For several months after the fall of Hubert de Burgh, the court can be divided, very loosely, into three basic groups: the veterans of John's reign headed by des Roches; a group of household officers including the stewards Ralph fitz Nicholas, Godfrey of Crowcombe and John fitz Philip; and finally, the earl Marshal, his kinsmen and allies. All three groups had shared a desire for de Burgh's dismissal, but they were united by little else. In this respect they provide an interesting comparison to the disparate alliance over which de Burgh had presided since 1224. Whereas by moderation de Burgh had maintained some sort of common front for the best part of a decade, it was to take barely six months for the coalition of 1232 to break down into civil war. For this des Roches must bear the greatest blame. Where de Burgh had proceeded with tact against those ousted from power in 1224, des Roches went all out for vengeance. In the process he reopened wounds and revived tensions that stretched far back into the reign of King John.

In the immediate term, des Roches and his associates obtained no stranglehold over the court. The fall of de Burgh was a momentous event, shattering the consensus of the past ten years, to usher in a period of uncertainty and realignment. Political groupings at the Plantagenet court had always been unstable affairs, undermined by internal rivalries and by the dependence of individual courtiers upon the personal favour of the king.