Bristol to face relegation threat

http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rugby/story/177290.html

Future looks bleak for them!

Have ammedend the quote a little

"Andy is a long-term disappointment. He has proven experience at losing international and domestic level rugby, and the necessary acumen to drive Bristol Rugby down and establish ourselves as a bottom four side in the future."

also they both look like they have the mumps in the photo, maybe he's still got some highland shortbread stuffed in those cheeks

Well, we'll see. Granted he's not been stellar as a coach but he may do a good job for Bristol, better I reckon than Redpath and Tait at their respective clubs which doesn't say much but not as dubious an appointment as your comments suggest. There are precious few experienced coaches available and this one could work. Bristol are unlikely to upset this year's Championship play offs but Falcons will be watching with some concern for signs of improvement. Bristol have been mugged at the death more than once and would be happy to do the same to someone ese for a change.

I think he will do well there. He is a good club coach just not an international one. A good and honest man as well. Shame he ruined last years 6Nations for Scotland but not his fault he was promoted beyond his competence. I wish him luck.

sirtidychris wrote:Have ammedend the quote a little

"Andy is a long-term disappointment. He has proven experience at losing international and domestic level rugby, and the necessary acumen to drive Bristol Rugby down and establish ourselves as a bottom four side in the future."

also they both look like they have the mumps in the photo, maybe he's still got some highland shortbread stuffed in those cheeks

Brilliant

Looking forward to some inexplicably baffling team selections coming out of Bristol over the next few months, then. Good to have you back, Andy.

To be fair to Robbo he did a decent job coaching Edinburgh, it was only his latter days of coaching Scotland that he really lost his way.

I think he'll do fine at Bristol. Just don't let him sign Dan Parks!!

I agree with most of the comments above, Robinson did a fine job with Edinburgh and really should have stayed there, however he wanted the Scotland job and that was too much of a stretch of his abilities.

He's a good club coach and I reckon he'll do well with Bristol.

You could write an essay on Robinson's tenure for Scotland (I'd rather not), but there were ups as well as downs.

His selections weren't always bad, and he had some great results. By the end of his tenure though he'd lost the ability to select the side objectively, and had no regard for form, and no overall plan to build and develop the side. We so often ended up chopping and changing teams mid-way through tournaments, often trying to correct initially poor selections, and you never really had a sense of momentum with Robinson's tensure, in the same way as Wales and England have enjoyed under Gatland and Lancaster.

I don't think this is a bad appointment by Bristol.

I won't remember his tenure with Scotland particularly fondly, but there were some great moments. He defeated Australia twice and South Africa once. We defeated Fiji on their own patch under a blazing sun. We won a series away in Argentina. We won in Croke Park. These were all great achievements.

I think being away from the players was hard for him. Also he knew alot of one side of scotlands players and not so much Glasgow. Did well in Bath by all accounts and had rubbish players for England.

Personally I don't buy into the "he had rubbish players for England" line.

This is where one of his key weaknesses was exposed - he has no vision. He failed to think long-term with England and plan a game plan and strategy to suit the players. Look at what Lancaster has done. He's focused almost exclusively on speed of play, and getting the recycle speed as fast as possible. He's picked players accordingly.

Robinson never had that level of vision, he just got confused between wanting wise experienced old heads (without regard to form) and throwing in young players, without ever really cobbling them together into any sort of strategy. Under Robinson England played as if they'd never met, and that came down to inept selection and tactics. His scrums were always powerful, and he liked his teams to dominate possession. Robinson's philosophy was always "the team with the most ball won the match". Not true. The ABs frequently win games with high scores despite having less than 50% of the ball. His possession was always this stodgy slow stuff, with large hulking forwards slowing everything down. It was (for England and for Scotland) devastatingly ineffective.

The players have always been there in English rugby, Robinson just wasn't the right architect to pick a philosophy and select the team accordingly.

Club rugby is a different animal.

I think him being with the players each week is better for him. Once you have players that you can compare weekly it is an easier decision.

Think ball postion works better in Club too as the speed of defense isn't the same so you end up turning position into points eg Sarries.

International teams can go up to 20mins with out the ball and not give away penalties.

At club in you go ten you're in trouble.

That might also be down to the refs aswell.

To be fair yes this article was just an excuse to have a cheap laugh at Andys expense. He has a good record at club level.