Scotland RWC 2015 Group

First topic message reminder :

Pool B

South Africa
Samoa
Scotland
Asia 1
Americas 2

We dodged a bullet there. Best possible draw from the 3rd pot in my opinion. Japan will take the Asia 1 spot with the USA likely in there as well.

Now I don't want to get too ahead of myself here but this group is winnable.

*flashbacks of saying that when the 2011 RWC group was drawn*

funnyExiledScot wrote:

SecretFly wrote:My advise would be to plan, plan, plan, (observe, observe, observe) to beat South Africa and then you certainly should be in a position to take on Samoa..but the bonus just might be - just might be - that you steal the game against SA too.

They were surprised by Wales last time...and Ireland knocked Australia off their perch. Stranger things have happened. So I'd look at SA for the duration and plan a game that might give them a game. Even if it doesn't work, it (the gameplan and players for it) then should be reasonably good enough to unsettle Samoa.

Not sure I agree with that. Could we not plan to beat them both? Pretty sure we'll need to be more sophisticated than simply rolling out the same game plan against every side we face.

No!

Looking at the last few years our records against SA & Samoa have been good.

Last time we beat Samoa we did it in Samoa. Sure Samoa had a strong Autumn tour and we were rank rotten, but there is a lot of Rugby to be played between now and then.

South Africa again are daunting side to face but have less of a fearful grasp on the Scottish fan's and players psyche due to Scotland beating them on the odd occasion. I still would have rather had Australlia than the Bokke.


I'm not really sure what the big deal is about beating Australia....

funnyExiledScot wrote:

SecretFly wrote:My advise would be to plan, plan, plan, (observe, observe, observe) to beat South Africa and then you certainly should be in a position to take on Samoa..but the bonus just might be - just might be - that you steal the game against SA too.

They were surprised by Wales last time...and Ireland knocked Australia off their perch. Stranger things have happened. So I'd look at SA for the duration and plan a game that might give them a game. Even if it doesn't work, it (the gameplan and players for it) then should be reasonably good enough to unsettle Samoa.

Not sure I agree with that. Could we not plan to beat them both? Pretty sure we'll need to be more sophisticated than simply rolling out the same game plan against every side we face.

Pretty sure the one gamplan will do both - as it'll need to be a pretty perfect one to roll over SA at a WC anyway. If you plan to concentrate on Samoa, like some have alluded to here, you won't beat the Boks. If you aim for the Boks (which of course the coach will - I'm only using my guidelines because of the points raised about focusing on Samoa) you just might get them.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:
I'm not really sure what the big deal is about beating Australia....

It wasn't But it didn't half shock the tournament itself and of course gave a few sides a much better shot at the title than they could have imagined.

The problem is lately Scotland have been doing too much planning, focus on our game first. That's one philosophy of Robbo I definitely agreed with, we should focus on winning one game at a time. I also agree with the Kiwi philosophy that they don't focus on the other team, they focus on themselves and their strengths and weaknesses, it feels like Scotland haven't focused on their weaknesses at all for the last year, no scratch that, last 8 years...

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I still would have rather had Australlia than the Bokke.
I'm not really sure what the big deal is about beating Australia....

I know you jest, but my brother and I pretty much agreed on the same thing last night - I suppose it has to do with our record (consider that by the time we next play them, Australia won't have beaten us for seven years), but also styles of play.

If Scotland play a forward-heavy, defence-oriented kicking game, it's more likely to upset the Wallabies than the Boks - for me, what has characterised our recent matches against Australia isn't really the Scottish defence (though it has been good), but rather the Wallabies' inability to deal with that defence, leading to a sort of collective nervous breakdown. Chances are spurned, opportunities to kick at goal are passed up, and the clock runs down. Scotland win.

The Boks have always seemed mentally tougher than that, and I doubt we'll be able to frustrate them enough to win in this way. To beat the Boks, we need to play the Edinburgh way.

We are sadly quite different from the Kiwis. They know that if they play to the peak of their abilities, they win the game. That is not the case with us. It's entirely possible we may wish to play slightly differently against South Africa than we would against Samoa. Just saying.

NeilyBroon wrote:The problem is lately Scotland have been doing too much planning, focus on our game first. That's one philosophy of Robbo I definitely agreed with, we should focus on winning one game at a time. I also agree with the Kiwi philosophy that they don't focus on the other team, they focus on themselves and their strengths and weaknesses, it feels like Scotland haven't focused on their weaknesses at all for the last year, no scratch that, last 8 years...

Yeah... should'a though

IMO robinson had a game plan in his head and tried to mould the players to that rather than using the best players and creating a plan for them

TJ wrote:IMO robinson had a game plan in his head and tried to mould the players to that rather than using the best players and creating a plan for them

So Robinson went to the same rugby school of coaching as Kidney? Interesting.

so then the goal to win the RWC is on then?

mystiroakey wrote:so then the goal to win the RWC is on then?

OCH AYE!!!

SecretFly wrote:

TJ wrote:IMO robinson had a game plan in his head and tried to mould the players to that rather than using the best players and creating a plan for them

So Robinson went to the same rugby school of coaching as Kidney? Interesting.

This is why we got Lamont and Morrison at centre, Parks agaisnt England etc etc. Matt Scott being used as a crash ball centre - I could go on

mystiroakey wrote:so then the goal to win the RWC is on then?

How could that be? England have already won it going by some very learned posts on other threads.

On a more serious note - can you really imagine the stresses that will be on the English side (put on them by a media that can even go home to the comfort of their own homes) by the time the WC cup comes around. It'll be very, very Heavy!.

My goal and englands goal isnt to win the wc- its to be the best in the world surely!

and i think we can be - another RWC will be lovely, but we will have more chance if we are the best

The most frustrating thing with Scotland is just when you think one aspect of their game is finally fixed, another aspect of it goes bad. Its like patching up an old car, continuously trying to fix it when the best option would probably be to buy a new one.

Scotland now have an opportunity for a fresh start, to put the last 10 years behind them. It really would be in the SRU's interest to get a coach who will be there for the long term. That is why I think the SRU should hire a promising coach rather than an experienced one. They could allow him to mature with the players and hopefully by 2015 Scotland will be very competitive.

mystiroakey wrote:My goal and englands goal isnt to win the wc- its to be the best in the world surely!

and i think we can be - another RWC will be lovely, but we will have more chance if we are the best

How long do you want that title for Oakey? A month? Six months? A year? The WC is about 3 years away. There are sides that will be using this period to consolidate, to refocus, to rebuild etc. Even the All Blacks have a thing called their 'best' players - and those players aren't getting younger and have been on the go for quite a while now. They'll need real alternatives up and running for their game-makers McCaw and Carter, to have genuine assurances in the case of injury. They'll be working on things and through things.

Now, in that climate England might become number 1 in the rankings for a time - fine. But they'll be told by the others that they're in development right now so you're welcome to it. That might be an excuse of course but it also might be suggesting that Number 1 when others are admitting they are operating below their usual best for the time being isn't such a boast.

Winning the WC would be a symbolic proof of course and I agree with you, it isn't all it's cooked up to be as a measurement tool for 'best'. But few other measuring tools are of much benefit either as there are always excuses from the hordes below you. The only sure fire bet of being considered 'best' is that you bring consistency to it for longer than other sides might claim to be in development. For me that would require a good decade of dominance.... like the All Blacks can manage. They still get called 'best' even if they lose a WC. They get called it becuase their consistency over long periods prove it. No excuses made by the lurkers in the long grass work.

So I see a lot of sides needing so much extras attached (players and structures) that to suggest they'll stay at their standards - when they can't afford to - and England will rise and rise in their standards is kinda placing much to much importance on that one game against the ABs, when games against below-standard SA and Australia were lost.

NZ have been on and off(mostly on!) the best team in the world by a long way for a long time..

we have yes got to those heights for a year or two!! we want that back,

England for all its resources have underacheived for 9 years!!

I want us to be up ther again for as long as we can be..

the RWC is the ultimate goal for me and i would prefer that to any no.1!

however i dont think teams should have goals to win tournies- it seems shortermist to me. Id rather have the goal of being the best - basically the way the kiwis do it!

I dont wanna sound patroinixing either when i say that a goal for scotland to be the best isnt really viable, but it is for england.

scotland need to first and foremost win some 6n's games- a 3rd place target over the next fewyears is adequate.

you cant beat a poker player who has endless money in the long term! this is the same situation- but eventually any smaller nation could become no.1 but there need the riches.. rugby would have to become part of scotlands phlosphy and become its no.1 sport for example

Biltong wrote: I am just speaking my mind Fly.

We have only ever lost one pool match against england in 2003. I don't foresee us losing one in 2015, it is not arrogance, but confidence in how we do in world cups.

Hmmmmmmm

That was the year you lost to the eventual winners

it could happene again.......................

mystiroakey wrote:NZ have been on and off(mostly on!) the best team in the world by a long way for a long time..

we have yes got to those heights for a year or two!! we want that back,

England for all its resources have underacheived for 9 years!!

I want us to be up ther again for as long as we can be..

the RWC is the ultimate goal for me and i would prefer that to any no.1!

however i dont think teams should have goals to win tournies- it seems shortermist to me. Id rather have the goal of being the best - basically the way the kiwis do it!

Agree with those sentiments