Should have chose McClennan he's proved he can !

If Smith can't get them up to scratch what chance does Steve "McClaren" McNamara have. Brought in because he met the crieria, English and cheap.

Or because he's good at bringing through and training young english players?

Or because he has the eye to tweak a player's techniques and perhaps their position to get the best out of them (Michael Platt from a liabilty at full-back to a strong running centre)

Don't get me wrong, i'm not claiming him to be a tactical genius or a motivational one, but he has a good record of training youngsters and mentoring them well.

You can’t hear from Southstander because it’s a message board. But you can read from southstander

Peacock is arguably Leeds best prop. Lautiiti can change a game as he has done many a time. Webb is the same likewise.

However thanks to Leeds having strength in depth it can make them three players look average. I don’t hear as many ‘Ryan Bailey is crap’ calls on this thread like you normally do. But now he’s a champion all of the sudden.

You can't hear those, you can only read them.

OK, so where we are now in your reasoning is this

1. Steve McNamara is a bad coach because he can't coach Bradford to any success

2. Bradford are in fact a mediocre side

3. When somebody points out that McNamara has coached this mediocre side to 4th in the table at the half way stage in the SL season, that doesn't count

Is that about right?

In which case, could I ask which criteria apart from the results he achieves should we measure a coach on?

Ta