EITHER Gordon McKie has far sharper sight than the rest of us, or there are untold reasons behind the decision to keep Frank Hadden as Scotland's national coach.
In a statement released by the Scottish Rugby Union yesterday, McKie, the chief executive, declared that Hadden was "still the best man to take the national team forward as head coach and build on the overall progress that has been made in the last t
wo-and-a-half years or so." It is hard to believe there is no-one who could do a better job. And it is harder still to discern the "overall progress" of which McKie spoke.
In his first season as Scotland coach, Hadden did relatively well as the team were freed of the inhibitions of the Matt Williams era and began to play with some self-belief. But since then, little has gone right consistently. Scotland won the wooden spoon in 2007, and only escaped the same fate in this year's RBS Six Nations on points differential.
There have been some major embarrassments, such as last year's home defeat by Italy and the desperate defeats against France and Wales this season, and promising performances such as the one-off win against England have not been followed up. Given such inconsistency, it is surely impossible to claim with any credibility that progress has been made. Instead, other reasons must lie behind McKie's decision to let Hadden soldier on into the summer tour – this time with Andy Robinson and Sean Lineen as his deputies rather than George Graham and Alan Tait.
Given the trauma suffered under Williams, it would be understandable if McKie and his colleagues perhaps wished to think twice or more about appointing another foreign coach. And if they think that the introduction of a new head coach from outside the country would cause too much upheaval at this stage, the structure of Scottish rugby leaves them with very few options.
There is the national coach, his two assistants, the coaches of Edinburgh and Glasgow, and after that nothing. No-one else of working age in the country has the relevant experience to take over.
Of course, Robinson has coached a national team before, and for some time Lineen has seemed to have the right qualities to graduate to that level. But if both let it be known that they do not want to become head coach at this time – and that seems to have been the case – McKie is left with a simple choice: persist with Hadden or find out how much it costs to advertise in the world's media for a new coach.
The chief executive would have had a broader array of options if Tait or Graham had shown they have the makings of a head coach, but both appear more comfortable by far in their specialist areas than they would be if they had to take a wider, strategic view. In fact, it is unclear why, given their lack of influence, those two should have been made to shoulder the blame for Scotland's – and Hadden's – shortcomings.
McKie surely knew a change was needed: he had seen England and Ireland, second and fourth respectively this year, jettison their coaches, so he was aware that doing nothing would reek of complacency. Tait and Graham were therefore sacrificed, and Hadden probably did not try for too long to keep them.
But far from being strengthened by the promotion of Lineen and Robinson, Hadden is now under greater threat. This is a triumvirate which will not work in the longer term, and the tour to Argentina could see Robinson, the most assertive and dynamic of the three, emerge as first among supposed equals.
The full article contains 631 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
