Why do some Scotland fans want rid of Townsend?published at 16:11 GMT 12 February

BBC Scotland's chief sportswriter Tom English has been answering some of your Scottish rugby questions.
James asked: Do you think the Scotland team has an attitude problem? I watch Glasgow week in and week out and there always seems to be some tenacity to them but at international level, the same players seem to lose it.
Tom answered: No, I think it's more complicated than that. There was nothing wrong with their attitude in Dublin 12 months ago, or against France in Edinburgh, or against South Africa in Murrayfield in the autumn. These are honest players who are giving everything.
I don't want to come over all Sigmund Freud here, but I wonder about their absolute desperation to beat Ireland and whether they out-psyched themselves beforehand.
Were they too emotional? To me, they lacked aggression in the first 30 minutes on Sunday and I've watched those minutes over and over in an attempt to find out why.
Ireland are very, very good, obviously, but the way they dominated physically (at Murrayfield!) was odd.
Whatever the rights and wrongs about Gregor Townsend's gameplan, it didn't stand a chance if it wasn't accompanied by a manic aggression. That's what I was expecting, but it was 17-0 before Scotland roused themselves. Too late.
Did they want it too much and exhaust themselves as a result? I don't know. It's a theory.
Stair asked: Why do so many so-called fans want rid of Gregor Townsend? Do they not remember the 20 years of chaos before he was appointed? Is there another top-class coach prepared to take on the poison chalice of Scotland? Be very careful what you wish for.
Tom answered: That's exactly the point Johnnie Beattie made on the BBC Scotland Rugby Podcast. Anybody who doesn't acknowledge how far Townsend has taken this team isn't worth listening to.
He's done really, really well to get Scotland to the point whereby they have dominated England for much of his reign. They're now well over the Wales hoodoo, they've been very competitive against France, they've beaten Australia four times out of five, they've played well in defeat in both games against New Zealand on Townsend's watch.
This has to be a balanced debate or else what's the point? The flip side to the positive argument is there's been two dismal World Cup campaigns, there's this on-going horror show against Ireland and a legitimate sense of 'has he taken this team as far as he can?'
It's too early to say that, but the next three games are very, very important. Even there, there are nuances.
Scotland are stymied by injuries right now. Sione Tuipulotu would be in the midfield, Dylan Richardson would be very much in the frame as back-up hooker, Scott Cummings would be in the second-row, Max Williamson would probably be in the 23 as would Andy Onyeama-Christie and possibly Josh Bayliss.
That's a lot of guys missing, which just makes the Townsend debate all the more complex.
Malcolm asked: Scotland show they can 'out rugby' most teams but get bullied by Ireland and South Africa. We match their skills and speed but do not have the power players they do. How do we address this?
Tom answered: On occasion, they do have the power, that's the frustrating thing. If they didn't have a lot of power they wouldn't have beaten England four times in a row.
For large chunks of the game against the Boks, they were very attritional. None of that was visible against Ireland on Sunday and that was part of why it was so disappointing.
I'd argue that if you could get Tuipulotu and Cummings into this team then your power factor increases substantially. If you then add Williamson, Onyeama-Christie and/or Bayliss to the squad then you're really getting there.
Jonny Gray and Grant Gilchrist have been unbelievable players for Scotland for many years but they're not offering nearly enough with ball in hand. Scotland needs to move on and bring in the carriers. Cummings has been a huge loss.
Image source, SNS




















