Battle of the ford: Robbs reaction.

[Jon Flowers]

At best, Robb's orders to Edmure were unclear and at worst, they were downright misleading. This is especially the case when one considers that they had the luxury of secure, face to face communications on the subject. Also, while Robb might be capable of making such a mistake with his limited experience, Ser Brynden at least should have known better. To base one's whole campaign upon a particular subordinate, not known for his sound decision making, precisely interpreting a set of widely discretionary orders seems to be extremely poor judgment in the least. This is why I believe that, having seen the missed opportunity for what it was only in hindsight, Robb and Ser Brynden sought to exploit the situation by blaming Lord Edmure in order to help make the Frey problem go away. Had Edmure not been needed as marriage bait, I think it likely that Robb would have blamed only himself, and rightly so. I don't think that the King Robb planned the failure of his campaign with the object of forcing his uncle into a marriage, but rather that it was his attempt to salvage a bad situation and that he only blamed Edmure in the manner that he did to that end.

[Barty]

Nope. The first anyone will have heard of that is when Edmure reports the result of BwB. Clearly Stannis was on his way to KL when Cat got back to Rivverun but no one knew that. Robb didn't either.

Maybe - its never really stated in the books. But from what I recall Oxcross happened right after or right before Renly's death(We hear of Oxcross first in Sansa's chapter and in the very next chapter Renly dies). Word of Renly's death spread very quickly(Thanks to Cortnay Penrose's ravens) and it was clear that with Renly dead and Renly's armies following Stannis, Stannis would make a move on KL.

We also know that Robb took the Ashemark with his full strength - its probable that Robb got word of Renly's death when a raven arrived at the Ashemark. Robb did use the ravens at Ashemark to send a letter to Bran(and possibly one to Edmure with his vague orders). It's only after the Ashemark that Robb truly starts plundering the west - till that point his army was kept together but after he takes the Ashemark, something changes and he decides to break up his army into multiple units to completely pillage the west. This is obviously done to inflict maximum damage since fall of his bannermen's castles, loss of his goldmines, loss of his cattle and raids on his coast all happening at the same time would leave Tywin with no option but to come home.

To summarize - The Plan was made at the Ashemark when Robb got word of Renly's death and he bet(quite rightly) that Stannis would want to move quickly on KL. This explains why after the Ashemark Robb divided his army into different units - giving each orders to do maximum damage to the west.

[Barty]

At best, Robb's orders to Edmure were unclear and at worst, they were downright misleading. This is especially the case when one considers that they had the luxury of secure, face to face communications on the subject. Also, while Robb might be capable of making such a mistake with his limited experience, Ser Brynden at least should have known better. To base one's whole campaign upon a particular subordinate, not known for his sound decision making, precisely interpreting a set of widely discretionary orders seems to be extremely poor judgment in the least. This is why I believe that, having seen the missed opportunity for what it was only in hindsight, Robb and Ser Brynden sought to exploit the situation by blaming Lord Edmure in order to help make the Frey problem go away. Had Edmure not been needed as marriage bait, I think it likely that Robb would have blamed only himself, and rightly so. I don't think that the King Robb planned the failure of his campaign with the object of forcing his uncle into a marriage, but rather that it was his attempt to salvage a bad situation and that he only blamed Edmure in the manner that he did to that end.

Did Edmure need clear orders?? It was a simple situation - the enemy which has long ravaged your homeland is now leaving to go home, why on earth would you want to stop it?? Edmure should have rejoiced seeing Tywin leave - or if he thought Tywin might defeat Robb he should have joined up with Bolton(together they easily outnumbered Tywin) and then followed Tywin into the west. Why stop your enemy from leaving and force him to stay on in your land?? "War is the only game in which it doesnt pay to have the home-court advantage"(cant remember who said that)

I dont argue that the orders were unclear but Edmure did not fight that battle thinking he was following orders - he fought because he was glory hunting and it was not a direct violation of his orders(thus giving him an excuse to go glory hunting).

[Blackfish Tully]

At best, Robb's orders to Edmure were unclear and at worst, they were downright misleading. This is especially the case when one considers that they had the luxury of secure, face to face communications on the subject.

Secure face to face communication? Robb was in the Westerlands and Edmure was in Riverrun so there is no way they had face to face communication. For Robb to tell Edmure of their plan he would have to send out a stong force (which would weaken him) through enemy territory and hope they don't get captured and reveal his plans to Tywin.

[E-Ro]

Did Edmure need clear orders??

Of fucking course he needed clear orders. No matter the quality of ones subordinates every field leader not in overall command needs clear consice orders. It's is a basic thing and a massive mistake on Robb's part for not being clearer.

I can't beleive the things said to absolve little Robby of all his mistakes, so now leaders shouldn't give clear orders. Yeah ok, right, in no universe does that make any sense at all.

Face it, Robb was good, but he fucked up with this. The blame is on him, no one else.

[Erkan12]

At best, Robb's orders to Edmure were unclear and at worst, they were downright misleading. This is especially the case when one considers that they had the luxury of secure, face to face communications on the subject. Also, while Robb might be capable of making such a mistake with his limited experience, Ser Brynden at least should have known better. To base one's whole campaign upon a particular subordinate, not known for his sound decision making, precisely interpreting a set of widely discretionary orders seems to be extremely poor judgment in the least. This is why I believe that, having seen the missed opportunity for what it was only in hindsight, Robb and Ser Brynden sought to exploit the situation by blaming Lord Edmure in order to help make the Frey problem go away. Had Edmure not been needed as marriage bait, I think it likely that Robb would have blamed only himself, and rightly so. I don't think that the King Robb planned the failure of his campaign with the object of forcing his uncle into a marriage, but rather that it was his attempt to salvage a bad situation and that he only blamed Edmure in the manner that he did to that end.

The reason 'hold the riverrun' order was enough, since Edmure demand from Robb, send their bannermen to their location (it is another stupid act too it caused extinction of House Darry but nevermind) so because of that they didn't even know Edmure has 10.000 men.

Edmure should ask them before calling the banners.

Also still some saying they blaming him for marriage. This means both Robb and Blackfish are liar. And interesting that ; not Robb, not Blackfish, Catelyn did the marriage propose. So for this logic, Robb or Blackfish should.

Of fucking course he needed clear orders. No matter the quality of ones subordinates every field leader not in overall command needs clear consice orders. It's is a basic thing and a massive mistake on Robb's part for not being clearer.

I can't beleive the things said to absolve little Robby of all his mistakes, so now leaders shouldn't give clear orders. Yeah ok, right, in no universe does that make any sense at all.

Face it, Robb was good, but he fucked up with this. The blame is on him, no one else.

Problem is ; Edmure himself accepting his fault.

Not only Robb, Blackfish and even Cat blaming him...

But strange that you guys are not accepting.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

sorry double post

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

I really doubt that the plan Brynden spoke about actually existed. It is based on one unlikely and two ridiculous assumptions:

1. Tywin will abandon Kings Landing (well, he made a move to do so, but it was nothing on which Robb could definitely count).

3. The Tyrells with their 80k-host will watch quietly as the man they nearly starved to death takes the throne and executes their allies.

3. Robb and Brynden have better knowledge of the Westerlands than Tywin. (Let's say he is the one who places la few thousand men from his >20k host in that easily defendable position on the Golden Road , while the others participate in the "merry chase"? What happens to the masterplan?)

The fact that Edmure seemingly accepted his "mistake" (iirc), tells more about poor Edmure than about anything else.

[Usrnmhsnomning]

Of fucking course he needed clear orders. No matter the quality of ones subordinates every field leader not in overall command needs clear consice orders. It's is a basic thing and a massive mistake on Robb's part for not being clearer.

I can't beleive the things said to absolve little Robby of all his mistakes, so now leaders shouldn't give clear orders. Yeah ok, right, in no universe does that make any sense at all.

Face it, Robb was good, but he fucked up with this. The blame is on him, no one else.

"Don't leave to hunt, nor gather and forage food". Clearly Robb didn't do his duty and tell Edmure letter for letter exactly what to do. "Piss at noon and twilight, not before or after". Edmure received his orders. As a soldier, as a subject, he should have obeyed those orders. "Hold Riverrun". The Red Fork is not Riverrun. The Green Fork is not Riverrun. The Trident is not Riverrun. The Riverlands is not Riverrun. People literally have to stretch and say "Well by defending the Green Fork he was defending Riverrun by preventing an army from laying siege to it!". Does Edmure make this argument? Does he make any sort of argument about it at all? No. What does Edmure do? He admits his fault and tries to make amends. The man in question himself KNOWS he was wrong. So why on earth should the opinion and stretched defense of a few Edmure apologists trump the actual factual text and the actions of the people in question?

Edmure was told to HOLD RIVERRUN. Edmure does NOT say he HELD RIVERRUN by defending the Red Fork. So why should you?

[E-Ro]

Problem is ; Edmure himself accepting his fault.

Not only Robb, Blackfish and even Cat blaming him...

But strange that you guys are not accepting.

Yeah, he accepts blame after being bullied and blamed for a mistake that is clearly not his. What is he going to do? Tell Robb to go to hell and then go join stannis or tywin?

I really doubt that the plan Brynden spoke about actually existed. It is based on one unlikely and two ridiculous assumptions:

1. Tywin will abandon Kings Landing

3. The Tyrells with their 80k-host will watch quietly as the man they nearly starved to death takes the throne.

3. Robb and Brynden have better knowledge of the Westerlands than Tywin.

Agreed. And if there was any sort of plan, it's chances of success are extremely low. When commanders gamble it is generally accepted that the gamble should have some reasonable chance of success.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

Problem is ; Edmure himself accepting his fault.

Not only Robb, Blackfish and even Cat blaming him...

But strange that you guys are not accepting.

No one is in a position to blame King Robb. If he thinks he was in the right he is not going to back down.

[E-Ro]

"Don't leave to hunt, nor gather and forage food". Clearly Robb didn't do his duty and tell Edmure letter for letter exactly what to do. "Piss at noon and twilight, not before or after". Edmure received his orders. As a soldier, as a subject, he should have obeyed those orders. "Hold Riverrun". The Red Fork is not Riverrun. The Green Fork is not Riverrun. The Trident is not Riverrun. The Riverlands is not Riverrun. People literally have to stretch and say "Well by defending the Green Fork he was defending Riverrun by preventing an army from laying siege to it!". Does Edmure make this argument? Does he make any sort of argument about it at all? No. What does Edmure do? He admits his fault and tries to make amends. The man in question himself KNOWS he was wrong. So why on earth should the opinion and stretched defense of a few Edmure apologists trump the actual factual text and the actions of the people in question?

Edmure was told to HOLD RIVERRUN. Edmure does NOT say he HELD RIVERRUN by defending the Red Fork. So why should you?

I would hate to break this to you, but he did hold riverrun. The castle didn't fall.

[Minstral]

Stannis is a far better soldier than tywin. And there would not be any room to negotiate as robb has with lannisters. Even the jaime lannisters card has no more value. Lannisters may let robb be king of the north; stannis never, it is bend the knee or die, and robb knows this by his mother... So in what scenario you want to aid stannis taking KL?

Strength of personality does not mean that the positiion would have been strong after taking KL. It's exactlythat reason he is so despised by the realm at large that others would be unwilling to bend to him. If he sits his rear on that throne he would still need to contend with those that dispute his rule first. And the casualties he was taking from the assault and the opposition that would likely come against him is a little more than substantial.

[TheSmilingKnight11]

Robb was in the middle of the Westerlands at that time so getting a message to Edmure would have been difficult and dangerous. When Robb left the Riverlands Edmure had sent the Riverlords back to their castles so in Robb's mind the thought that Edmure would call the banners and pull the soldiers out of the Twins to attack Tywin just wasn't a possibility.

Yea your right. And Edmure was just trying to help their cause.

[Señor de la Tormenta]

I ask, what would have happened if tyrells didnt join tywin and he was beated up by the mannis in front of KL walls??? Everyone would say, what a plan edmure! You prevented tywin lannister to get back to his lands and build back his power... Yeah cause then robb would be facing two enemys at the same time: tywin at the west and "bend the knee or die" at the east....of course this wont work in case you say to me robb knew about the tyrells, but in that case stannis wouldnt took KL with or without tywin....

So the question is, is robbs great plan to have stannis at east, tywin at west and ironmen at north?...

[Barty]

Of fucking course he needed clear orders. No matter the quality of ones subordinates every field leader not in overall command needs clear consice orders. It's is a basic thing and a massive mistake on Robb's part for not being clearer.

I can't beleive the things said to absolve little Robby of all his mistakes, so now leaders shouldn't give clear orders. Yeah ok, right, in no universe does that make any sense at all.

Face it, Robb was good, but he fucked up with this. The blame is on him, no one else.

The orders do not come into this. Edmure never justified his actions saying that he was only following orders - he was acting outside of his orders. The order was to hold riverrun and Riverun never came under threat. Riverrun was never threatened by Tywin - he was just going home. Edmure did what he thought was best - this backfired but this is clearly on Edmure. If he thought he was following Robb's orders when he engaged Tywin - then I would have sympathized with him, but this was not about orders since the orders were to hold riverrun and riverrun was never attacked(or under threat of an attack). This was about Edmure taking initiative and it backfired. When a subordinate in an army takes initiative and it helps the cause then he gets credit but if it backfires then he should be ready to get the blame as well.

[Lost Melnibonean]

There are good arguments for either side.

The more intersting but less discussed observation is that Tywin was prepared to abandon his son (albeit, Tyrion), daughter & grandchildren to the superior might of Stannis. Casterly Rock and the west were more important to him than the Iron Throne & his immediate family.

[Barty]

I ask, what would have happened if tyrells didnt join tywin and he was beated up by the mannis in front of KL walls??? Everyone would say, what a plan edmure! You prevented tywin lannister to get back to his lands and build back his power... Yeah cause then robb would be facing two enemys at the same time: tywin at the west and "bend the knee or die" at the east....of course this wont work in case you say to me robb knew about the tyrells, but in that case stannis wouldnt took KL with or without tywin....

So the question is, is robbs great plan to have stannis at east, tywin at west and ironmen at north?...

War is about risk - any plan can backfire. This does not mean you dont make plans and strategies which might mess up. And as for the bolded part - I already addressed that - Robb would end up facing no enemies since Stannis and Tywin would be forced to fight each other while Robb grew stronger. If Robb has successfully trapped Tywin in the west and Stannis takes KL - they would have to fight each other since neither can make peace with the other.

It was a good plan - could it backfire on Robb?? Yes of course(Tywin might have caught upto him or something) but all plans have inherent risks and something you just have to throw the dice.

[Señor de la Tormenta]

There are good arguments for either side.

The more intersting but less discussed observation is that Tywin was prepared to abandon his son (albeit, Tyrion), daughter & grandchildren to the superior might of Stannis. Casterly Rock and the west were more important to him than the Iron Throne & his immediate family.

Yes! And this is because he may have thought he didnt have the numbers to beat stannis

[Minstral]

Edit: I hate posting on phones