SCOTTISH rugby's leading fans organisation are insisting Murrayfield bosses are digging themselves into a hole over their review of the RBS Six Nations Championship flop.
While the authorities are claiming when appointing Andy Robinson and Sean Lineen to replace George Graham and Alan Tait as assistants to head coach Frank Hadden that "progress" is being made independent organisation, The Forum of Scottish Rugby Suppo
rters, take a more sceptical view.
In a statement, issued today, the fans say: "We expressed strong reservations to the SRU at the outset about the review being done in-house. Our reservations have increased."
As well as possible lack of objective assessment the fans are concerned about the apparent scape-goating of Graham and Tait while expressing concerns about the consequences for Edinburgh and Glasgow with their coaches moving upstairs in a dual role.
The statement adds: "Changes, whether in approach or personnel, were certainly needed on the coaching side, as there were some clear errors in tactics, selection and preparation. Whether these can all be laid at the doorstep of the assistant coaches is more questionable, whatever other faults they may be deemed to have had.
"If Andy Robinson and Sean Lineen are heavily involved in the Argentinean tour and then the Autumn Internationals, it is inevitable that Edinburgh and Glasgow Warriors will suffer. We therefore hope that this will be a very temporary belt-and-braces job and that the SRU is now concentrating on succession planning and developing a Plan B."
On the format of the review the fans statement hints at cover-ups.
"The problem with an in-house review is that there is not the depth of knowledge within the SRU about coaching at senior international level.
"All those with any experience were already involved to some degree in the unsuccessful campaign. The right course was to get experienced, outside rugby eyes taking a closer look at what went wrong and what needed changed. However, the SRU seems particularly resistant to any objective, external assessment.
"An equal danger with an in-house review is that, rather than being about the main issues of coaching and playing, it gets taken over by internal diversions like cost-cutting and PR and of course runs the risks of peer pressures and personalities."
The full article contains 389 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
