

Seemingly the players' ridiculous behaviour just before the competition was McNamara's fault according to some. They were the ones that let themselves and their mates down. Graham would have played against Australia, and who knows if we'd have won with him in the side? I don't hear him being blamed at all for that.