Asim wrote:My comment wasn't aimed at the threads being merged, it was aimed at the (IMO) patronising tone taken by yourself, and a couple of others, when anyone dares to criticise McNamara or the coaching staff.
That's pretty breathtaking, Asim. Off the top of my head I can't think of
anyone who either patronises or indeed even criticizes anyone who "dares criticize McNamara or the coaching staff. Your position seems to indicate that we wll think everything at the Bulls is 100% perfect, when nobody has been saying that at all. It is extreme, relentless and unfair criticism that I object to.
Personally I have criticized ME's incessant "sack the coach, he is utterly useless, why can't everyone see it" mantra - because I think it's unfair and ridiculous, as well as done to death - but ME and RER pretty much have the floor to themselves on their anti-Mc obsession nowadays as long as confined to quarters.
Patronising? I have no clue what specifically or who that refers to, but being patronised is hardly in short supply on rlfans, it's pretty much a standard response isn't it?
Asim wrote:I'm sure there are a crazy minority who think that we should win every game 40-0, and who thinks Wayne Bennett should be coach, but that's all it is a very tiny minority, most of would probably just like some fairly simple things like watching a team out on the pitch who look to have some idea of what they are supposed to be doing, maybe a discernible gameplan.
Which, finishing 5th, we presumably manage to a passable degree for more of the time than not?
Asim wrote:They'd like players to play to something like the best of their ability for the majority of the season, occasionally surpassing usual standards when it matters. They'd like players on their team to not make the same mistakes week in, week out with no sign of them being eliminated,
Indeed. Except that I'd identify it more as a recurring problem than a constant one. You seem to overlook the many good weeks, as well as the good parts of several of the games we lost. But I don't think anyone is arguing that the season wasn't disappointing, even taking severe injury problems into consideration.
Asim wrote:they'd like players who make a large amount of such mistakes not to be rewarded with long contracts, they'd like to watch a team who look capable of playing for eighty minutes not just fifty or sixty (if that).
See above, esp. re league position. You're grossly exagerrating, for effect.
Asim wrote:They'd probably like the coaching staff to take a little responsibility from time to time when things don't go well and not continually whine about how it's the fault of the officials/weather/man on the moon/the bigger kid in the playground.
McNamara's comments on officials have been directed at specific and well-publicized instances where major ricks have mostly occurred, and been accepted widely as such. Even then, I don't recall him abdicating responsibility, on the contrary, I think he's invariably made it clear that he is not looking for excuses. What I've read, anyway.
Man in the moon? Playgrounds? I don't think I read those reports. Link?
Asim wrote:Unfortunately anyone who has watched this team over the last couple of years can't really say hand on heart that they see this,
Gve over. Name someone who has been arguing that we are perfect, as you seem to imply. It's a silly position - to advance a "perfection" argument that no-one is claiming so that you can then deride this non-existent argument.
Asim wrote:and the condescending nature of posts claiming people who have very valid criticisms along the lines of "you would only be happy with Bennett" is particularly grating, while it may not be directly censoring opinion there's no doubt that trying to make posters look irrational and stupid has a similar effect on what they can be bothered to write.
What's this . . you want us all to be really nice to each other? Or maybe you don't think that there is any condescension, michael-taking or whatever from the Sack Mac camp? I think I can judge the debate quite well from where I'm sitting.
As for condescension, put-downs and sarcasm - well, I'd put you near the top of this forum's charts!
Asim wrote:I think that's a particularly unfair comparison to make, doesn't Brian McDermott work with the smallest budget in SL?
Maybe but there's no logical reason to say he is at this stage any better a coach than what we've got.
Asim wrote:(Silly me, forgetting that only the Bulls play to the salary cap and everyone else fiddles it through their rich benefactors).
What was that again about the condescending nature of posts?
Asim wrote: I've watched more than enough SL games over the last few years to know that Paul Sykes underperformed last year compared to how he has in recent years, which is a shame because I thought he'd be a very good signing (and hope he still might).
Again, a point which, broadly speaking, not many would argue against too vehemently; OTOH he played well enough (admittedly with not that great a number of competitors) for the GB coach to pick him for England, so perhaps you could at least
consider that he might not have been
quite as bad as you maybe think?
Asim wrote: but with the resources available I stand by my opinion that we should be doing better than we have been.
nothing wrong with that - as long as you do think it's an
opinion.
Asim wrote:I'm a great believer that most coaches and managers have in sport have a shelf life,
But that's just a truism. 99% of all managers will sooner or later be sacked. The fact that the majority of them will end up getting a job managing somewhere else - indeed the fact they got sacked - shows that the coach getting sacked does not necessarily mean he can't coach. Any more than the coach NOT getting sacked means that he CAN coach. Indeed in many cases coaches get sacked for all sorts of reason unrelated to their intrinsic coaching ability. For example, a coach may be sacked simply because a club feels it must either do something, or be seen to do something, about a long losing streak (say) but as they can't sack the players, have no real choice but to sack the coach. But yes, very few coaches will not be sacked.
Asim wrote:I think the team on the pitch have to show a hell of a lot more than they have done since about July 2007 for myself to have any real faith that McNamara really is the man for the job, and if there isn't how can anyone realistically say that he deserves any more time?
I don't know, as I don't know the future. Your question is a question that can only be sensibly asked at the end of next season, of anyone who then thinks McNamara then deserves an extension.