Brian Ashton has been tight-lipped for the last month and is unlikely to change now, if only under legal advice. But given the shabby manner in which he has been treated by the Rugby Football Union since the mid-winter review of the 2007 World Cup, it is hard to see him accepting employment with the union again.

At 61, Ashton has useful years left in him as a coach. He had hoped to spend that time preparing for the 2011 World Cup with the degree of forward planning which was never brought to bear at any stage of his 16-month tenure, working with many of the young players whom he nurtured during his years as manager of the RFU national academy in Bath.

That is the job to which he could return since his successor, Conor O'Shea, is moving on this summer. It would be conveniently close to home and the RFU have offered it to him, with added responsibility for the England Saxons, under-20 and under-18 programmes. But the question of trust would pre-occupy his mind. How could he continue to work for an organisation which has let him down so badly?

It is more likely that Ashton would look for a return to the Guinness Premiership. He had, after all, just taken over at Bath in 2006 when England came calling and, in the five months he spent in his second coming at the Recreation Ground, took the club to a Heineken Cup semi-final. Steve Meehan, his successor, has built successfully on his philosophy but it is easy to argue a case for adding Ashton's wise old head to a coaching panel that is already doing well.

Alternatively he could act as a consultant to a variety of clubs, just as Phil Larder did after the RFU terminated his employment in 2006. Larder had established such a reputation as the defence coach who helped England to the 2003 World Cup that clubs, notably Worcester Warriors, were eager to use his talents; Ashton's liberated thinking would open the minds of the second generation of professional players in England and would give him the satisfaction of projecting individuals towards the highest level of the game - his argument is not with the England team as a concept but those responsible for running it.