Ablett, Ferres and Westwood have all been better than Hock this season.

So because others have transgreesed it's ok for our management to let it go?
Not once, not twice but again & again?

I must have missed the bulletin were greg Bird disobeyed Team instructions twice in the lead up to a game and was still selected because he's one of the Better players?
I'm sure the whole of the NRL is littered with players who have not maximised their potential due to off the field issues and an inability to "Focus" on their careers.
Lets call that alright then and tell the rest of the players to do the same?

I'm not sure many of them will be playing in the few weeks upcoming though?
Becuase coaches want players they can TRUST, players that will obey team instructions, players that dont think theyre untouchable and can get away with what they want to as someone will always give them a 2nd,3rd 4th,5th,6th etc chance!
Because when it comes to World cup semi finals, Finals or CC Finals & Grand Finals you don't get a 2nd chance.

Wether they have or they haven't Brian that's not the point.
Gaz Hock was selected, he disobeyed Team instructions etc. and paid the price so for my money I would have selected absolutely any 2nd rower who would have obeyed team instructions that Qualifies before him and if that meant going down to Champonship level then I would have!

Because as soon as you let a player "Get Away" with something then the Rot sets in & your only going to go down a slippery slope.

I've underlined the bits that suggest you are not a fit and proper person to comment on this thread and be taken seriously.

What the Aussies' bad boys do is their own business, but I'll tell you now, I bet none of them - including Bird - were so p*ssed a few days before this Test match that they were physically unable to get out of bed the next morning.

The mind boggles that you can actually belittle the British players who did everything in their power to be as ready for one of the most important games of their lives as they possibly could. That you can mock them for not getting slaughtered on the eve of a very, very important international competition. That you can call on the head coach to dispense with team discipline on the off-chance that one of his more wayward talents might unexpectedly deliver a performance (and not get sent off).

Are you on some kind of 'working class hero' kick? Are you another of these guys who fawn over the rebels among us, regardless of how much or how little they actually have to rebel against? Maybe you're one of those advisers Gareth has been relying on for the few years to ensure that his career ends up totally on the rocks?

Sorry, but your last two posts on this thread were pathetic and you should retract them straight away.

I agree, the point I was making as that Hock was lucky to be selected in the first place and as such should have being doing everything he could to justify his selection instead of being an idiot and letting his teammates and the England staff down.

And the England fans.

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.