THE appointment of Andy Robinson as Scotland's coach is big news, but scarcely a surprise, certainly not in the "man bites dog" class. He was indeed the obvious choice, so much so that one wonders whether it was really necessary for the SRU to go through the doubtless quite costly charade of its selection process.
There were only three possible doubts. First, given the progress that Edinburgh have made since he was in charge, whether it might not have been better to have kept him there. The drawback here is that if he had been turned down for the Scotland job,
he might have looked to move away from Edinburgh before long.
Second, there was the matter of his less than successful tenure of the position as England's coach. Here however there were extenuating circumstances. He took over a disintegrating team after the 2003 World Cup; in Scotland he will inherit one still in the process of formation. Even so, his time as English coach might have been more successful if he hadn't been deprived by a succession of injuries of his chief match-winner, Johnny Wilkinson. Moreover if his time as the man in complete charge was judged to be a failure, it's no secret that Robinson, rather than Clive Woodward, was responsible for the hands-on coaching that led to the World Cup triumph. Incidentally, Brian Moore, surveying Robinson's time in charge of England, concluded that, while he was a very good coach, he was a poor selector. He may have been right. Even so, one should remark that selecting an England XV is always more difficult than picking a Scotland one – simply because in England there are usually several players of comparable ability competing for each position, which is rarely the case here.
The final doubt was the nationalist one. Do we want an Englishman coaching Scotland? Given the way the international game is now, this is rather petty. Wales are coached, quite successfully, by a New Zealander, and so indeed are Australia, though the rivalry between the Wallabies and the All Blacks is no less intense than that between Scotland and England. A friend asked me a few days ago how I thought it would be to have a man with an English accent urging the Scotland team to stirring deeds in the Calcutta Cup. Well, I replied, it wouldn't be the first time that has happened, for several Scottish captains have had accents that belonged to London or the Home Counties rather than to Edinburgh, Glasgow or the Borders.
In the other big story of the week, what a contrast the first two games of the Lions tour have offered. Against the Royal XV last Saturday the Lions were truly dreadful. On Wednesday against the Golden Lions (Xerox Lions, Gauteng Lions, Transvaal – whichever you choose), they looked sublime. On the other hand, the Royals, supposedly the weakest team the Lions will face, played with pace, zest, skill and determination, while the Golden Lions were quite remarkably feeble, falling off tackles and scarcely ever competing for the ball. Admittedly they've had a poor season , finishing 12th in the Super 14; admittedly too, they were below strength and there are reports of dissension in the camp. The fact remains that they looked about as enthusiastic as the West Indies cricket team by the time they arrived in Durham for the Second Test a couple of weeks ago.
Frankly one would have backed any club in the Guinness Premiership or the Magners League to beat this Golden Lions side, the best ones by 20 or 30 points. For the British and Irish Lions this came as close to being an unopposed practice session as you will ever see when there are 15 players in a different colour of jersey on the field. The Golden Lions' performance disgraced South African rugby. I wouldn't have thought it possible for a South African provincial side to be so feeble – nor, I guess, would Ian McGeechan.
In the Royals match the trouble started with the Lions' forwards. They were horribly slow to the breakdown and then didn't get there in sufficient numbers to secure and protect the ball. So for the first 20 minutes, even half an hour, Mike Blair had a very uncomfortable time behind the scrum. To add to his troubles the Lions' lineout was poor and David Wallace at No 8, where he hasn't played often recently, proved quite incapable of controlling the ball at the set scrum. No wonder Blair looked poor and out-of sorts for much of the first half, though he came on to a good game as the forwards themselves began to improve a bit. In contrast on Wednesday Mike Phillips was in clover, the ball presented to him on a plate by an advancing pack. Blair couldn't have experienced a more difficult start to the tour, or Phillips an easier one.
So the two games really tell us nothing about the form or ability of the scrum-halves, though there is no doubt that, by getting such an easy ride, Phillips will remain favourite to start in the Test team.
