How can so many people defend Robinson?

I see on here and on other forums and blogs many people saying that Robinson had done a good job. I cannot follow the logic in this. can anyone explain?

His record is really poor http://www.espnscrum.com/scotland/rugby/team/2.html?template=results

The players play worse for him than for their clubs - or they were playing better before he coached it out of them ( Laidlaw)

Bizzare selections such as Parks in the last 6N and Lamont at centre

Clearly a decent honest man with passion for the game but promoted beyond his abilities

TJ - I think you could argue that under Hadden the Scottish side looked worse. In fairness over the summer Scotland won all their matches down south, and beat Australia. I think that there is a problem with being head coach of Scotland, as they tend to come in and improve the attitude/result and then get talked up to being able to get Scotland to be competitive again, then they fail to win and get thown to the lions.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:TJ - I think you could argue that under Hadden the Scottish side looked worse. In fairness over the summer Scotland won all their matches down south, and beat Australia.

Its his record in competitive games that cost him his job. 2 wins from 17 games in 6 Nations and WC games against Tier 1 Teams is an atrocious record.

As I have said elsewhere on here, there is far more problems than just the coach. However after 3 years of failure when it matters, its time to try somebody else.

credit where is due... he achieved 3 wins against 3N sides... 2 vs AUS and 1 vs SA.

Conditions or not a record like that is admiral when you think the very best era we had in recent years (late 80s - early 90s) never beat these teams or came close.

Guys like the Hastings brothers, Armstrong, Chalmers, Wainwright, Calder, Milne, Sole, Weir, Jefferies etc... they never experienced that.

Bad losses to teams like Tonga, RWC pool exit and poor 6N throughout did not build on this however and its right he left... as I don't think he can offer any more.

It goes beyond Robinson though.... would Henry be any better.... doubtful. For any coach to be successful you need playeers who were being misused/not selected etc..

I don't think this is the case... for me, its just that we don't have the quality of players we once did. With reduced player numbers, only 2 pro teams etc and dwindling support what do we expect.

Ireland, Wales and Italy have far more people playing the game and crucially this included kids too. Let alone the powerhouses of FRA and ENG.

fa0019 wrote: and dwindling support what do we expect.

This was the best Attended set of AIs in many years.

I think the players we have now are better than any I have seen for a long time. Maybe the 1990 team.

We have a pack to match anyone and backs with pace and guile with a bit of power as well. The team play as less than the sum of the parts. they look lacking on confidence and ill prepared and clearly some very poor selection decisions.

Robinson has to carry the can for that

It's the Scottish way - feeling slightly guilty for having requested his demise only for him to hit the ejector button! A subtle rewriting of facts is then used to support the view, and shame on those that are celebrating his departure. When that gets called, blame the players. Farce, complete and utter farce - the support of mediocrity

I think Robbo did ok but any coach will have limited success for Scotland. One way to improve the results may be this radical idea:

1. People say that NZ do well as their clubs/franchises play the same structure as the national team so players easily slot in and out of it. Why not do the same in Scotland? There are only two teams anyway, get them playing a similar game plan, devised by someone like Henry or another well proven coach.

Ensure the coaches at Edinburgh and Glasgow know the score. Use the same/very similar defensive systems, similar but slightly different line outs, approach the games in the same way with regards to phase by phase etc.

2. Bring in weight classes for younger players and focus on basic skills. Again, the smaller Scottish system could do this more easily than a big union such as England or France.

The first option would bring about results within 2 or 3 years. The second would help secure quality players from a limited pool. Too many good players leave because they mature later and are sick of not getting the ball and being trampled in the Scottish weather.

Both are radical ideas, but without something radical I think Scotland will suffer the same problems over and over, regardless of the coach.

I think too much focus has been put on Robbo.

We keep going on about the players being the best since 1990. I'm sorry, I just dont see it.

I think folk are getting swept up in hype or something.

Lets look at a few players.

Ford vs Bulloch - Sorry but its Bulloch for me here
Gray vs any other Lock - Gray wins but this is the exception
Kellock/Hamilton Vs S Murray or Hines. Murray or Hines each day

In the backs its a similar set up
Hogg is not living up to potential. There have been better 15's like Ramont.
Blair vs redpath, Basil for me.

If folk think these players are so good then a large part of the poor performances need to lay with the players.

I am not defending Robbo, but his job was made more difficult by the players not pulling thier weight too

Dorothy_Mantooth

Does attendance figures correlate with people actually playing the game on a regular basis or kids learning the sport... crucially at pre teen age?

Perhaps but very loosely.

More likely the attendance numbers are up because we played 2 matches vs. 3N sides rather than our typical 1.

The biggest contributor to pools of talent in a given country is a) the number of people you can choose from and b) when they picked up the sport.

We have the lowest playing numbers in the 6Ns. You can't make talented sportsman just out of training etc... else we would all be at it.

If the best kids are going off to other sports first or only playing rugby at high school then what chance do we have of creating our own regular world class players?

Its chicken and egg. Kids want inspiration and they won't get that by losing all the time, but we won't get better in the future without attracting youth to the game.

I am one who certainly does not defend his record

I do admire that he went - as he could have carried on and we would have to pay a lot out to get rid of him -

I respect that he had passion and did try his best

However he, above all else, has to take the lion share of the blame for us not developing at all

Picking out of form players, players out of position, ignoring new talent, playing the wrong game plan is ALL on his shoulders

Player playing badly can not be helped, but having no clear plan and a mix up of players playing all over the place is his choice

Did no-one notice that one of our best players, and one of the best No 6 in the NH - played 8 and 7 - and did not play his own position - that is why he had to go - bizzarre and brain fartie decisions

I would have accepted us losing if I could see a plan for development, but all I saw was panic decisions and favourite players playing

At least I will have the oppotunity to change my AR poll this 6 nations

Ok. I now understand. If you don't think the players are much cop then its not Robbos fault he cannot make them world beaters. If you believe the players are better than the results then you blame Robbo.

I do think we have some very good players now. One of the key differences for me is that our packs used to get pushed around because other packs were heavier and stronger. No more. And as a bonus wehave some very good players amongst them. The backs its not so obvious or clear but we do have some young creative guys and players of real class. Weir. Laidlaw, Hogg, ( who is far better than Ramont surely) Visser.

Its not the players not having the abilities, its they don't have the confidence and preparation to use their abilities

We don't have to go as far back as 1990, remember the 1999 backline with Tait, Leslie, Townsend and one of my old favorites Glen Metcalfe? That was a backline that could score tries.

fa0019 wrote:credit where is due... he achieved 3 wins against 3N sides... 2 vs AUS and 1 vs SA.

Conditions or not a record like that is admiral when you think the very best era we had in recent years (late 80s - early 90s) never beat these teams or came close.

Guys like the Hastings brothers, Armstrong, Chalmers, Wainwright, Calder, Milne, Sole, Weir, Jefferies etc... they never experienced that..

To be fair, a lot of them did experience victories over Australia in Australia, albeit on a Lions tour. The team of the early 1980s also beat Australia home and away, drew with the All Blacks and won a Grand Slam. Losing to Romania kind of shows that Scottish rugby has always had its ups and downs but at least that team, as did a few Scottish teams through the 1990s, played some decent rugby and generally weren't an embarrassment.

I backed Robinson right up to the World Cup but after that debacle he had to go, and the 6 Nations whitewash that followed should have been the end. He deserves credit for some big victories outside of the 6 Nations and World Cups, but he asked to be judged on his results in those tournaments, and on that basis it's impossible not to agree with his decision to step down, which I applaud.

I can see why some posters have sympathy. He doesn't have world beaters at this disposal, and the support of the nation in Scotland is not what it ought to be, or once was, but the players he has are better than the results and performances he's achieved. He's had time and he's had chances. Time to let someone else have a go.

Who would you lads want to take over.

My main concern with the robinson situ is the fact that he is englah and the scots know it!

therefore he will allways be under the spotlight more when bad performances happen!

I can never work out if he is doing a good job , an ok job or a bad job!

But then i honestly belive all managers should be from the nation that they manage..

mystiroakey wrote:My main concern with the robinson situ is the fact that he is englah and the scots know it!

Scots don't discriminate in who they dish out hatred to - de Luca, Hadden, Laney, McKie, Parks, Robinson.

I do not think anti english sentiment had anything to do with Robinsons difficulties - and i am an english born and sounding scots fan so i think I would have noticed

Crypto/TJ

Forign coaches allways get more blame, it doesnt matter where they are from or what country they manage- and in this case maybe abit more so!

Basically point is this. There are more hatred posts about robinson due to his nationality around the net and media. and no one can dispute that- Even if that is from a minority- it still happens!

As i said before i dont know if he has done a good or bad job- because of alot of vile i have read about him!

Its hard to get a real opinion on this especially due to the fact that scotland do not have much minerals atm! they have won and lost games- i am not sure why fans should expect more.

Basically its a bit cloudy..

what managers/coaches get more out of a team.. When is the real time to blame a manager, when do we praise one!! tough to work out imo.

managers coaches dont seem to go based on results all the time- however many go or stay based on fan and media standing.

I mean are you scots fans gonna expect to win all games when you get someone else in??

I am not denying it has happened - but I am denying it was at all significant.

mystiroakey wrote:

managers coaches dont seem to go based on results all the time- however many go or stay based on fan and media standing.

I mean are you scots fans gonna expect to win all games when you get someone else in??

I know the point you're making but it could appear a little......... condescending. Fans always want wins.

Teams that are failing to match the expectations of the fans will always be losing coaches - it's certainly happened to England. It's a natural process. The successful sides try to hold onto coaches, the losing ones try and try to find the perfect coach that will change their fortunes and they don't have the patience to hold on for 6 or 7 years waiting for one coach to finally do the business. New coaches are the natural dynamic of frustrated sides.

SecretFly dude.

lets use England as an example- We have lost a bag load of games recently and us fans expect more, but we haven't given SL untold stick! I honestly believe that. iF SL was foreign he would be out the door already!

Robo was the best thing to happen to Scotland since Irn Bru hit the shelves.

mystiroakey - of course fans should expect more. We do not expect win every game (hope to, but not expect)

What we expect is to see the best players being picked, a tactical plan going forward, a game plan that makes sense, players being picked in their best positions (unless very good reason), a coach that does not pick his out of form favourites when better options are available and above all progression


AR has brought none of the above - hence why he had to go

These days i am so confussed as to what the best players are for a team- and especially in rugby. Coaches may be picking players on many different factors- not just for the supposedly inform good looking players!

a manger/coach will think about a system and way of playing that he feels will do the best possible. and then pick players that fit!

Picking players based on what fans wont is surely a cop out- I mean its not as if Robinson didn't know who you fans wanted playing- but he tried his best. Yes that may have been wrong , but i would much rather a coach pick on his own rather than be pressured to appease fans!

Basically my point is(although i said on the other thread pick mallet!!)

Pick Scottish and then you there is nothing else to blame!

mystiroakey wrote:SecretFly dude.

lets use England as an example- We have lost a bag load of games recently and us fans expect more, but we haven't given SL untold stick! I honestly believe that. iF SL was foreign he would be out the door already!

He's only a season in. Now how many coaches have England been through since 2003?
Six. That's roughly on average a new coach every one and a half years over the ten years. The underachieving Scotland have had three coaches in that time.

So, they're not excessive in relating change of coach to demands for winning. Others are more eager in that department

yep we are all guilty of it.. But i am not being a hypocrtie I didnt want MJ to go and i dont want SL to go now..

I am a believer that managers arnt at important as peops make out in the short term but in the long term they will know best, because they should be given the chance to learn from there mistakes!! Thats how we get good at anything- We make mistakes, we fix it!! its how the pros come so good in the first place.

This is the fundemental flaw of switching coaches all the time!

Strokey, I haven't seen Robinson's nationality raised on this board at all (except by c21st with his tongue-in-cheek moniker of our departing head coach) - in fact, it hasn't even entered my head that he was English until you mentioned it, other than in the sense that he had a high profile intl coaching job before at which he also did not succeed

Really. Sorry i dont believe ya

by the way why hasnt he succeded at scotland?

I mean who is judging his success. I suppose from his personal pov he has left so he hasnt finished his contract. But how do we measure success. Results or longleviety!

could scotland have done better ?

I personally dont think he has succeded because he failed to win the scottish fans hearts and trust. and this is why he has left(could this be harder to win if your english- i would say so 100%)

his results and performances have been ok from my pov

Sorry, but you are trying to push a point on his nationality that really does not exist (even if you do not believe us)

He has one of the worst win / loss records in Scottish history - is that a good way to judge success?

mystiroakey wrote:by the way why hasnt he succeded at scotland?

I mean who is judging his success. I suppose from his personal pov he has left so he hasnt finished his contract. But how do we measure success. Results or longleviety!

could scotland have done better ?

I personally dont think he has succeded because he failed to win the scottish fans hearts and trust. and this is why he has left(could this be harder to win if your english- i would say so 100%)

his results and performances have been ok from my pov

wow, I thought Scots were meant to be riven with paranoia and chippiness! Strokey, you're entitled to your opinion, but there's little evidence to support your view, I'm afraid

results OK? Abject failure in the last 6N and the WC

As an outsider I haven't really sensed the idea that it is Robinson's nationality that is or has annoyed the Scottish fans - or that it is the issue that makes their 'good riddance' easier to say.

I really do think it's a plainly frustrated attitude from the Scots. They know they have players who can perform better than they are doing. I don't think they believe their players are all pervading Giant killers but they do know that Pro12 performances suggest they have more potential than Robinson has been managing to express. They just want a new start because they really feel that with the right coach they might progress to higher in the ranks.

They have a right to want that. Here in Ireland, we have a coach who has been victim of much more vicious reactions from followers - and he's bloody Irish.

"He has one of the worst win / loss records in Scottish history - is that a good way to judge success?"

impossible to quantify. how much is on the stock you have in relation to competitors and how much is on the manager

mystiroakey wrote:"He has one of the worst win / loss records in Scottish history - is that a good way to judge success?"

impossible to quantify. how much is on the stock you have in relation to competitors and how much is on the manager

What - this is the easiest to quantify - it is a % - done

Sorry you are not even making any sense now

"They know they have players who can perform better than they are doing."



Do you honestly think that robinson is getting less out of the players than england,Irelands,welsh or the french coach is!!!

what sort of argument is that.. i would actually say that robinson has done pretty well in comparison to other coaches!!

international rugby is so differnt, thats not a valid argument

Risky this might be a tough concept for you pal..

But a managers job is to try and get 'more' out of a team./. it is impossible to tell what another manager would get out of that same team against the other same teams in that time line that the manager managed!!


absoloutley impossible!! it can not be quatified.

if you wanna talk about how successfull TEAMS were then use the stats all day long.. they are valid

mystiroakey wrote:"They know they have players who can perform better than they are doing."



Do you honestly think that robinson is getting less out of the players than england,Irelands,welsh or the french coach is!!!

Yes. Certainly. No doubt at all.

what sort of argument is that.. i would actually say that robinson has done pretty well in comparison to other coaches!!

[quote] Really - sliding down the rankings and loosing 14 out of the last 22 games - with 3 of the 7 wins coming against minnows and two in non competitive warm up games

Justice_4_ROBO

Hersh - justice is done - be sure of that.

mystiroakey - this might be a tough concept for you pal..


but you seem to have an agenda - fair play - keep with it

Well I can say quite confidently - AR played Parks against England in the 6 nation who was out of form and had retired from Test Rugby and it cost us any chance of winning that game

We all knew it, Parks knew it, the whole world knew it execpt AR

Nothing to do with his nationality but his selections


He has one of the worst win / loss records in Scottish history - is that a good way to judge success?"

impossible to quantify. how much is on the stock you have in relation to competitors and how much is on the manager


Sorry this is the most silly thing I have heard. You do not keep sales people if they miss their targets, just cos the nasty competitors were there

mystiroakey wrote:"They know they have players who can perform better than they are doing."



Do you honestly think that robinson is getting less out of the players than england,Irelands,welsh or the french coach is!!!

what sort of argument is that.. i would actually say that robinson has done pretty well in comparison to other coaches!!

international rugby is so differnt, thats not a valid argument

International rugby is so different. Well in the big theory that does the rounds every year - yes - it is very different.

In the sense that quite a few sides in Pro12, AP and Top14 would knock the stuffing out of Tonga then, in practical terms - from game to game - No, it is not always so different. Indeed, there are times when International rugby is quite substandard to club/Provincial/regional rugby.

"He has one of the worst win / loss records in Scottish history - is that a good way to judge success?"

impossible to quantify. how much is on the stock you have in relation to competitors and how much is on the manager


Sorry this is the most silly thing I have heard. You do not keep sales people if they miss their targets, just cos the nasty competitors were there"

oh dear you still havent got it have you..

you cant judge a sales person selling an inferior product against figures selling a higher quailty product!! you have to make that adjustment!!

jeas is this really so hard for you to work out!

and how the heck can anyone hit scotlands target- of winning the wc 2015!!

not even god could do that one

Judge me on results he said - well we have and its not good enough
7 wins out of the last 22 games - two of which were warm-ups and 3 of which were minnows

Robinson was also given a target of two wins in each of the last two six nations.

How can a 6N whitewash with the team collapasing and an early bath in the WC be acceptable - especially given clear mistakes made by Robinson - the selection of Parks being the worst.

so does any of you think going scotish would be beneficial?

or do you just want the best you can get

mystiroakey - no but you can judge a person who sells less of the same product, espcially when the components have improved and doing well in their own right (edinburgh in the HC and Glasgow in the league)

We are not judging him on that goal, as it was not even a goal (You mixed up 6 nations with world cup)

So part from his win /loss ratio - which AR himself said he should be judged on

I judge him on these too

What we expect is to see the best players being picked, a tactical plan going forward, a game plan that makes sense, players being picked in their best positions (unless very good reason), a coach that does not pick his out of form favourites when better options are available and above all progression


So I have all the basis covered -

Not once do I nor any Scot I know give two hoots where he comes from - we want wins - as did he

you want lots of wins- but Isnt that like I want england to win the football world cup. Its not gonna happen. So get a manager you like and relate to and just enjoy the odd scalp here and there!!


good luck anyway.