Who should replace Andy Robinson? (Part 1)

First topic message reminder :

Plenty of threads picking over the bones of AR's coaching career with Scotland but I'd like to get away from that and look to the future. Clearly, there is a potential gulf between the head coach that a lot of us would like and a coach that the SRU would appoint. Principal considerations for the blazered McBumferties are:

(a) the costs involved with buying out the contracts of coaches already gainfully employed elsewhere;

(b) the costs involved with letting any new coach bring their existing team with them, rather than having to use Scott Johnson and Matt Taylor whose contracts would have to be terminated at cost;

(c) the risk involved with someone inexperienced in NH rugby and/or with existing Scotland players;

(d) the brickbats they may receive by choosing someone without an international track record; and

(e) the concern of possibly allowing a SH coach to be appointed who may be less than deferential to the SRU.

This list does not purport to be exhaustive but what do posters think about the following options:

A. Sean Lineen

1. Arguments for: at Glasgow for 6 years, knows huge amount about Scottish rugby, track record of making a lot of a little talent, passionate and able to instill this in the players, has a good track record with defense coaches, the public like him.

2. Arguments against: many feel that he had taken Glasgow as far as he could with his modest talents, no particular history as a forwards coach, never actually won anything with Glasgow (apart from the 1872 Cup ). Does he really have the necessary pedigree?

3. Realistically?: Looks likely. Ousted spuriously by Mark Dodson and Graham Lowe in order to gift Scotland's best coaching job to Townsend - he would doubtless love to return and prove the SRU wrong. Still on the SRU pay grade in his new role as talent spotter - his availablity may be key.

B. Scott Johnson

i. Arguments for: international experience with the Wallabies and US Eagles, attack is supposed to be his strong suit, er, happens to be living in Edinburgh at the moment...

ii. Arguments against: time with the Wallabies was a disaster, known from his time with the Tahs to be a blunt (possibly even abrasive) character and so possibly too coarse for SRU tastes to be the national team spokesperson, many Ospreys fans feel that he added little to the coaching set up and lived somewhat vicariously on the team's success, has never been a head coach at this level.

iii. Realistically?: Difficult to tell but as second in command, may be appointed caretaker-general coach by default and be given this year's Six Nations to prove himself. Has to be regarded as 'unproven' at best and an enormous gamble at worst.

C. Gregor Townsend

i. Arguments for: very few - he has taken Glasgow to third place in the Robocop table at present and has managed not to set his hair on fire, tie his shoelaces together or evacuate his bowels live at a press conference (yet).

ii. Arguments against: track record as Scotland attack coach was so woeful it was hilarious, relatively speaking he remains hopeless inexperienced as a coach.

iii. Realistically?: Unlikely - he will be tainted as a product of the Robinson regime and be regarded as a step away from meaningful change rather than a step towards it.

D. Michael Bradley

i. Arguments for: has international experience as acting coach of Ireland in 2008 and did a good job at Cork Constitution and Connacht with relatively little money and talent, coached Scotland A as an undefeated team for 2 years, including victories against Ireland, Italy, the USA and Tonga and was in charge for the well regarded 35-0 defeat of England Saxons in February 2012, took Edinburgh to a Heineken Cup semi final (first time ever for a Scottish franchise), by all accounts a thoroughly nice chap.

ii. Arguments against: Edinburgh's league form has sucked a variety of elderly individuals' genitalia since he took over, team has been horribly inconsistent and the coach has seemingly been powerless to stop this continuing into this season.

iii. Realistically?: No. The magical pixie dust of the Heineken Cup run has already worn off and Edinburgh's season in the HC and in the league are already over. It would be associating the new head coach with failure before he ever starts.

E. Other candidates with successful international experience

1. Eddie O'Sullivan

i. Arguments for: international experience with Ireland and the US Eagles, won 3 triple crowns with Ireland (2004, 2006 and 2007) making him the most successful Irish coach in the modern era, much liked by players, backs play a specialty.

ii. Arguments against: many Irish fans blame his poor preparation on their terribly disappointing 2007 RWC campaign and their abject 2008 Six Nations which led to his dismissal, some may feel he is not the kind to light a fire under poorly performing players.

iii. Realistically?: Very serious possibility. Would tick a lot of SRU boxes and his gentlemanly ways would be a good fit for the more traditional SRU members.

2. Graham Henry

i. Arguments for: coached Wales as well as the Lions so knowledge of UK and Irish rugby is good, the quintessential tactician and man motivator.

ii. Arguments against: 66 now and a RWC winning coach - may not be interested in another international post, famously cost Wales 250,000 nicker a year so surely out of the SRU's league.

iii. Realistically?: No. Has reached the top of his profession - would he really coach Scotland with all of the limitations this would bring? Surely a bit like dating again once you've been married to Deepika Padukone or Marion Cotillard.

3. Nick Mallett

i. Arguments for: solid international time with the Springboks and Italy - has taken Italy to their highest ever world rankings and his Sprinbok's winning streak of 17 consecutive test wins remains a national record, his Bokke teams are also responsible for the biggest winning margins against notable opposition - e.g. 52–10 win against France in Paris, a 68–10 win over Scotland in Edinburgh, a 33–0 defeat of Ireland and a 96–13 against Wales, much liked and clearly an arch motivator and no-nonsense hard arse.

ii. Arguments against: potentially abrasive and therefore uncontrollable by the SRU, apparently turned down England because of concerns about RFU interference which cannot be much less of a concern with the McBumfertie squad.

iii. Realistically?: possible, although the press will flush out in forthcoming weeks whether he's considering this seriously or not.

4. Jacques Brunel

i. Arguments for: included in this category due to his time as France assistant coach where he primed the forwards for the 2007 RWC, record with Perpignan was very good indeed and had some barnstorming wins, is taking Italy from strength to strength now.

ii. Arguments against: known to be a homebody and prior to taking over with Italy has only ever coached in France, at 58 will he really want a challenge of coaching a national side in English.

iii. Realistically?: would be a very good choice indeed and has coached exciting sides but it's hard to believe that he'll be first on the SRU radar.

5. Marc Lièvremont

i. Arguments for: four years of solid national experience with France, took his side to a 2010 6N grand slam and a 2007 RWC Final, known to be a quiet tactician and is an astute reader of the game.

ii. Arguments against: the only person in rugby with a more inconsistent selection policy than Andy Robinson - may not bring the stability that is craved, appalling revelations from Imanol Harinordoquy that the players had basically coached themselves during the latter stages of the RWC as they had effectively lost confidence in their coach, not backwards in coming forwards, comments in press conference criticising his own players have become famous.

iii. Realistically?: hard to come to any other conclusion than the SRU will consider him too much of a risk.

6. Bernard Laporte

i. Arguments for: currently taking Toulon to the top of the Top 14, an absolutely stellar record when managing France - 4 Six Nations championships, 2 grand slams, 4th place at 2003 Rugby World Cup, a smooth public speaker and statesman, exactly as slick as the SRU could hope for.

ii. Arguments against: never managed outside France - what are the odds that Scotland can persuade him to abandon the south coast of France for a cold sandstone in Edinburgh old town, may not seem like a realistic option.

iii. Realistically?: very difficult to see Big Bernie putting down the soft cheese and burgandy for a McSween's and a bottle of Buckie.

7. Robbie Deans

i. Arguments for: has won more Super rugby titles than any other coach, has ridden the gamut of ups and downs as Aussie coach, has seen it all and is resilient, would be a prestige capture for the SRU, may well want to get away from the media circus that accompanies him during SANZAR games.

ii. Arguments against: extremely inconsistent results with the Wallabies, has shown every indication of wanting to stay with his current national side, may regard another international role as too much of a hassle given the nature of NH press, may simply want a break, has never coached in the northern hemisphere and has not spoken about doing so.

iii. Realistically?: a definitely possibility although would need to be given the welly by the men in gold first of all, may also be simply out of the financial range of the SRU.

8. Eddie Jones

i. Arguments for: formal international experience with Wallabies and Japan, informally was appointed by Jake White to be the technical adviser of the Springboks for the Rugby World Cup in France where he was credited as the brain behind the success of the South African Springboks side, a true scholar of the game and a no-bs motivator, has been a consultant to Saracens so the NH game is not completely unfamiliar.

ii. Arguments against: wildly differing results depending on whom he's coached, win-loss ratio is the lowest of any Wallabies coach, great results at the Brumbies, abysmal results at the Reds, well known for a massive falling out with the Aussie rugby union leading to him publicly saying he won't coach in Australia again.

iii. Realistically?: exceptionally hard to tell - he is clearly still interested in the coaching game and (at the time of writing) Scotland would still be a step up from Japan, might be considered a troublesome character.

Part 2: "Other candidates with successful franchise/regional experience" is here:
https://www.606v2.com/t37746-who-should-replace-andy-robinson-part-2

Why not just appoint a permanent head coach? Presumably we don't need an interim if we can get the right man before the end of January.

The problem with an interim coach is that (a) we lose a potentially useful 6 Nations, (b) he may get an initial boost from the team (a la Hadden or Lancaster) and then the SRU consider keeping the interim coach, when they'd never have considered the man on a permanent basis initially, and (c) he'll probably expect to be paid.

Let's just get cracking with headhunting the right person. If that person is identified, agrees to do the job but for whatever reason can't do it until the end of the season, then fine, at that point we can debate interim options. Personally I'd just let the current coaches deal with any interim period, with perhaps Lineen to oversee things. That way you don't waste any money.

The SRU will also need to be looking very closely at all the contracts the coaches are currently on. Some of them may have trigger termination clauses in the event AR gets the sack, others may include provisions that enhance severence packages if the coaches work longer than say 12 months, so we should be mindful of costs here. The new man should have the ability to appoint his own men.

If you can get Mallet- Then get him

I'd like to see Mallett in the job. reckon he'dbring the best out of our players

he would for sure- although i think you should go scottish on second thoughts!!

mystiroakey wrote:he would for sure- although i think you should go scottish on second thoughts!!

Ha, ha, too late, Strokey, you've let the cat out of the bag!