Johny.
Alvaro de Bazan that yes was an experimented admiral and a very good seaman not considered the Armada as a possible disastrous project.
Also is a topic a lot of clear for spanish historic books and in vox populi for the readers of history that Medinasidonia not was a good appointment, he fears the appointment not because he believed that the project was a possible disaster, it was because clearly for him not was the adequate commander for the Armada because as I say:
-1. he has not have experience as commanding fleets, in fact he has no experience even commanding any kind of armies.
-2. His knowledge about nautical matters was effectively zero. For example he did not know which part of the ship is starboard and which larboard (no I am not exagerating, Medinasidonia admit himself not know what is starboard and what is larboard)
-3. He has a lot of seasick (if you say someone that the admiral that command your fleet have seasick, well I suppose he is not the kind of chief that a sailor would want commanding a fleet
)
-4. Because: a) no experience b)no knowledge of matter and c) he need to show that he was at the command he decided only to pursue orders and continue without profiting opportunities as in Plymouth against the advise of the Sailors Masters as Recalde and Oquendo (so in fact Sailors Masters advise him but he decide not to follow his advise simplily because he fears any possible risk even when it was clear that was not a risk), so in this case he observes the same attitude of an authomatic pilot in a civil aircraft: yes he pursues the orders and maintain the course but well a robot could be the same.
Why Philip II decides to appoint him?, well because Philip II was a man too much friend of his friends, Medinasidonia was a very good friend of him, a confident and also a grandee of Spain, Philip II apreciated a lot his friend and decides to show all that he was also a great leader (perfect, naturally Philip it is not the first person that makes this kind of decision even when his own friend pleads you that he is not he person adequate for the work, unfortunately little times this kind of appointment in high and technical positions only having in count the frienship is finally a good decision -a case of good decision was for example the appointment of Albert Speer, personal friend and architect o Hitler as minister of armament, was an strange but a very good decision, but this unfortunately is more an exception that the rule-).
Respect adopting the decision of make the route of Scotland, yes Medinasidonia makes the decision but the route was not decided for him, several choices with routes prepared was made by the Sailor Masters and veteran captain ships, some indicates route in direction Norway, others to Scotland, Medinasidonia only decides a or b but the routes and all the other dispositions was decided by the veterans of the Armada as Juan Martinez de Recalde.
Was Medinasidonia guilty?, I think that blame corresponds more to Philip II that appoints a man that was not prepared, absolutely not prepared for this kind of expeditions, it was as if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had appointed Nimitz as commander of the IIIrd Army, not worse as if FDR had appointed Wallace as commander of the Pacific fleet.
As say Wikipedia: "He was chosen even before Santa Cruz was actually dead, and was forced to go in spite of his piteous declarations that he had neither experience nor capacity, and was always sick at sea. His conduct of the Armada justified his plea. He was even accused of showing want of personal courage, and was completely broken by the sufferings of the campaign, which turned his hair grey. The duke retained his posts of
admiral of the ocean and captain-general of
Andalusia in spite of the contempt openly expressed for him by the whole nation." entire article here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Guzmán_El_Bueno,_7th_Duke_of_Medina_Sidonia
you will find that the most part of the history books, at least all that I have at home and I read says the same.
Guzman was an icompetent totally?, well not he was a very good administrator, in fact a superb administrator, but instead of having a true destine according to his skills, Philip put him commanding the fleet!!!
(as I say Wallace was a good secretary of Agriculture and Nimitz a good admiral but if you puts both commanding land armies well, ehem, ehem they would seem totally incompetents)
Also Johny you are right there other factors: the storms, the presence of Drake, the problem mentioned by you of the Parma´s army, but unfortunately for Spain it is clear that with Alvaro de Bazan commanding the fleet the english fleet surely had been destroyed and all the other factors had been considered minors for stop this victory of the Armada.
And respect if the landings of an spanish army had been succesful if the Armada had suceeded in defeating the English fleet well in a very interesting article in Historia 16 number 140 article by Geoffrey Parker says for example (translated from castillian -spanish- of the article named "If the Invencible had landed..." in number 140 of Historic spanish magazine "Historia 16"):
"First of all, there was very little towns and castles in the southeast of England with capacity of supporting great cannon fire. The fortifications of the most part of the places in the Elizabethian England was very little adequated. According to an old ill-humoured soldier, the queen ministers believed that according with the opinion of the lacedemonians, fortificate the cities was more perjudicial than benefitious.
True is that Henry VIII of Ingland had shown great activity in improve the defenses of Kent with five fortress between the Downs and Rye and five more along Tamesis. But all these new defenses (as show a visit nowdays to the intact castles of Camber and Walmer) had been built with round walls of little thickness and with curved and hollow bastions. Only the squared and solid bastions, protected by wide ditchs, were apts to support bombings with great caliber cannons, and in the southeast only has this kind of bastions the castle of Upnor, built between 1559 and 1567 for the defense of the new shipyard of Chatham. Upnor by only himself was too much little to stop Farnesio and his army.
The towns of bigger size of Kent, Canterbury and Rochester, conserved only their old medieval walls, and the castle of Rochester, that dominated the principal way over the Medway, was in a painful situation. It seems that there was any fortification between Margate, the zone where was planned to land, and the Medway"
"Even in London, the Flandes army there was found little difficulties: the city was still defended by medieval walls. These had changed little since 1554, when Thomas Wyatt and his rebel army, without order and formation of any kind, marched through Kent, cross the Tamesis river in Kingston and entered unpunishedly by Westminster until come to Ludgate crossing Fleet Street. In military terms, London present too many less difficulties than Amberes, city defended by a walled precinct of 8 km of circumference and built according to the more elaborated designs. Even in the case of Amberes, the Flandes Army had captured the Amberes after a siege of a year, in 1585."
So Johnny Medinasidonia is clearly proved an incompetent in commanding a fleet but this not means that he was not competent in other matteries as for example in the administration, but as we know a good administrator not necessarily is a good leader, in this case it was a bad commandant according at least all the books that I have read (and in Spain there is a lot of articles and books about Philip II and the episode of the Armada)
