Rugby: Tough-man now looks weak

Mike Tindall's England career is in tatters. Photo / Getty Images

The credibility of Martin Johnson as England manager took a significant hit yesterday, his tough-man status undermined by the stern actions of the Rugby Football Union in stripping Mike Tindall of his place in the squad and fining him £25,000.

Why did Johnson not upbraid Tindall at the time? Why did he stand by his man so resolutely? Such questions can only throw into unfavourable relief Johnson's failings in either keeping his England squad in line or getting them to apologise.

The glower that used to intimidate many an opponent in his playing days did not deter some from various transgressions. Either Johnson was not respected or he was not feared.

If there is concern as to the fitness for purpose of Johnson, then the same holds true of Rob Andrew. It is already being suggested that the principal figure behind the severe sanctions, operations director Andrew, has acted so harshly so as to project himself as a man of substance in these volatile times at the union.

You want a strong individual at the helm? Then look no further. Either way, too soft or too draconian, the union looks divided in the way it handles its business. If Tindall is now seen as disreputable, then why was he not considered so at the time? Or is he a scapegoat for Andrew's ambitions?

Andrew was in constant touch with Johnson and present in New Zealand in the later stages of the Rugby World Cup. Even though Johnson insisted on being front-of-house, declaring that he "was the RFU" as regards such team matters and didn't need anybody to ride shotgun, Andrew could, and should have overruled the manager if he had misgivings as to how it was being handled. That didn't happen.

There has been a dispiriting lack of self-awareness, with only, latterly, the likes of Lewis Moody and Jonny Wilkinson acknowledging that the behaviour of certain parts of the squad was unacceptable.

Of course, more detail emerged after the events of that Queenstown night when Tindall either couldn't recall or wasn't prepared to say precisely where he had been. Even so, Johnson had enough evidence, as did Andrew, to have either sent him home, dropped him or publicly castigated him.

Even a cursory apology would have offset so much of the subsequent damage. Instead, Johnson defended his man, cut off questions directed at him and hid behind the platitude of "Rugby Player Drinks Beer. Shock". That was an expensive pint as it turns out.

Sources at Twickenham say there is a mood afoot that Johnson should be kept on as England manager, as might defence coach Mike Ford and scrum coach Graham Rowntree. Forwards coach John Wells and attack coach Brian Smith remain under greatest threat. Andrew, too, must be held to account.

The fact that the Rugby Players' Association reacted with such alacrity to announce that Tindall would be appealing, suggests that Andrew will be called to task given that RPA chief executive Damian Hopley is on the Professional Game Board review panel looking into England's World Cup failure.

Even on the lesser punishments meted out to James Haskell and Chris Ashton for dealings with a hotel chambermaid in Dunedin, there is dissatisfaction as to how the incident was dealt with.

The image of a union at odds with itself remains. Johnson ought to have been more transparent, more forceful and more up-front. His reluctance to single out individuals for rebuke was an unwise throwback to his own playing days. That said, there was precious little leadership from Twickenham to address the matter there and then. Instead it has festered. Tindall, too, ought to have said something. Silence is rarely golden. Instead, it has proved very costly.