My thoughts exactly,how can tomkins get in front of whitehead,the best 2nd row in s/l last year,in the dream team,so how can mcnamara pick tomkins for 3 matches and whitehead 10 mins,and why take graham off after 20 mins when he plays 80 mins every week. ?

ive never known Daryll Clark play a full 80 minutes so to not have another hooker on the bench was a mistake IMO. Clarks best coming on against tiring legs.
agree about Joel Tompkins too, no disrespect to him but Whitehead earned his chance.

who were the other half backs in the squad?

What did Whitehead do today other than give away a soft penalty that led to a try?

I agree that J. Tomkins shouldn't have been in the side, by the way.

Ferres to acting half was a poor tactical switch, but Josh didn't do enough to be included today, Smith should have gone there with O'Loughlin at first reciever.

I'm not a McNamara fan, but who would be better at the moment?

I understand when people say it should be a full time job but until the IRLF take the International game seriously, why would it be?

A well thought out post there my learned (and feathered) colleague. Look at it another way, we were the width of a god damn post away from winning, just like last week. If Hall had painted his nails, we would have beaten the convicts. Fine margins... change the coach or hire a better manicurist?

Agree 100% all changing coach would do is bring in another unproven person who may or may not be better, who may or may not choose different players who may or may not gel or be any better than the current crop. We can all differ in our choice of selection for me I cant see why Joel Tomkins was in the squad let allone on the field? but I saw a vast improvement over previous tours & though disapointed with the results it was close & could have been so diferent but for the one video descision. As I have said they will get better lets get past the next world cup then sit down & study the outcome. For me we change things to often & dont give anyone a fair chance.

The reason joel tomkins was playing was because the coach chose him instead of elliot whitehead,who most people thought he was the best 2nd row in s/l, mcnamara didnt.Have you also forgotten that because mcnamara has issues with danny brough,which is why brough went to play for scotland,when he was man of steel and should be playing for us. The point I feel you are missing is that we have the best squad in the competition and have failed to qualify,12-4 up v the aussies by attacking them,so in the 2nd half we change tactics till we get behind,and had that dodgy "try" disallowed.If we attack them we win and the aussies would have been out.
Three years at bradford who had never been out of the top6 till he went there,finished 10th all 3 years and finished with a flourish 13 sucessive losses,gets the sack from bradford and gets the england job,seems about right.The only saving grace is he was close to taking the head coach job with us,so lets be grateful for small mercies.

I can see where you're coming from but you've got a flotilla of it's but's and maybe's in that post.

I take huge issue with your assessment that we had the best squad, and I'm no NRL apologist.

I wouldn't have picked J. Tomkinks but Whitehead has been a defensive liability and penalty incurrer his whole career. We're not nineteen seventies Association Football Brazil where you score four, we'll score five.

We've lost the last two games through lacking the extra five per cent of execution and game mentality.

We created more chances than Australia and New Zealand but failed to convert, we allowed them to score off less meaningful sets in our half.

We had a game plan and that must have come from McNamara, when we stuck to it we did OK, once the games got messy we strayed and got burned.

I can't see a better option at the moment, we were better in this tournament than last year (and I went to a lot of WC games) so why change for the sake of change?

Fair play,we agree on some and not on others,at least we have genuine opinions,but I do think with the players aussie had missing,they were there for the taking and we missed a trick.

Who would you all replace him with ?

Perhaps if he hadn't played for Hull, there would be a little more understanding of how finer lines can change a competition. Award the Ryan Hall try and we'd have beaten the Aussies (job done), had Gareth Widdops kicks gone the right side of the post and we'd be in the final unbeaten. Fine lines, and you want to beT up on a coach who at least has made us competitive, at the other side of the planet, missing our and the worlds best player, not to mention James Roby, who in conjunction with Daryl Clark I think would have given us that little bit more to change the impetuous of the two main games.

Sorry but those blinkers are making you look foolish, we have come as close as we have for many a year, and you want to heap this all on an ex-Hull FC player, get a fooking grip. Love him or hate him, Steve Macnamara has got us as close to beating the Aussies and Kiwis on their own muck for many a year, a defeat under such fine lines cannot be placed solely on the coach, sometimes dumb plays from those players on the park are the singular reason why we came so close but no cigar.

If you think I am wanting him replaced because he played for FC many years ago I despair. You must be projecting your attitudes onto me. If this, if that. The Aussies were far more depleted than we were and all teams can point to things that did not go their way in a match. The fact remains as a coach he is a failure both at the Bulls and with England. In the end the only thing that matters is the result. Who said that the result is placed solely on the coach? Obviously the players played their part in the defeats. The coach however takes ultimate responsibility for results. He has had no success so far, how long do you propose giving him?

We lost yesterday and will continue to do so because we have a lack of quality at half back. Smith is a steady player who will direct a team around and look good in a good team but he lacks a spark of creativity that a Johnson or Thurston has.
For what its worth I don't think Brough would have done much better, he has a bit of flair but lacks the brains and organisation (and temperament) to make it at the top level. Hopefully we'll see a British 7 come through although the shoots arem't looking too green, Myler has never kicked on, Sneyd is probably the only one who may but time will tell.
I'd leave Mc in charge, we did ok and who else is there and more importantly who would take it?

Most fans want him to stay in the England role so he doesn't end up coaching their club !!!

Club first and all that

If you think I want him replaced because he played for hull,you really are need help.I was saying I felt danny brough selected,who did he play for,none other than hull fc.I think that flattens your argument,I should ring the samaritans before they ring you.
Dont you get it we were the best team in the comp and didnt qualify,the aussies had the weakest squad they have had for years.

Noble or kear,would be far more tactically aware,mcnamara Imo cannot get the best out the players he has,whether it be at bradford or england.
As I say we had the best squad in the comp Imo,better than the aussies,yet they qualified and we didnt.