The announcement of the forthcoming departure of Mark Dodson from the job of chief executive of the SRU was greeted with a chorus of delight from his many naysayers.
I include myself among that number having called for Dodson to be sacked after his crass “we’ll sue!” remarks during the 2019 World Cup in Japan. He wasn’t even suspended as the SRU handed over £70,000 to World Rugby as a “fine” for his stupidity – his moaning about a match being cancelled when dozens were dead in the typhoon still grates with me. And in the following year he pocketed nigh on a £1 million.
All that after the 2018 debacle over the sacking of Keith Russell which ended with the publication of a tribunal judgment that devastated Dodson’s reputation and should have cost him his job.
My problem with his going is that the SRU are now facing a huge problem – who do they get for the job? And for that matter, who will replace performance director Jim Mallinder who is also leaving?
The chief executive wasn’t always a failure, delivering on one of his first promises which was to find suitable homes for Glasgow Warriors and Edinburgh Rugby. It took a while, though.
Whoever comes in will have to face the questions Dodson avoided like a slippery baggie up a Borders burn, in Bill McLaren’s famous phrase.
Questions like why does Scotland have to keep looking abroad to other nationalities for playing personnel? And on his watch, who was responsible for missing Finlay Christie as the young scrum-half from Peebles developed into an All Black?
For all his talk about creating a player pathway, the number of players coming through to the elite level from our own development systems over the last few years has been saddening. Check out our age grade results for proof. As for the promised numbers to come from state schools – it just never happened.
When he was appointed, Dodson said it was his ambition “to make rugby the preferred sport in most schools in Scotland”. What tosh.
Finance was supposed to be his strong point so how come the SRU made a loss in excess of £10m last year? How did the payroll explode? Has the money given by the Scottish Government because of Covid-19 actually been spent on the grassroots? And what exactly has Ruth Davidson done as a non-executive director?
I don’t expect Dodson to answer any questions. Best just to see out his time and slip out the side door.
The SRU high heid yins need to decide first and foremost what kind of chief executive they want. Someone who knows about rugby and sports generally would be preferable and especially someone who knows Scotland and the Scots – that’s not being chauvinistic, just realistic.
Choose the preferred profile and then find someone who can deliver. And please, oh please, SRU, do not appoint a performance director until the new chief executive is in office and working, because apart from the head coach, it will be these two individuals who will determine the way ahead for Scottish rugby, though John McGuigan as chair of Scottish Rugby Limited must have a big say in future developments, including the appointment of a chief executive.
Despite, rather than because of Dodson, the governance issues seem to be resolving and to me that’s a sign of hope for the SRU.
And another thing
To matters more pressing and a certain wee tournament that’s just over a fortnight away. I simply cannot believe that we have seen the last of Hamish Watson, Chris Harris, Rory Sutherland and Dave Cherry in a Scotland jersey but that has to be the inference drawn from their absence from the Six Nations training squad as announced by head coach Gregor Townsend yesterday.
They are all far too good to be yesterday’s men, and Watson, Harris and Sutherland were all British and Irish Lions a little over two years ago. They must be on standby because there will be injuries in the coming weeks.
I see that Townsend has called in a former England player, Alec Hepburn. The qualification rules are there to be used and at least we can say he is not South African. However, and to echo one of my points about Dodson, only half of the squad announced yesterday came through the SRU player pathway. That’s a failure in anyone’s terms.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel