The decision by Police Scotland chief constable Stephen House not to seek a second term was inevitable.
His two years as the country's most powerful police chief - a role that would have been challenging for anyone - have not been a success.
On his watch, police staff jobs have been slashed while perks for the most senior officers have been retained.
His policy on arming police officers on routine duties was pushed through, without a full consultation with the public or the Scottish Police Authority.
And his policy on stop and search, which was hammered last week by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, has gone from farce to fiasco.
According to inspectors, Police Scotland frisk figures cannot be trusted as officers don't know what a search is, or what should be recorded.
Even worse, House's evidence to the SPA on his force's questionable stop and search data was marked by basic errors.
It is almost as if, having been used to little scrutiny at Strathclyde Police, he has been surprised that politicians and journalists would have the audacity to hold him to account in his new role.
In explaining his difficulties, House used a football metaphor by saying his force had given away too many "stupid penalties".
In reality, his decisions as manager have been poor and his arrogance has alienated his own team and the supporters of the police.
It would be better for the chief constable to bring forward his retirement date, but seeing out his full term could bring opportunities.
If he stays, House should revisit how his force consults the public and key stakeholders before embarking on controversial changes.
He should also insist that the force make better use of external and independent agencies to scrutinise its statistics, which have been proven to be wholly unreliable.
House is yesterday's man, but he could help his successor restore trust in a valued and necessary public service.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article