You don't seriously believe he pulled out of his own accord do you?

He accused the media of making things up, which they clearly was not doing. How do you know they only "made out" they didn't know what was going on? Isn't it entirely possible Leeds were unaware of the situation, as they stated?

Ugh I'm defending Leeds. Unclean, unclean!

My take on the matter is McNamara lied, got caught out, and now looks a bit stupid. It does make me chuckle how he didn't want to talk about Hardaker anymore. What's the first question he will get asked this week?

It doesn't really matter what I believe, or you believe, the fact is that England and Zak made a statement that he had pulled out for personal reasons. Other than the first incident he wasn't disciplined by England, as he didn't do anything after that, that was against the England rules.

As far as England are concerned the media did make things up. Or put more correctly, the media followed that Joker Mick Gledhill in making things up. Didn't the media ask him if Hardaker had been dropped as a disciplinary last week? they made that up then.

I am sure Leeds were aware of the situation considering the barrage of rumours ever since Saturday afternoon, and then following the England statement Monday afternoon.

My view is, McNamara has worked withing his own rules, and handled them accordingley. Leeds have worked within their own rules and handled it. McNamara looks none the worse because of either.

Leeds aren't even in the middle of a regular league season, never mind a world cup! You cant compare the two!!!

Team Steve!!

Fair points, I can't really argue with any of that. I do wonder why some people cant seem to go 5 minutes without having a drink (if that is indeed what happened), that certainly isn't the coaches fault. If he was booted out of the squad for disciplinary reasons I hope he doesn't get back into it for a while either

Who cares.

McNamara handled it how he saw fit, BMc and GH how they saw fit.

Are we supposed to be pretending that the RL media deserve some kind of respect? Are we pretending that they serve a useful purpose? Its not like they are out there risking life and limb to bring us a hard-hitting expose. Tanya Arnold isn’t Glenn Greenwald.

If Tanya Arnold wants to publish a story she goes out and gets the evidence for it. It isn’t incumbent on Steve McNamara to make it easier for her however much the self-serving clique that is RL journalists bleat about it.

Maybe Steve McNamara would have been a bit more open with them had they not spent the last two years trying to undermine him. I saw the response from certain journalists to Ian Lenegans criticisms of them earlier in the year with them insisting they weren’t supposed to be cheerleaders for the game. That being the case Chris Irvine should really put his pom-poms and Danny Brough outfit away.

I honestly struggle to remember the last worthwhile piece of RL journalism I saw. Outside of a few Martyn Sadler pieces I struggle to remember an RL piece that wasn’t simply a match report or a reprinting a John Ledger press release.

If the RL press want Steve McNamara to treat them with respect, then they should treat him with respect. If they want to criticise and undermine him, don’t bitch and whine when you aren’t handed stories on plate. Go out and bloody get them.

It makes me laugh how people think that only the 'right' sort of media exposure is good for the game and that they know what that is.

I don't care if the story that hits the mainstream press is about Sinfield's favourite flavour of crisps, or that Jennifer Aniston has started dating Ben Westwood's parrot - I just generally assume that journalists have a reasonable idea of what they can sell to their editors, and if that's just tittle-tattle, then so be it - as long as it gets League in the news, and nobody is getting hurt, I couldn't care less. If I want to read serious technical analysis I'll look outside the mainstream news. In today's environment, it's no doubt unfortunate that its easier to sell to the editor a story about a player getting kicked out than it is a technical analysis of defensive structures, but we are where we are, and I'll take whatever press we can get.

Not that I don't want to see good journalism, but before you can sell those pieces to editors we have to get to a place where editors think enough readers are interested in RL.

Quite coincidentally, Irvine's piece in today's Times is both fairly readable and positive. Beyond that, I pretty much agree with the rest of what you posted. Had Arnold opened her interview by asking questions related to other matters it would probably have progressed more smoothly. Quite reasonable that she should ask about squad discipline but I suspect a more experienced journo would have engaged MacNamara about issues he was more comfortable with first.

What has Mick made up?

He said Hock had been kicked out of the squad and later on that day this was made public. He said McIllorum, Hardaker and Graham had all been dropped for the Australia game and low and behold, none were in the squad when it was announced 2 days later. Then he says on Sunday that hardaker has been dropped from the squad for further breaches of the rules. Ok, strictly speaking, he "left of his own accord" but if you seriously believe that this wasnt to save face for both Hardaker and the England set up, you are very naive.

So again, tell me what Mick Gledhill has made up.

At first he said that, but then said it was only Hock. This was before the press release too.

He hasn't made up anything either about Hardaker. Yes, he was the one that brought it up in the media room but come on, as has been shown by Leeds fine of Zak, something has happened. Leeds don't just fine a player for the sake of it.

My point was McNamara reacted to somebody making it up, specifically Mick Gledhill.

I was at Thorpe Park Spa last week talking to the players, and Sean O'Loughlin specifically responded with "rubbish made up by that d1ck head Mick Gledhill"

I think someone mentioned it earlier but a team manager, to take the media responsibilities and the administration away from McNamara, would have been a good idea. That way the story could have been released correctly and a person with interest but not emotionally attached could have handled it a damn sight better.

I don't think I have ever seen one player let alone two get sent home in such a way from international duty, let alone a world cup. I know a Scotland footballer (Willy Johnstone I think) got sent home from Argentina in 78 but I am at a loss to name others.

Still at least there is no dwarf throwing or ferry jumping going on eh?