Randyll Tarly is an terrible commander

[Minstral]

I'm with the OP somewhat. True Tarly did win at Ashford and Duskendale so he can't be terrible, but neither are they significant enough battles or victories to label him a "great" commander.

His reputation comes only from what other characters say about him, when / if we see him leading a force we will be able to judge better.

If anything,his position near the top of the great commanders lists - after 2 victories - just shows how lacking Westeros is in "great" military leadership.

People tend to equate "great" or knowledge of war with winning battles in the medieval context. Sure, a commander should know what is necessary for winning a battle under the right conditions, but medieval warfare was more defined by attrition than the "great' battles through sieges and the intentional devastation of the land.

[Tony Soprano]

I totally disagree with the OP.

Randyll Tarly is regarded as one of the best commander, not just by these forums, but by the people of Westeros as well.

Almost everyone in the books thinks that Tarly is one of Westeros' best and brightest when it comes to marshal ability. And the whole OP is based just on speculation and downplaying, derived from hate for him.

[The Mountain That Flies]

First, wasn't the decision to siege Storm's End made by Mace Tyrell, not Randyll? It makes sense on a conventional level, since capturing your opponent's base will tremendously weaken their position (plus since JonCon was on his way to the Riverlands with a Royalist force, they could have figured Robert stood no chance).

Second, while yes, Randyll may have had a slight edge in numbers when he fought Robert, this isn't always a clear indicator of victory. The Royalists had more troops than the Rebels at the Trident, after all, and Robb Stark was continuously outnumbered by the Lannisters. In short, I don;t think having a lot of good men negates Tarly's tactical prowess.

Finally, Duskendale. While this was delivered to Tarly on a silver tray, you can't fight a group of Northmen and not expect them to defend themselves harshly. Of course Randyll took losses, especially since the Northmen may have realized they were trapped and decided to Thermopylae that place. While he probably could have mitigated his losses a bit better, it's really no worse than winning a 7 vs. 3 fight by a tower and only leaving with 2 men alive.

OP, you need to understand what makes a good commander. Tactics, innovation, and flexibility are important. but medieval armies lived and died on their discipline, and Randyll was an unquestioned mater of this. He's regarded as a great military commander not just because of his victories, but also the way in which he manages his armies.

Oh, and Tarly was right about needing to finish off Stannis when he spoke to Renly. As the eventual hole in Renly's throat attested to.

[Nyrhex]

I wouldn't call him terrible, but he is by far overhyped well beyond his actual capability. At Ashford he proved to lack patiance and charged without the rest of the army, ensuring Robert had a chance to escape, and didn't even bother giving chase. He also failed to understand his CO's objective, the operative map and simply charged out of impatiance, thus dooming the loyalist cause. Had he waited, Mace could use his force to engage Robert while Tarly could have flanked and destroyed Robert, preventing escape.

At Duskendale he had an army with him, yet still managed to mess up an ambush so Gregor had to intervene and help him finish the job. This despite the fact that the entire ambush was rigged by the enemy commander...

He is concerned as the finest soldier by Kevan, but Kevan only has his side to choose from, as in, the finest Lannister/Tyrell soldier. Not exactly a great many fine soldiers in the West, other then Marbrand and Prester (off the top of my head), but they are too low of rank. In the Reach there is Garlan, but he is already pre-occupied with the Ironborn.

[PonchoBear]

Spartans in Westeros ... Not until the Unsullied land my friend, then you will see people Thermopylae'ing it up

[PonchoBear]

As for the finest soldier, soldier does not = commander, the greatest soldier could mean he is the most disciplined man he knows, the greatest warrior he knows (Any takes on this, we know he wields a greatsword called Heartbane and fights in the Vanguard, the most dangerous role on the battlefield) or just that he is the greatest military thinker he knows. I am disinclined to support the last one as Kevan constantly looked up to Tywin.

[Jordouche]

He's a good commander because George tells us he is.

Simple as that.

[Nyrhex]

He's a good commander because George tells us he is.

Simple as that.

Not so simple. GRRM does not say he is, charachters in the books say he is. Charachters who can be wrong. But more importantly, we the readers critisize charachters based on thier actions and words, rather then on what we are told. People bash charachters who are mentioned as good because of bad things they have done, and praise bad charachters for good things they have done. If Tarly is called a fine soldier in the books and considered a strong commander who can be a good hand, but from what we see of him his justice is not fair, his command in the two battles that we hear he leads being questioned, we the readers can call him a bad commander and say that in our opinion he is not worthy of being hand. GRRM can say that he is a good commander, but GRRM is not a commander, and does not know how to portray one. Same as GRRM not being a woman and I hear from several female posters how he writes women not as good as he writes men.

[The Frost Wolf]

I totally disagree with the OP.

Randyll Tarly is regarded as one of the best commander, not just by these forums, but by the people of Westeros as well.

Almost everyone in the books thinks that Tarly is one of Westeros' best and brightest when it comes to marshal ability. And the whole OP is based just on speculation and downplaying, derived from hate for him.

I thank you for your opinion and non-insulting manner. If someone disagrees with me, then fair enough.

But I don't hate Randyll Tarly. Perhaps my use of "terrible" is more of a shock-factor tactic. I should've gone with "he's overhyped" or something like that.

[Naathi Prince]

Everyone has stated how awesome Randyll Tarly is pretty frequently in the books, and we actually see how well he keeps his men disciplined when Brienne stops at Maidenpool.

[The Frost Wolf]

No, wrong. Thses are not facts. This is just your perception of the events that occured. I am sorry, this looks very thought of, but it`s wrong.

All I can say is thumbsup for attempt.

So the fact that Duskendale was a pyrrhic victory, that Tarly did advise Renly to attack Stannis and that Robert had just fought three battles is just .... wrong? Please explain WHY you think I'm wrong, rather than "No, wrong."

How do you expect to get anywhere with that? You can't just say that I'm wrong then not explain why.

And that last line was very condescending. Thanks for that too.

[The Frost Wolf]

You're second point is totally invalid. Stannis did become a big threat as Randyll predicted.

And while Ashford weren't complete victory he would probably have been outnumbered (it is estimated that the Stormlands can mass about 45,000 men).

As to the siege of Storm's End, the reach did no want to fight a war so they pulled out. They got very close to what they wanted in the end, minimal loss of men though their power in King's landing was somewhat decreased for 17 years.

This character bashing is starting to get ridiculous. I could understand Tywin and Robb but this one just doesn't make any sense.

Any character bashing is not only ridiculous than also unproductive. If people would only start making serious analysis... Well, there are coupe of them worth mentioning (Sansa, Arya, Tyrion)

I am not character basing and I don't hate Randyll. I'm just saying he's overhyped.

I think Randyll Tarly excells as a vanguard commander but judging by Duskendale perhaps he is overly agressive? A man better suited for a minor command, the vanguard or some such, rather then command of an entire army. But in any case he is experienced enough, there are probably not many that can match in this regard. In any case his reputation is probably out of proportion, but that is the case with many commanders out there..

I think that in some ways he can be compared to John Bell Hood, who fought at Gettysburg;

http://en.wikipedia..../John_Bell_Hood

"Hood had a reputation for bravery and aggressiveness that sometimes bordered on recklessness." and

"Hood became increasingly ineffective as he was promoted to lead larger, independent commands late in the war."

Perhaps that is indeed stretching it but still..

Probably the only constructive reply I've gotten.

[Naathi Prince]

Probably the only constructive reply I've gotten.

It is usually hard to get good replies when you posit silly things.

[Talleyrand]

1. Mace Tyrell's greatest accomplishment, giving Robert Baratheon his only defeat during the rebellion at Ashford. Now we all know that Randyll's van smashed Robert before Mace even got there, so hats off to Randyll for this victory, right? No.

- He's got the power of the Reach in his van, that means armoured lances, heavy horse and experienced knights. Renly's mounted strength (more on that later) at Storm's End numbered give or take 20,000 (including Stormlanders). So let's say Randyll only has around 10,000-15,000. Meanwhile, Robert's host had just won three consecutive battles at Summerhall. In those three battles he would've lost a considerable amount of men, surprise attack or no. And we know the Stormlands can't raise that large a host compared to other areas (like the Reach), so Randyll would have been crushing Robert's thousands with double or even triple his numbers.

This is a false assumption. 20,000 is the entire mounted contingent of both the Reach and the Stormlands so it does not stand to reason that the van of the reach is 15,000. You're taking one figure and using it to invent one that has little relevance to it. The van is not simply all your mounted soldiers that would be silly and makes no tactical sense.

Then the Tyrells moved to Storm's End. He needed to follow up this victory with something more impacting on the war other than being able to say that they dealt Robert his only defeat. If they had pursued Robert and captured him before he got to Stoney Sept then the war would be over. But no, they moved onto Storm's End instead. While this does cut Robert off from his castle, supplies and fresh troops, it was an odd move. They must've known that the North, Vale and Riverlands had risen in Rebellion too, while they're acting like it's just Robert they should be worrying about. Being one of the Tyrell's main commanders, Randyll most like had input on the decision to move onto Storm's End and to not pursue Robert.

How is this a failing of Randyll, he'll have some input yes but it doesn't mean he makes the decisions. Mace does, and if Renly dismisses his advise at Storm's End I don't see why Mace who's even stupider wouldn't.

3. Randyll's pyhrric victory at Duskendale in aSoS. Randyll has the advantage of more troops, having travelled less distance, being mounted and even the element of surprise. He pens up the Northern foot at Duskendale and wins. Great, except he had HEAVY LOSSES.

You seem to misunderstand the meaning of Pyrrhic. It does not simply mean that you had heavy losses. It means your losses are so great that you cannot continue to fight another battle.

Robert escaped.... And not only that, (Ser Helman Tallhart was slain to be fair) but Robett Glover and parts of the Northern army escapes!

Off course they escape. That's a bloody stupid point. People always escape from battle both in RL and in this series. Are you under the impression that every enemy dies in a victorious battle. Bolton manages to escape with most of his men from Green Fork. Forley Prester escapes with some couple thousand men from the Battle of the Camps. Stannis escapes the Blackwater again with a few thousand men. The only battle we've seen where there has been no word of a large amount of the enemy making an organised withdraw is the Battle of Oxcross - where one side got attack from a magical goat path in the middle of the night.

[Ser Pink of Floyd]

Am I the only person here who doubts that any army would have a vanguard of 10-15k soldiers, I reckon its closer to 5-7K which is still a large amount. Most armies wont field more then 20k due to logistics and the time it takes to actually gather men and make them move great distances, and then factor in that most will also keep back several thousand troops as a reserve to move around the battle for various tactical needs. Granted the Reach has the larges pool of soldiers but its also one of the largest of the 7 Kingdoms. Example, Robb Stark took a shade under 20k south, and we know that there is many more soldiers still in The North, as time required him to move south and he didnt have time to gather everyone, i'd wager the same happened for all armies involved in the Rebellion.

Tarly IS a very good commander, otherwise other characters wouldnt speak so highly of him and his military prowess.

[Thendel]

2. aCoK, Catelyn, p. 436

"I say that Stannis is a danger to you," Lord Randyll Tarly declared. "Leave him unblooded and he will only grow stronger, while your own power is diminished in battle. The Lannisters will not be beaten in a day. By the time you are done with them, Lord Stannis may be as strong as you ... or stronger."

Um, what? Am I missing the secret House that can field 20,000 (and more) troops which is just waiting to support Stannis? Cause if so, it hasn't been revealed. Stannis could really use your help now, secret House. There are no troops left who can flock to Stannis. Crownlands are with the Lannisters, Dorne is neutral (or eventually going to support Renly as Renly believes), the Stormlands and Reach have all gone over to Renly. So in the absence of this secret Stannis-loving army, Randyll was just talking bullshit to get Renly to like him and side with him rather than Mathis Rowan (who's plan of just leaving Stannis and moving on to King's Landing sounded much better). Wouldn't the well-being and best possible plan take priority over rather than doing the irrational, more damaging option? Not for Tarly. Most likely he wanted lands and favours from Renly when he came into his throne and that's why he appealed to Renly's impulsive nature. Serving his own selfish ambitions rather than doing the best thing potentially for his king/troops.

A "secret" house with about 20K troops... Uh, how about the Vale? For what Tarly knows, the Arryns could well end up declaring for Stannis, in time.

As for the battle of Ashford: It wasn't a rout, Robert was able to retreat in good order, which makes pursuit and capture a good deal more troublesome than you lay it out to be.

[The Frost Wolf]

This is a false assumption. 20,000 is the entire mounted contingent of both the Reach and the Stormlands so it does not stand to reason that the van of the reach is 15,000. You're taking one figure and using it to invent one that has little relevance to it. The van is not simply all your mounted soldiers that would be silly and makes no tactical sense.

How is this a failing of Randyll, he'll have some input yes but it doesn't mean he makes the decisions. Mace does, and if Renly dismisses his advise at Storm's End I don't see why Mace who's even stupider wouldn't.

You seem to misunderstand the meaning of Pyrrhic. It does not simply mean that you had heavy losses. It means your losses are so great that you cannot continue to fight another battle.

Off course they escape. That's a bloody stupid point. People always escape from battle both in RL and in this series. Are you under the impression that every enemy dies in a victorious battle. Bolton manages to escape with most of his men from Green Fork. Forley Prester escapes with some couple thousand men from the Battle of the Camps. Stannis escapes the Blackwater again with a few thousand men. The only battle we've seen where there has been no word of a large amount of the enemy making an organised withdraw is the Battle of Oxcross - where one side got attack from a magical goat path in the middle of the night.

Watch the video, "Armies of the Seven Kingdoms" by Westeros and you'll find that the Stormland's can raise a host of 25,000 max.

the Stormland part starts around 7.45. I find this pretty accurate, Renly's army was mainly made up of Reachmen rather than Stormlanders. Even when he lists his Lords bannermen, there's only a few significant Stormland houses. Although, that being said perhaps I'm overestimating the Reach, maybe you could say 8,000 - 10,000 instead. But I think that's being modest.

Apologies for the Pyrrhic reference, I thought it meant that they sustained heavy losses. On the ASOIAF wiki, it describes many battles as being "Pyrrhic victories" and I suppose that's where I was mislead.

And your last is pretty condescending and rude, but most of the replies on here are too so what the hell. No, I don't think that people can't escape when another side wins. But Randyll had the Northmen penned up at Duskendale, unlike the Blackwater, where the Lyseni remained in the bay incase of escape, unlike the Green Fork, where Roose's caution paid off and unlike the Camps, where the castle was assaulted from three sides and blocked off from each other. If there was to be a total victory there then one side would literally have to stay and fight to the death rather than retreat.

[The Frost Wolf]

A "secret" house with about 20K troops... Uh, how about the Vale? For what Tarly knows, the Arryns could well end up declaring for Stannis, in time.

As for the battle of Ashford: It wasn't a rout, Robert was able to retreat in good order, which makes pursuit and capture a good deal more troublesome than you lay it out to be.

The Vale have no ties to Stannis whatsoever, if anyone they would rally for Robb.

If Randyll had pursued Robert, then he would have been caught between the Tyrells and Jon Connington, making a capture easy.

[The Frost Wolf]

Am I the only person here who doubts that any army would have a vanguard of 10-15k soldiers, I reckon its closer to 5-7K which is still a large amount. Most armies wont field more then 20k due to logistics and the time it takes to actually gather men and make them move great distances, and then factor in that most will also keep back several thousand troops as a reserve to move around the battle for various tactical needs. Granted the Reach has the larges pool of soldiers but its also one of the largest of the 7 Kingdoms. Example, Robb Stark took a shade under 20k south, and we know that there is many more soldiers still in The North, as time required him to move south and he didnt have time to gather everyone, i'd wager the same happened for all armies involved in the Rebellion.

Tarly IS a very good commander, otherwise other characters wouldnt speak so highly of him and his military prowess.

Watch this video, should explain to you about the armies of different regions and why I came to my conclusion.

[Riptide]

I totally agree with the OP; he's the one with direct evidence while it's other character's opinions that are the second hand accounts. I have a few things to add:

1. On Robert's escape after Ashford, of course they could have trapped him. 500 km lay between Robert and the Riverlands, including 2 rivers and the fortresses of Bitterbridge and Longtable. The mystery is how the hell he bypassed all that!

2. Duskendale: we are never told how many men Randyll has, but it could easily be in the 20,000 to 50,000 range given the number of Reachmen in King's Landing after the Blackwater. That's only 10X the Stark force. Suffering heavy casualties with such odds is quite an attachment.

3. Even if both the Vale and Dorne join with Stannis (which obviously won't happen) Renly still vastly outnumbers him, and Roose and Tywin lie between the Vale and Renly.