Macca: Don't give me the sacka : Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:21 am  

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... owest_ebb/

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... owest_ebb/

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:45 am  

The sad part was 'McNamara refused to criticize his players'. This attitude has it's time and place but we are now well past that. Perhaps he needs to be telling them that they ha better buck up their ideas because nobody else would want them the way they are playing. MOre importantly he needs to be letting the speccies know that he is doing this.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:06 pm  

rugbyreddog wrote:

The sad part was 'McNamara refused to criticize his players'. ...

How so? First, everybody else is (rightly) having a go at the players and we all know he has, so what does it add for him to relate in public individual criticisms? It's not as if we think he's congratulated them, is it? He's rightly keeping the specifics of what goes on in the dressing room, in the dressing room. I don't see how he can be criticised for that, and it would be stupid for a coach to do other.

Secondly, withouit divulging details or specifics, he was quoted in the article as follows:

Disillusioned Steve McNamara admits the Bulls’ horror capitulation in Perpignan is the worst defeat of his reign at Odsal.

Any implied criticism there, or is it a ringing endorsement of his team? If I were in it, I'd feel criticised.

The stunned coach was furious after his side pathetically threw away a 26-0 lead

Would they think this was praise?.

It’s probably as much as we’ve ever hurt right at this moment in time. We blew the game at the end

This sounds like more criticism to me. You?

“It was really poor for the last 35 minutes.

Is this not criticism?

McNamara said: “I’d hoped we would have learned some lessons from last week but we didn’t apply them here.”

And this?

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:49 pm  

Maybe people expected Macca to brand his players "pathetic", as the (also seriously under fire) Agar did?

I wonder whether branding them that in public is any more motivational than doing whatever is done behind closed doors?

All Agar has done is set his players up for, e.g., chants of "your pathetic, and you know you are..."

I've never been one for blasting my troops in public when they screw up, and I'd support a coach who chose to do likewise.

Providing, obviously, that the paint was peeling off the walls behind closed doors...

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 2:41 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Maybe people expected Macca to brand his players "pathetic", as the (also seriously under fire) Agar did?

I wonder whether branding them that in public is any more motivational than doing whatever is done behind closed doors?

All Agar has done is set his players up for, e.g., chants of "your pathetic, and you know you are..."

I've never been one for blasting my troops in public when they screw up, and I'd support a coach who chose to do likewise.

Providing, obviously, that the paint was peeling off the walls behind closed doors...

I think publically branding players pathetic might provide some motivation for some players. Lets be honest mate, Steve isn't motivating the players enough with the method he's using at the moment.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 2:52 pm  

It's always a tough call (or should be) if you are going to criticise anyone you are responsible for in public in any walk of life, and should only be done as a last resort (although from personal experience it is fun to do it).

Everyone responds differently to criticism, and some it could cause some to go into their shells even more.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:00 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

How so? First, everybody else is (rightly) having a go at the players and we all know he has, so what does it add for him to relate in public individual criticisms? It's not as if we think he's congratulated them, is it? He's rightly keeping the specifics of what goes on in the dressing room, in the dressing room. I don't see how he can be criticised for that, and it would be stupid for a coach to do other.

Secondly, withouit divulging details or specifics, he was quoted in the article as follows:


Any implied criticism there, or is it a ringing endorsement of his team? If I were in it, I'd feel criticised.


Would they think this was praise?.


This sounds like more criticism to me. You?


Is this not criticism?


And this?

You are right in all your comments. But those criticisms seem like 'being savaged by a dead sheep' to use a Dennis Healey phrase.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:53 pm  

rugbyreddog wrote:

You are right in all your comments. But those criticisms seem like 'being savaged by a dead sheep' to use a Dennis Healey phrase.

And anyway, any such comments would be pure populist blood-letting. One thing is certain - the players know exactly what their performance in the second half was like, without the need for a word.

[Pumpetypump]

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:10 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

One thing is certain - the players know exactly what their performance in the second half was like, without the need for a word.

But they will also presumably know that regardless of performance, the squad is too thin for them to be dropped in favour of someone else. You have to question what incentive they have to improve other than some sort of ethereal sense of pride.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:16 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

And anyway, any such comments would be pure populist blood-letting. One thing is certain - the players know exactly what their performance in the second half was like, without the need for a word.

That is true I am sure, however is that knowledge enough to do anything about it? Probably not. I was at Keighley Cas yesterday & I could swear I saw a couple of Cas players smiling to each other behind the sticks after Keighley tries. To me that was almost equally unprofessional & made me question whether this Cas team has what it takes to compete at the very highest level.