Randyll Tarly is an terrible commander

[Nyrhex]

We don't actually know what the Tyrell plan was, or whether they were bringing siege engines from Highgarden. They could have been told to prepare for an invasion of the stormlords, but felt they had to react to a thrust at Ashford. Also, there are lots more things we don't know about the battle that make judgments like this dubious. Robert isn't going to have left SE without a garrison when he made for Ashford either; blaming Tarly for failing to pursue and saying this led to siege is just ... well ... unfair is a word that springs to mind.

Robert knows the Reach is marching for the Stormlands front, Ashford is his plan to delay them until he wins in the Riverlands and the Crownlands. Siege engines are most likely to be in Mace's army, and like in ACOK the reason he took so long to reach Ashford. I'm not saying the siege is because of Tarly, there would have been a siege in any case, but if Robert is dead and his force destroyed, a small force can siege SE while the rest of the Stormlands are no longer a risk. Stannis isn't going anywhere, and the Stormlands army is no longer a threat, which means Mace can march his forces north to assist the Crownlands and the Dornish against the rest of the rebels.

Also Tarly might not have had anywhere near as many men as Robert, and may have felt a long pursuit very near the stormlords borders was a recipe for getting the van cut apart. If Robert's men fled in different directions, aiming for near by fortresses, you might not want to split up a force that is only 3-4,000 strong to chase them over long distances.

We don't know how many men Tarly had, or how many Robert had. We know that some Stormlords sided with the crown, while the Reach was entirely loyal to mace. It's fair to assume that if mace is going to war, he will take his full force. The van should be larger then any other van, and Robert should have less then Renly had in ACOK. More then Robert? Less then Robert? It doesn't matter if Tarly thinks he can deny Ashford but not destroy Robert, as he destroys Mace's chance at defeating Robert right there at Ashford.

Can't we just agree he likely won a battle with inferior numbers, against one of the best generals in westeros, which at least had the affect of making Robert's position in the stormlands fall apart.

We can agree that he won a battle, while we don't know the odds, against one of the most renowned generals in Westeros, which at least provided a morale boost to the loyalists and weakened Robert's position in the Stormlands.

I'm sorry if this is getting frustrating, but I think there are victorys that can mean nothing, and there can be defeats that can be regarded with praise. It's how the commander handeled himself before, during and after the battle that determins his capability, not a list of wins and defeats. I have said it earlier in this thread and I'd say it again, Tarly is not a terrible commander, but he never won battles he couldn't lose. No more, no less.

[Nyrhex]

I think there have been some well structured and thought out arguments against Tarly on this thread, but in the end I just do have to wonder: has Samwell made himself multiple accounts to rip the living daylights out of his dad on this board?

I think several people have said it, and I am also one of them, that the Tarly "bashing" isn't done because of his charchter as a father. Mostly, I think people don't like Sam either. I just do it because of my experiance in command and I like studying and analizing the battles and commanders in the books. Stannis realy appealed to me, as I read the books when I was a relatively fresh commander who had issues with leading at first, and I was placed in commanders course because I too was considered a good soldier. Tarly didn't appeal to me, because of my experiance with problematic soldiers in boot camp, and how he approahces to educating Sam. I assume most people here also like to analize the battles, and some look at it form thier own position, based on how they like the charachters.

No leader who GrrM has given a good reputation and some victories gets as much shit as Randyll Tarly.

Stannis? Robb? Tywin? IMHO Tarly just makes the lists everywhere based on charachters refering to him as finest soldier.

[King Aerys the Just]

We don't actually know what the Tyrell plan was, or whether they were bringing siege engines from Highgarden. They could have been told to prepare for an invasion of the stormlords, but felt they had to react to a thrust at Ashford. Also, there are lots more things we don't know about the battle that make judgments like this dubious. Robert isn't going to have left SE without a garrison when he made for Ashford either; blaming Tarly for failing to pursue and saying this led to siege is just ... well ... unfair is a word that springs to mind.

Also Tarly might not have had anywhere near as many men as Robert, and may have felt a long pursuit very near the stormlords borders was a recipe for getting the van cut apart. If Robert's men fled in different directions, aiming for near by fortresses, you might not want to split up a force that is only 3-4,000 strong to chase them over long distances.

Can't we just agree he likely won a battle with inferior numbers, against one of the best generals in westeros, which at least had the affect of making Robert's position in the stormlands fall apart.

:agree:

Exactly, good commander would know when to call off his troops to re-form for their primary mission of being a vanguard.

Actually this is somethign many commanders had problem with. Especially cavalry often tended to charge too far and spread too thin in pursuit, it was a common illness of British cavalry in the Napoleonics ofr example.

I agree. The enemy might be able to reform and counterattack, in which case a situation like you describe could get very dangerous, or they could have been feigning retreat all along.

[Chaircat Meow]

I'm sorry if this is getting frustrating, but I think there are victorys that can mean nothing, and there can be defeats that can be regarded with praise. It's how the commander handeled himself before, during and after the battle that determins his capability, not a list of wins and defeats. I have said it earlier in this thread and I'd say it again, Tarly is not a terrible commander, but he never won battles he couldn't lose. No more, no less.

I agree with this.

All I would say though is that if you are dealing with a non POV-attended character in Asoiaf you don't have that much information to go on. One is likely to misread authorial intent if we suppose all of these 'off scene' campaigns can be analyzed in the same detail as some of the battles where we are there 'first hand,' so to speak. There are all sorts of circumstances that could be supposed to vindicate Tarly from committing a blunder by engaging and routing Robert before Mace got there (some of which I mentioned) ... we just don't know the details. I would say when you combine Tarly's record with statements by other characters in the story about his abilities, Ashford (and the subsequent situation in the stormlands) is meant to be a credit to him. If GrrM set it up as a similar situation to the Robb-Edmure fiasco, where we are supposed to question Robb's argument about Edmure overstepping orders because Robb has a reason to strong arm him, I'd give the idea Ashford was an overall bungle more credence. GrrM didn't do that though.

Different ways of reading the books I guess ...

[The Mother of The Others]

re: terrible commander

whatever. twist and pervert things to suit yourself as is your right when you're the reader. But it's another thing to suggest in public that Randyll is a terrible commander. Now you can expect other people to pipe up with responses like "Is not!" Because by all accounts he's getting shit done at Maidenpool or wherever his command was when Brienne crossed his path. He's dealing effectively with the troops who misbehaved, and because of that the others will quickly learn that it's a good idea to learn some personal discipline real fast. And by all accounts he's an excellent soldier. And he made the right move by returning to the capital with great haste as soon as he heard things were looking unstable there. He's the one who stabilized the situation by getting there first. So.... :bs:

[kephv]

I think we have yet to see the true mettle that lives beneath the heart of his legend. He may be a more skilled player then we know as well. I'd wager he may even be one of the minor lords that the JC talked about them being able to get support from.

[Arkantos]

The OP already stated he wasn't being serious, twas a hyperbole. He just thinks that Randyll is overrated.

[ColdHandsLuke]

Response to OP:

Issue 2: I disagree with you on this one.

Tarly's insistance on attacking Stannis makes sense if you consider his real objective. He's remarkably loyal to Mace Tyrell and his plan fits his liege lord's end goals. Mace doesn't care about toppling the Lannisters as an end in itself. He wants his daughter to be queen. And that's pretty much it.

Say Renly's army heads right to KL and defeats the weakly guarded city. Stannis still has the better claim to the throne. While the war continues, that doesn't matter as much as which brother has the most troops. But afterwards, if the majority of the great houses (and not just Reach and Stormlands, but everywhere) want to uphold the laws of inheritance, it is possible that they'd give the throne to Stannis. So striking Stannis' outnumbered army first, with the plan to kill him in battle, would all but wrap up the crown for Margaery (shadow babies notwithstanding).

So while Tarly's advice isn't what's best for defeating the Lannisters, it is what's best for reaching Mace's goal.

Issue 3: I agree with you.

This should have been a devastating victory. The conditions were ripe, but Tarly just doesn't pull it off. Whether you want to call it an ambush or not, it was definitely wasn't the win it should have been.

Issue 1: Mixed feelings.

"Randyll Tarly is great." Is only half of what everyone seems to say about him. The real message is, "Mace Tyrell is a terrible commander, but at least for his sake, Randyll Tarly is great."

This favorable comparison is probably the biggest reason why he's overhyped. Mace Tyrell will screw up just about anything if given the chance. Just by ensuring full on discipline (which is a HUGE deal and Tarly should get credit for this) and his favorite strategy: attacking head on and then taking time to regroup, he fixes plenty of Mace's mistakes.

[Chaircat Meow]

Robert knows the Reach is marching for the Stormlands front, Ashford is his plan to delay them until he wins in the Riverlands and the Crownlands. Siege engines are most likely to be in Mace's army, and like in ACOK the reason he took so long to reach Ashford. I'm not saying the siege is because of Tarly, there would have been a siege in any case, but if Robert is dead and his force destroyed, a small force can siege SE while the rest of the Stormlands are no longer a risk. Stannis isn't going anywhere, and the Stormlands army is no longer a threat, which means Mace can march his forces north to assist the Crownlands and the Dornish against the rest of the rebels.

We don't know how many men Tarly had, or how many Robert had. We know that some Stormlords sided with the crown, while the Reach was entirely loyal to mace. It's fair to assume that if mace is going to war, he will take his full force. The van should be larger then any other van, and Robert should have less then Renly had in ACOK. More then Robert? Less then Robert? It doesn't matter if Tarly thinks he can deny Ashford but not destroy Robert, as he destroys Mace's chance at defeating Robert right there at Ashford.

There are a good number of reasons Tarly's attack at Ashford could have been in accord with Mace's objectives. One scenario could be that Tarly saw a chance to defeat the Stormlander army when they were unprepared and not drawn up in their ranks properly; a disadvantage the reachlanders would not enjoy if they waited for Mace. Alternatively, the Tyrells might have come on Robert unexpectedly, thinking he would withdraw in the face of their larger army, meaning that waiting for a really decisive battle with the rest of the army was never going to have been an option: Robert would just retreat. Finally, we could suppose Robert was planning to intercept the Tyrells at some sort of bottleneck/strongly defensible position we don't know about, (which Mace wouldn't want to attack) and that Tarly therefore felt it necessary to exploit the fact he had caught Robert before he could achieve this. The odds of getting a really decisive encounter in medieval warfare (where most armies tended to avoid each other in most campaigns), is always relatively low, so Tarly would be more than justified to exploit his opportunity in any of these scenarios. All of this assumes it was even Tarly who came upon Robert and decided to engage ...

To get to the idea Tarly had a bad understanding of the campaign's overall strategy you have to have a pretty specific picture of the contours of that campaign, which, imho, we just aren't given. Ultimately, to say he denied Mace the opportunity to destroy Robert at Ashford is overlooking the fact that, unless GrrM reveals more information, the consequences of Robert's repulse at Ashford are the likely cause of the disappearance of the stormlander armies; either because the royal army ran down the fleeing stormlanders, or because with his plan to stop the Tyrell host gone, and his host demoralized, Robert could no longer march his men north.

[Victor227]

Heck, even in Tarly's advice before the battle between Renly and Stannis was good. Strike before dawn and kill Stannis. He didn't care that Renly had Stannis outnumbered 4-1 with an absurd difference in quality of troops. He didn't care about the politics of the situation or its value as a propaganda piece, he wanted to lead the charge and defeat the enemy in the most effective manner possible. While no one suspected a shadow baby, Tarly had the right idea. - Likewise with Rowan who brought it up to begin with. The Reach has teeth, and those two (both were suggested by Kevan for handship in finishing the war), are pretty good examples of it.

[Despot]

Well, we simply don't know enough about battles at Ashford and Duskendale. All we know for sure is that Tarly won both times. We don't know how he won; did he use some brilliant tactical maneuver or just smashed the enemy using numbers or sturdiness of his cavalry; or both. All we know is, that at the Duskendale there were "heavy loses" at the both sides, and that Robert wasn't defeated again. We don't know exact circumstances.

Concerning numbers ; Tarly probably had larger numbers at Duskendale, but not at Ashford ; I may be just a little girl inexperienced in the matter of tactics :drunk: , but I'm convinced that vanguard - even Tyrell's vanguard - couldn't be larger than 5000 mounted man. Vanguard is just a part of an army, something like elite part, but not strong in numbers. That's my impression.

Anyway, because we don't know much about the battles, we can speculate a lot; there is a lot of space for wishful thinking - so some could say that Tarly is a military genius, and other that he is just good with numbers. But, all we know for sure is, that other characters - Kevan or Stannis - consider him one of the best commanders in the realm. That's all.

(Recently I saw the thread dedicated to Garlan Tyrell; the point of OP was that he is not one of the best fighters in realm, when he is clearly worse than Sandor ( ?) or Gregor Clegane. That was wishful thinking at it's best. This is much better, with some logic and arguments, but still - we simply don't know enough).

I'm sorry for grammar or other mistakes, I'm not a native speaker. Sorry.

[Riptide]

Is anyone going to address what I said on page 2!?

[Chaircat Meow]

Is anyone going to address what I said on page 3!?

No, because you didn't say anything on page 3. I just checked.

[Lord Ben]

- 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.

We don't know that for sure so you're only speculating. But even if it was true it doesn't mean what you think it means. Part of being a good commander is knowing where to meet the enemy and how to get all your guys to the same place at the same time. Even if it were true that he had double the number of troops it doesn't mean he was poor for it. Logistics is an important part of war and being a good commander.

That said, we have what people in the world far more familiar with the situation have as an opinion on Tarly and we have a couple half known items of information to compare it to. Clearly the people around him consider him a good commander and I don't see enough convincing information to overwrite everything they know.

[Valyria's Finest]

1) Having more troops doesn't make you a terrible commander. And you say Reach levies were fresh and i say they were green. You could just see this as Robert's troops were experienced and Reachmen had no idea what they were doing.

I can see the logic in this. Stannis said in the show that the larger army wins 9 times out of 10. Tarly had to be just a good enough commander to take advantage of his numerical strength.

2) Stannis really became a big threat. And even with a small army a man like Stannis Baratheon can be a trouble. He might still get the support of the Iron Bank or he could accept Robb Stark's Kingdom and beg him for the throne. Stannis had a better claim and this makes him a big threat.

I agree with that as well. We know that Stannis that is stubborn has a mind for tactics.

3) Lord Tarly let the Northman retreat so Gregor Clagene could crush them. And even it was not winning a victory does not make you a terrible commander.

I disagree with the notion that Tarly is a "terrible" commander- that language seems a bit loaded to me. I can, however, see the argument that he is overrated.

[StarkDragon]

Randyll isn't a contemplative character. He is prone to rash decisions, as Sam informs the reader early on, with his interactions with Jon.

He doesn't want to deal with the heart of the issue, he wants it done and dealt with, immediately.

At least, that's how I figured it.

[Batman]

Hold up guys, I haven't finished my tyrion lannister is stupid thread

There are times when that is not a joke

[Chaircat Meow]

I have a 'Sam is actually skinny' thread in the making.

[Arkantos]

I have a 'Sam is actually skinny' thread in the making.

Maybe he is, WoW isn't out yet, but GRRM might've already written that Sam has lost a lot of weight.

[Chaircat Meow]

Maybe he is, WoW isn't out yet, but GRRM might've already written that Sam has lost a lot of weight.

Why of course. That was one of the arguments I was going to use ...