Throwing down the Gauntlet.

Every year the Six Nations is the birth place for rising stars and the platform to showcase young talent. This six nations may have had some dire games but when looking a little closer there has have been some individuals with hard work rates, big runs, electric offloads and good vision who have brightened the most dreary of matches.

A lack-luster England survived with less possession and territory against a game Scottish side who if they had but for a little luck or a little more patience could have pulled through. On the other side of the coin we have seen an on form Welsh side with electric back line play run most defences into oblivion, their six tries in 2 matches is proof of exactly how dangerous their back line combination is.

So who has impressed? Who are the players staking a claim, the young inexperienced players who should become regular fixtures in the starting line-up for their respective countries?

David Denton age 22, 6ft 5inches 249lb
As a back rower Denton has impressed me in both games so far with his ball carrying ability. Setting up the ball in the tackle and his offloading capability, looking at his match stats of 9 passes, 35 runs, 117 meters, 2 clean breaks, 4 defenders beaten, 2 offloads, 3 turn overs, 5 tackles and 1 missed, he may be more of an attacking force than a Schalk Burger type defensive demon, but it is early stages yet and he is certain to work on his defensive work rate.

Alex Cuthbert, age 21, 6ft 6inches, 229lb
While Cuthbert may have had a quiet game against Ireland his performance against Scotland was a revelation, outshining his teammate George North in nearly every department. His match stats of 1 try, 1 try assist, 3 passes, 8 runs, 84 meters ran, 2 clean breaks, 3 defenders beaten, 1 offload, 1 turn over and 6 tackles with none missed, shows he is a playmaker with the ability to beat defenders and the necessary vision.

George North age 19, 6ft 4 inches, 229lb
Now a regular fixture in the Welsh team, his match stats of 1 try, 1 try assist, 4 passes, 11 runs, 85 meters, 1 clean break, 8 defenders beaten, 1 offload, 2 turn overs, 2 tackles and 1 missed tackle would suggest that George North is a very effective runner with ball in hand, and who can forget his incredible offload to Jonathan Davies against Ireland.

If there is one criticism of him, where there is room for improvement then it is his work rate. Granted he got injured in the Scotland match, but in 119 minutes of play, 11 runs and only 2 tackles completed would suggest that Warren Gatland needs to have a quiet word with this rising star.

Jonathan Davies, age 23, 6ft 1 inch, 227lb
The first time Davies impressed me was during the world cup. He showed an eye for a gap, an ability to wriggle out of tackles and a good turn of pace, complimenting the raw running power of Jamie Roberts well. His first two matches of the six nations have cemented that impression on me and with match stats of 2 tries, 1 try assist, 4 kicks, 10 passes, 22 runs, 156 meters, 2 clean breaks, 2 defenders beaten, 1 offload, 17 tackles and only 1 missed has shown consistency, a high work rate and sublime skills with ball in hand.


Richard Gray, age 22, 6ft 10inches, 285lb
With 8 passes, 23 runs, 89 meters, 2 clean break, 3 defenders beaten, 2 offloads, 15 tackles, 0 missed tackles and 11 line outs won Richard Gray is the quintessential modern day lock, he is tall enough to be a world class line out jumper, he is big enough to break tackles and beat defenders and his work rate makes him a very good defender. It is still early days, but what I have seen from this young man would put a smile on any Scottish coach's face.

Stuart Hogg age 19, 5ft 11 inches 194lb
Perhaps too soon to tell, but Stuart Hogg on debut came off the bench in the 15th minute of the Wales vs Scotland game and has shown very good promise for such a young lad. During the second half in particular he ran the Welsh defence ragged with match stats of 2 kicks, 2 passes, 10 runs, 82 meters, 2 clean breaks, 2 defenders beaten, 3 turn overs, 5 tackles and none missed. It would be to Scotland’s advantage to develop this young man as they need someone with his skills in a back line who all too often have shown they do not possess the necessary patience and execution to finish moves.

Ross Rennie age 25, 6ft 1 inch 213lb
Almost unnoticed Rennie has been the star of the show, his match stats of 22 passes, 31 runs, 107 meters, 4 clean breaks, 5 defenders beaten, 6 offloads, 2 turn overs, 28 tackles and only 3 missed shows that in combination with Gray and Denton, they will be the catalyst for a revival of Scottish rugby. He has an astonishing work rate, he must be close to the top of the list as far as ball carriers are concerned and yet as an additional line out option his ability is evident for all to see.

There are of course other players who have continued to impress, such as Leigh Halfpenny and Rhys Priestland, but they are old hands now, established in their squads, and this is of course not about them, but rather a celebration of the new stock, those guys that in future will be able to stake their claims on the international stage.

Whilst I think Richie Gray is pretty much a unique talent for Scotland, what pleases me about Denton and Rennie is that they've had to work for it, particularly Rennie. Stern competition from John Barclay for Scotland and Roddy Grant for Edinburgh has pushed Rennie to achieve his maximum potential, which he is now doing. Doesn't happen often enough in Scottish rugby, but competition for places is the real key to unlocking you best players. At Edinburgh Denton has had to barge past Talei and McInally to get a game, and that has done him good as well. Hopefully Beattie can come back and push him further in a Scotland jersey.

It was a shame Hogg's try was disallowed - I think it would have been a perfect statement of intent for him to notch up 1 try from 1 match: almost unheard of for a Scot [completely unheard of?] I can remember S Lamont scoring quite a few in his first 20 caps (well, for a Scot) but he slipped away in terms of conversion.

I can see Visser, Hogg, Laidlaw being the catalysts for turning this try drought around for Scotland.

Wasnt Gray in the last 6N? I seem to remember him impressing me very much then.

Yes he debuted in 2010

Thought so, he is going to be a big player for Scotland in the future, dare i say even a captain at some stage as he does seem to have some good leadership qualities.

Billy the guy who impressed me most when I was doing research on these guys was rennie.

I made mental notes of the new guys over the past two weeks, and then when I started writing this and I saw his stats I couldn't beleive his work rate.

Rennie has been impressive and he does do loads of work but Gray just has something about him that makes me think that he will be a good captain for Scotland.

Well with Gray, Rennie and Denton, Scotland have the beginnings of a mobile pack, they just need to find another playmaker at ten, I was not convinced by Laidlaw.

Laidlaw needs to grow into the team but there are signs there that he will be very good.

I think some of Laidlaw's problems were some fairly slow ball. But I think the right signs are there.

And that Scotland pack could really become deadly in the next year or so. And a real good team could be built around that.

Well he did look better in the second half, what struck me about him in the first half was when he recieved the ball, he slowed, took a step, telegraph his intended target to pass too, and then passed.

His recievers were on a hiding to nothing during those plays.

Perhaps he needed that initial 40 minutes to adapt to a match situation.

We'll see how he fares in the next match.

Gray.. he obviously has his stats...but for me, I've constantly been rather underwhelmed by him, or rather felt he has a reputation I don't fully buy as yet. It might change in time but as yet, I seem to be very much an exception to the rule of general excitement about him.

SecretFly,
I get what you are saying. And I am sure you see him more than I do. But watching the last two matches I thought I saw some nice glimpses. Laidlaw did have some slow ball.

But, granted, I am probably engaging in a little wishful thinking, as I can't wait for Scotland to come good. So close, I think we can smell it.

By the way, I am really not a big stat guy. I only use them where some real context exists. There is nothing in the world more maleable and corruptable than a hard and fixed number or statistic.

Grey stats do have their uses though, in rugby it provides ou a decent guide of a players work rate.

Some stats are more misleading than others as well.

Often you take the metres ran by a full back or wing as just that, he hained 100 metres, but what is misleading if that player played against a team that kicks deep all the time, then half those metres would have been gained by any player running back into the opposition, and yet have not gained enough ground from where the kick initially took place.

Then there are some stats more accurate and usable. such as line out wins, turn overs, defenders beaten, tackles made and missed.

So stats do provide you enough and combined with the actual performance on matchday gives you a pretty good idea of the player.

Hence my relatively meak impression of Laidlaw.

The players I selected here, impressed me on matchday, and then I looked at their stats when writing about them.

I guess I knew more about the welsh players before the six nations so Im not really suprised by their emergence. The players that have really stood out for me are Denton and Rennie for Scotland. Against England espescially Denton really caught the eye. The other player Ive really liked is Fofana for France. I think his inclusion along with Trinh Duc at fly half makes the french backline deadly. For all Wales Power in the backs the French are a step up in class I think.

I shouldn't get started about stats and numbers. There will be no end to my ranting. But, as I am merciful, I recommend only sitting down with one beer before I start............

The essence of any statistic is context. I think you were right on the money when you said a fullback might have 100 yards because he was running back kicks all day. But that does not mean he was productive, or even had a good match. Another player might have ony 5 carries, but might have been fine, if his team had little possession to start with.

The first stats I look at are possession and tackles. As a general rule, the more tackles a team makes, the less possession they usually have. That puts the other stats in some context. However, stats don't tell if a team has a strong defense and is comfortable kicking away and waiting for mistakes to occur.

At work I see all kinds of numbers about surgical success rates, recovery time and the like. But so many injuries are subtly different that much of any recovery is down to the patient and his/her mental state. You or I might work mercilessly to recover whilst some others might not. Hence skewed stats.

Back to the Rugby, a standoff like Laidlaw might have worse stats than some other 10s, but may have done quite well. The stats don't illustrate how Scotland is still finding its way on attack and the attacking numbers might not reflect true performance. SecretFly is much more knowledgable than I about Laidlaw and says Laidlaw might not be the second coming. I would trust a fan and someone who sees Laidlaw play more frequently than the numbers alone.

By the way, I know you go by what you see on the pitch before the numbers. I am merely telling you how I feel about numbers, sans context.

Any of that make sense? Or should I go back that special home where the men wear those special white coats and maybe come out after winter is over?

Can I just put a word for Farrell? I dont think he's anybody's idea of the finished article but I doubt there has been a better kicker so far this 6N and you only have to see him taking Parisse down a few times last week to know he can tackle

Lostinwales, Farrel is on the radar for a follow up article at the end of the 6 nations, I have taken these players first as they made the biggest impression on me so far.

doctor_grey wrote:Any of that make sense? Or should I go back that special home where the men wear those special white coats and maybe come out after winter is over?

fortunately you own a white coat already!

Ah, you see how I escape from their evil clutches. I have plenty of white coats too. They don't expect that.
I need to escape because they are after me. Everywhere. They are all after me. Everyone is after me. But I won't let them get me, will I? No, no. They won't get me.........

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzHtm1jhL4

Grey, apart from the voices you hear, do you see dead people too?

Everywhere, mate. Everywhere........

Despite the OP being about celebrating the 'new stock', it is worth mentioning that Ross Rennie made his Scotland debut way back in 2008.

Held back by serious injury in the past, means his comeback and performance for both club and country is even more remarkable.

I hate stats!We did not need stats to tell us that Gareth,JPR,Waka,Gibson,Mervyn,Sella etc were great players.God gave us eyes;the devil gave us statisticians!
Out of context stats mean diddly.If you need stats to inform you about Rugby you just havent quite got it.

Taffin it was my eyes wathcing them play that told me they had great performances.

It was when I did a bit of research on them that I started looking at match stats.

As much as you hate stats, many welsh posters on here are forever posting North's stats on the forum.

North has impressed me to no end since he came onto the international scene, but during the world cup I started thinking Wales has a great player here.

Then when he had his magnifocent offload against Ireland and a few strong runs I was beginning to beleive he will be a great player.

However, it is always the guys making the great runs, that seems the most impressive.

It was only until I looked at his work rate of the matches in the six Nations that I noticed he made very few tackles and did not have that many runs.

Cuthbert outplayed North completely in the match vs Scotland, it wasn't that obvious when the game was on, but looking at work rate there is a marked difference.

Many times someone will say stats must be looked at in context, I did that, how else do you think I came up with the players.

When looking at the young players here, who in the Scottish team and wEslh team did not impress you, regardless of those useless stats.

Just one last point. Last year during the RWC I was criticised for Being "Anti Welsh", even during the Scottish clash I was criticised for being "Anti Welsh."

It seems as a neutral you may only comment positively on Welsh rugby, and even then, don't present any stats that may shine negatively on a welsh player.

It seems even when I compliment Welsh players, criticism follow.

I think it is time for me to with draw from commenting on welsh rugby in totality.

Taff only likes the stats when they are in favour of his players - he got very grumpy when I posted Lydiate's stats last week. Generally the stats do reflect the performance. Stats, although very susceptible to being wrong, are both interesting and useful.

Rory, I think Gatland might also not use match stats when looking at his players performance, if he does, it seems he knows nothing about rugby.

Yeah, if you go by what a few moaning fans say on internet forums. I think it is ridiculously naive to think that coaches etc don't use proper match statistics and player statistics as a reference.

In modern day rugby, even at training sessions coaches look at work rate when comparing to similarly abled players.

It is the guy who shirks responsibility at training session who is most likely to shirk responsibility on match day.

You get those players that are glory boys and then you get the workers.

As an example, Denton impressed me most in the Scottish team because he left a lasting impression with his ball carries, but it was when I looked at Rennie, that I realised how mostrous he was with ball carries, he beat more defenders and had more clean breaks than denton or Gray, and then if you add his number of tackles which was the highest of all the scottish players (all of this you don't remember but see it in the stats) then you realise here is a player who is not only great in defence, but also in attack.

Rennie's performance I think eclipsed that of anyone so far. He definitely was the one who deserved MOM and he played with such intensity. I think it was standulsterman who said that was one of the best performances by a 7 in the NH he has seen in a while. I have to agree. He was absolutely brilliant. I really hope SOB can learn from him, from an irish POV.

But what would we know biltongbek, we referred to stats after the game and that means we just haven't got it

KickAndChase wrote:It was a shame Hogg's try was disallowed - I think it would have been a perfect statement of intent for him to notch up 1 try from 1 match: almost unheard of for a Scot [completely unheard of?] I can remember S Lamont scoring quite a few in his first 20 caps (well, for a Scot) but he slipped away in terms of conversion.

I can see Visser, Hogg, Laidlaw being the catalysts for turning this try drought around for Scotland.

It was a disgrace to be fair - he's in my Guiness Fantasy League team.

I particularly like Rennie and Denton and they are my standout performers so far in a team that has lost both of it's opening games, Gray has been impressive for a while now, but I went off him in a big way when he broke Bath hearts with an overtime try in the HC match up in Glasgae.

I think you have all of the main contenders for "Young Turk" of the tourney in there Biltong, it's always interesting to read your musings. Personally, although I'm loving the way Wales are playing rugby at the moment, I'm really excited by Scotland. I think they are starting to wring the very best out of their limited resources and are not a million miles away from a very strong starting XV that will prove a much more successful team than recent results have shown, with Italy still improving, it's becoming a much closer competition with the bar being set higher each year, which can only be good for NH rugby as a whole.

Lancaster has shown he's willing to give new players a shot (as well as bringing back an old stager here and there), which suggests that if he's successful in retaining the role post-6N, England may start to play a more expansive and quicker game too, now that would be something........

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Rennie's performance I think eclipsed that of anyone so far. He definitely was the one who deserved MOM and he played with such intensity. I think it was standulsterman who said that was one of the best performances by a 7 in the NH he has seen in a while. I have to agree. He was absolutely brilliant. I really hope SOB can learn from him, from an irish POV.

But what would we know biltongbek, we referred to stats after the game and that means we just haven't got it

PJHolybloke wrote:I think you have all of the main contenders for "Young Turk" of the tourney in there Biltong, it's always interesting to read your musings. Personally, although I'm loving the way Wales are playing rugby at the moment, I'm really excited by Scotland. I think they are starting to wring the very best out of their limited resources and are not a million miles away from a very strong starting XV that will prove a much more successful team than recent results have shown, with Italy still improving, it's becoming a much closer competition with the bar being set higher each year, which can only be good for NH rugby as a whole.

I am with you on that one PJ, their pack is looking good with some seriously good young players, they miss a playmaker at 10, will have to see if Laidlaw improves.

I am going to go off track here by using no stats, so what I am about to say cannot be verified in any way, shape, or form.

Laidlaw look pedantic in the first half, he was slow to react when he recieved ball in the first half, he hesitated a number of times, took a step and then decided wh he was going to pass too. That put his recievers under pressure and they were marked by opposition defence every time they recieved the ball.

SecretFly is much more knowledgable than I about Laidlaw and says Laidlaw might not be the second coming. I would trust a fan and someone who sees Laidlaw play more frequently than the numbers alone.

[quote]Having been watching Laidlaw all season for Edinburgh I think he is the real deal. I think he needs to settle into the international team.

His performance in the last group game of the HC against London Irish showed some real class. I think he will come good in the international squad He would be better playing with Blair who he is used to playing with.

Do you really need stats to tell you what you are seeing?The Scots have a good pack and I have no idea nor interest in what the individual stats say.Some stats from the WC said that Faletau did not miss one tackle.B*llocks.He played damn well but he aint superman.Who validates these stats?Mickey Mouse?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Rennie's performance I think eclipsed that of anyone so far. He definitely was the one who deserved MOM and he played with such intensity. I think it was standulsterman who said that was one of the best performances by a 7 in the NH he has seen in a while. I have to agree. He was absolutely brilliant. I really hope SOB can learn from him, from an irish POV.

But what would we know biltongbek, we referred to stats after the game and that means we just haven't got it

Rory,I know that I shouldn't but you keep giving the ammo:Grow up!!!!!!!
If stats make you happy go for it.Eyes and scoreboard have worked fine for me but if you unsure what is going on check the stats.If the stats show that Lydiate is crap I would suggest that you rethink your strategy.
You could always remain a juvenile but I would advocate maturity.It is your call.Enjoy.

Taffin, you really need to start seeing the other side of an argument. Perhaps you need to realise that often what you see is misleading.

The statistics are verified by ESPNscrum.com

These stats may not be 100% correct, they are however as much an indication of WORKRATE as anything else.

If you don't care for the stats, then fine, keep on believing what you are seeing with your eyes only.

Biltong,my eyes are regularly checked.Why can I not see workrate?That is precisely what Lydiate brings to the party over show-ponies like Ferris and Heaslip.Some nerdy bloke clicking a counter cannot sway me from what I have watched.
Stats that may not be 100% accurate are worth less than I deposit down the khazi!
Stats that are 100% accurate should only confirm what you have already witnessed.Totally pointless.

"moan moan moan, bitch bitch bitch, my players are better than yours etc etc"

And you tell me to grow up

People refer to stats after a game sometimes (including coaches) because it gives them some added insight to things they may have missed, things the players should work on, or to confirm their thoughts they had during the match. You keep saying how I said Lydiate is crap, but notice how I have never even said that. Maybe that is just you drawing your own conclusion from the stats instead?

Oh for Pete sake, you are so blinded by your own way of thinking that not even common sense prevails to you.

I like stats, it tells me the things I forget.

Although some I don't like the fact that we have only lost to wales once.

Other stats aren't that simple, thus I have to reflect upon them.

I could have written an article here about how fantastic these players are, and mouthed off some fancy lyrics about side stepping, offloads, tackles that were broken, and then we all wax lyrical about them.

If it wasn;t for the statistics, I wouldn't have realised how majestic Rennie was, and if not for the stats, I would not have realised how low North's work rate in defence was.

Ignore these stats at your own leisure, it is however pertinent when you delve a little deeper as I am sure Gatland will do.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:People refer to stats after a game sometimes (including coaches) because it gives them some added insight to things they may have missed, things the players should work on, or to confirm their thoughts they had during the match. You keep saying how I said Lydiate is crap, but notice how I have never even said that. Maybe that is just you drawing your own conclusion from the stats instead?

We are wasting our time here Rory, he is not a believer, he likes could nine.

biltongbek wrote:Oh for Pete sake, you are so blinded by your own way of thinking that not even common sense prevails to you.

I like stats, it tells me the things I forget.

Although some I don't like the fact that we have only lost to wales once.

Other stats aren't that simple, thus I have to reflect upon them.

I could have written an article here about how fantastic these players are, and mouthed off some fancy lyrics about side stepping, offloads, tackles that were broken, and then we all wax lyrical about them.

If it wasn;t for the statistics, I wouldn't have realised how majestic Rennie was, and if not for the stats, I would not have realised how low North's work rate in defence was.

Ignore these stats at your own leisure, it is however pertinent when you delve a little deeper as I am sure Gatland will do.

If you genuinely needed the stats to tell you that Rennie played well I begin to understand from whence you come.I apologise,I misjudged you.If you had not reallised that North is a young kid learning the game,I apologise.You do need these stats,desperately.Look at as many stats as you can.They will help to educate you as you seem not to understand what is before you.

I probably know more about the game of rugby than you.

Perhaps that is why I delve a little deeper and analyse the game more, rather than just listen to unfounded one eyed opinions.

taffineastbourne,

Stats are not used in place of your own eyes, they are a valuable addition to getting a fuller picture especially in areas that are more difficult to spot during a game or to judge trends over longer periods of time where memory is a factor

Nobody is suggesting that stats are the only thing you use to judge a player.

All sports make use of stats, even during a game. Either that or Robin McBride is playing Angry Birds on his laptop.

Aw go off and stare at your Dan Lydiate posters Taff will ye? He quite clearly has said that he thought Rennie played well, but didn't realise just how well until he checked the stats. I also didn't realise he made so many carries during the game. Though I'm sure you and your extensive knowledge of rugby meant you managed to see all.

SafeAsMilk wrote:
Either that or Robin McBride is playing Angry Birds on his laptop.

Luckily it isn't Taffin, he would most definitely be playing some game, but it would have to be one that doesn't keep score as those points would just be baffling.

biltongbek wrote:I probably know more about the game of rugby than you.

Perhaps that is why I delve a little deeper and analyse the game more, rather than just listen to unfounded one eyed opinions.

Loathe as I am to stoop to your level of arrogance but I doubt that you know more about the game of Rugby than me.You are a Saffer so we make allowances.Perhaps you delve deeper because you seek understanding and I applaud your spirit.
Unsure what one-eyed opinions that I am particularly prone to.Living in England you'd have thought that all things Twickers would be fantastico and all the rest mucho pantso!
Enjoy your stats(the modern day clipboard for people trying to validate their position!)

Taffineastbourne wrote:Biltong,my eyes are regularly checked.Why can I not see workrate?That is precisely what Lydiate brings to the party over show-ponies like Ferris and Heaslip.Some nerdy bloke clicking a counter cannot sway me from what I have watched.
Stats that may not be 100% accurate are worth less than I deposit down the khazi!
Stats that are 100% accurate should only confirm what you have already witnessed.Totally pointless.

You are a human being. Ergo, you are, regardless of how impartial or fair or logical you try to be, automatically subject to a hundred biases and fallacies that you cannot ignore without conscious knowledge of them and a wish to overcome them, which rarely exists when applied to any assessment of something we support or hold dear. Some of these biases are useful or vital to survival asan individual or race or are by-products of processes that are and thus cannot easily be ignored. Stats allow an objective way to assess whether what we think we have perceived is in fact what happened. The stats are also open to bias but less than an individual's general memory of how one player amongst 30+ plus several officials plus interactions between units and entire teams performed across an entire pitch with and without possession, sometimes not even visible, over an 80 minute + spell. Even more objective compared to an individual with a definite bias towards one of the teams playing. This is not a criticism of you, it is however saying that you as a Welsh supporter are in a worse place to assess who played best (which is highly subjective anyway) than a neutral with no bias (which Biltong and Rory may have but probably less than someone supporting one of the teams playing) and a far worse place than statistical analysts who will be watching all of the players individually in specific moments rather than relying on a general memory (all memories are highly subjective btw) where you could not have possibly focussed enough on a comparison between players to know who should be MOTM, if indeed it is possible to select one player's contribution as more important than every other players given the qualitative and contextual differences between any of their praiseworthy acts.