I've been saying the same for quite a while. Our underperforming players are not doing it because the coach tells them to.

I've noticed a correlation in sport & in work. That people consistently perform better for better managers.

The players clearly need to take some flak, its ultimately them that misses the tackle or drops the ball. But there is an argument that these errors from otherwise professional sportsmen could be coached out of them by good coaching is there not? And indeed if we agree its all the players fault and we have signed a bunch of duds, who signed them and who keeps playing them?

The problem McNamara has for me is the Warrington example from this year. Yes they have a backer and a new staduim. But taking just this season (so the finances were already set and the staduim has no effect), they were a collection of players who were making daft errors, finding ways to lose games, looking low on confidence and looking like a bottom 4 team. (sound familar?) They then change coach, dont sign anyone for cash just do one player swap to get a full back in and then they start to look like a unit, cut out most of the daft mistakes, play well, gain in confidence, rise up the league and very probably will be making a trip to wembely and make the playoffs with room to spare. Would this approach really not have worked at Bradford?? Would our players have posted better results under Smith?

I dont think there is an easy distinction to be made between the players faults and the coaches fault, both are to blame for different aspects as both are essentially the same unit. It is clearly not all McNamaras fault, but he does have issues that IMO he is not addressing so he is also accountable, and ultimately he is responsible for the players actions, fairly or not.

But the coach has the backing of the club, and McNamara is putting the side together for 2010, so its the players that we need to talk about changing as the coach is not changing.

The thing is, they are letting McNamara assemble a team for next year, but if we continue to be pi$$ poor and they have no option to get rid in the middle of next season then -unless Macca makes some quality signings- the new coach will be stuck with the same heap of turd. Mr. Hood, please get rid sooner rather than later.

I think Warrington is a fair comparison. Both teams are comparable in quality, though Wire have more talent in the centres & far more quality in depth. I would expect both teams to be vying for 3-5th place.
HKR are more interesting, I have seen them a number of times this season & think they have a very average squad of individuals, one or two exceptions obviously, but the sum of their parts is far stronger than Bradfords.

Sure McNamara doesn't coach players to make errors but whatever he DOES do doesn't seem to be working. What is clear is that performances have got worse over the past few years under his leadership.

Whatever he's been trying to do to turn things around isn't working. I remember him saying at the end of last season that in 2008 he learned more than ever before as a coach. It doesn't seem to have stood him in good stead.

It's time for a change.

It is excuse making.

'Confusion and indecisiveness' translates to poor game plan and a lack of preparation - which is coaching. If the players looks confused and indecisive it's often because they're not sure of their own roles, or because they're being switched too frequently between roles, or because the interchange isn't working (see endless examples).

'defence opened up again', 'tired defence', 'weak tackling' - poor defensive structure is also coaching and poor tackling technique (incidentally half the reason Deacon is continuously getting mullered - see last week and the Wire game) could also be a lack of coaching, although with Deacon's experience you'd expect it was more age catching up.

Now I could go on, but even if I were to go down the 'blame the players' route and agree with you and FA, you'd still have to concede these are the players he's brought in. This is the team HE has built, the team we were told to wait for. If he can't get them to play together, inspire confidence in them and reinforce core skills amongst them, then what use is he as a coach? As I have commented elsewhere there's very little about his 'leadership' as evidenced pitch side that would suggest he can inspire confidence. I've also tried to demonstrate that in attack we're extremely limited in the options we take and the predictable way they're executed. It's therefore unsurprising that with little confidence, a poor defensive structure and limited attacking options we're at the bottom of the table. This is, whether you like it or not - coaching.

We've seen the same elsewhere particularly at Wire under Cullen, players that can click one minute and look promising are the next minute giving the ball away under the slightest pressure, unable to hold a lead and look as though they're not bothered and/or lacking any confidence. The same players under a different coach can produce entirely different results given a different coaching regime. I'm sure McNamara was an excellent assistant coach but he hasn't made the step up.

Public goals aside, Steve must have set himself some private targets, I need to achieve at least x by (*specified date*) or it's time to go.

You'd like to think he was big enough to step down if he feels he's not meeting these.

I have been very much in the "Macca in" camp, but as weeks pass by with no improvement, I'm finding it harder to find anything to post in arguement to the "Macca for the chop" posts

Presumably his goals are like the rest of us. 'I must get paid each week'. As he is still in place he must be achieving his personal goals so he is in for a good appraisal at the end of the year and a possible pay rise. Trebles all round!!

If he isn't performing to where he thinks he should be and feels out of his depth, then it will be pretty uncomfortable turning up for work every day, the point has to come where he says, it's too much for me.

The result yesterday was another shocker but the only person who will ensure that McNamara leaves the club appears to be McNamara himself.

TBH I dunno how he can be bothered with the current scenario. The club are unperforming, he has become a laughing stock and hardly any fans really want him at the club anymore (apart from a few desperate, but dwindling Macca Backers) and I really do not see how he can continue to hold his head high. If the guy had any dignity he would just walk away and admit that the job is too big for him to do at this stage of his career. That way, he could maybe start afresh at a lower level and maybe then learn the job at a place where he would not be under so much pressure to succeed and possibly come back a better coach.

If this carries on, no-one would take him on IMO.

The sooner he goes, the better and his weekly claptrap in the T&A does little to suggest that he actually [idoes[/i have a clue whatsoever.

This is HIS team now and look where we are. He has been a complete failure and he will only continue to drag us down further the longer he stays.

Well reasoned post.

No it's not, it is my view, and I give it in probably far more detail than I ought. So don't tell me what I think. What I say IS what I think. I have no reason or wish to "make excuses" of any sort.


I wouldn't buy that anyway, indeed the thought of the likes of Menzies being "unsure of his role" I find actually quite funny. But I don't need to buy it, as it is the players who have, repeatedly publicly stated that it was them not carrying out the game plan, and not the lack of/wrong game plan. So you don't need to theorise. Admissions have been made.


Defensive patterns are in place and the players know how to operate them. We have seen that. It is the inexplicable spells where they won't play as a team that cost us all season long and that is much more therefore not doing what the coaches say than not being coached.

Anyway I don't really see why you seem so intent on contradicting my personal opinion that the lion's share of the blame here rests with the players. McNamara is far from absolved in my reckoning, the season is a disaster on any view and as head coach (as I keep getting told) he carries ultimate responsibility but I am not dealing in cliches or truisms, but in the detail of what I see.

And 90% of the glaring ricks I saw at HKR were not even things you ought to need to mention to a Super League standard player. What would the session be? "This week we're going to concentrate on not dropping the ball"?



Don't misquote me, I am not absolving McNamara of any blame, I am saying the players take the majority of the blame. As someone who thought our pack would be among the best in the league, even if our backs were less than great, I can hardly blame him for the unexpected slumps in performance. Indeed I still can't quite work out, looking at what we have had available, how it has come to this. But anyway in a nutshell, the question would be is he respnsible because these players are in fact crap? Or is he responsible because it was reasonable to think they were good but they have played crap? Even now, the majority seem to want to keep Menzies, Morrison, Burgess, Newton, Scruton, Kopczak. Is anyone suggesting that these are crap players? Nobody who knows anything.


Maybe none. Maybe lots. It depends on something we'll never know i.e. whether any other coach could have done better with this lot.

... were it not for the odd fact that the players repeatedly and to the point of ad nauseam seem insistent that he does inspire confidence.

... and you've failed since it isn't really our attack that is the problem. I don't know if you noticed, but we score a fair share of points for bottom-of-the-pile nog-enders.



I am 100% certain that the main reason we are where we are is repeated defensive capitulation spells that can last 10, 15 or 20 minutes. After that, the secondary reason is the ludicrous and embarrassing number of times we give up possession/field position in countless bizarre ways.

While at times on opponent's line undoubtedly we do look lethargic and lacking ideas, that is NOT in the top two reasons why we are where we are. I don't see how you could sensibly argue it was.


But it's not, you see. It may be, or it may not be, or it may be a combination of coaching and players inexplicably doing crap things. My view is the latter predominates. You certainly can't sensibly say that a coach is responsible for all the horrendous catalogue of schoiolboy howlers we came up with at HKR. Can you?


Warrington? Am I reading this correctly? Warrington have lost 10, we've lost 12, but we've played 1 game less. They've scored 451 points against our 414 but again in one extra game. Given the agonising close-shave defeats we've (undeniably) had, and the highly comparable attacking stats, I can't believe you're holding Wire up as some sort of example of where we should be. They're 8th. Last year they finished 5th. Season before 7th. Season before 6th. The season before that, 4th. Yet you see some sort of coaching transformation? On which planet?!

You clearly were not reading it correctly then.

The point being made is the change in fortunes at Wire since they got rid of a failing coach and replaced him with a more successful one.

IMO of course.

I'm not telling you what to think, largely because I'm not very interested in what you think. I find your line by line responses (to me and others) to be full of tortured logic, veiled personal insult, and willful misinterpretation combined with some preposterous sense of self righteousness. As the latter seems unshakable I'm going to stick with ignoring you.