Is there reason for Scottish optimism after week 1?

The short answer is no

The longer answer is still no, but with reasons

While I have read quite a few comments and opinions on how we can take heart that we have better players, more dangerous attack runners or that we have some players who are playing very well – I think these are all papering over the cracks and in essence are almost irrelevant.
This weekends game was a MASSIVE step back for me. I think it is the worst performance I have seen from a Scottish side in 10 years. I have never seen us so poor, with so little ball, with no defence or attack plan and players not competing across the park.

You think I am harsh – well maybe, but answer me this. While in the last 6 nations we got the wooden spoon – BUT did we dominated possession and territory in most games, but could not convert. The answer is yes/

We had a structure to win and keep the ball, but were just lacking a cutting edge to exploit that.
Roll on one year and we hardly touched the ball. The score flattered us enormously, we got 2 break away tries against the entire run of play. England could have put 80 on us, with the amount of possession, missed tackles and line breaks they had.

Scotland did not compete at the break down, did not pressure the runners, did not tackle and looked headless in a scramble to save their blushes. These are all steps back imo. One would be understandable, but all 3 is indefensible.

Looking at the weekend matches I can only see a wooden spoon for us, as if we play like that again Italy will beat us by 20 points, Ireland and Wales by 30 points and even a mis-firing France will put 20 on us.

Week one and I am down. Week one and I am accepting. Week one and the realisation has been ful-filled
The last 10 years have not been a blip, wooden spoons have been deserved, sliding down the rankings are a true reflection and the world cup failure a normality to be accepted.

This will not be a popular opinion I know, but unless we change everything, I feel we are in for a horrible 6 nations again. This time there is no second chances, no the ref robbed u, no how unlucky we were, or no how we could of / should of won.

Is there any light at the end of the tunnel? Well if we can compete at the break down, select the best players in their position (no Brown at 7 or Lamont at 13) and if we can get the run of the green, we may beat Italy – but the rest – sorry not a hope in Rose street


PS I feel better for that vent :-)

Your back three.

Let's call them HVM

High Velocity Movement.

Risky

I think you are slightly harsh there. There are some areas of your team that are pretty good - front 5 plus Beatty stood up pretty well and at least two of your back 3 looked classy (McVisser didn't do much other than kick). Oh, and Sott at 12 looked pretty good as well.

I thought when I saw your line-up before the match that the absence of Rennie (or even Barclay) was going to be a big issue - OK, Robshaw isn't quite as much a 'fetcher' 7 as McCaw or Pocock, but he's not that far off, and allied with Wood we have a very good pair of rucking flankers (backed up by the likes of Youngs and Cole). You simply didn't have the guys who could get on the ball and disrupt well enough. Brown's a very good 6, but isn't suited to playing 7 with the current rule interpretations.

I honestly think you'll go better in the next couple of matches - you were just unlucky to catch England on a very good day, where the off-loading game kept getting us well over the gain line and so making quick ball easier and cleaner, which then of course makes it easier to get over the gain line in the next phase of play - continue until we drop the ball in your 22 and you score a break-away try...

Big issue for me was the plan of attack. It basically consisted of the following...

Secure possession: Check

Run 1-2 phases: Check

Kick the ball up high or into England's half: Check

Apply no pressure: Check

Allow England to catch ball with ease: Check

Allow England to run ball up deep into our half: Check

Depend on Hogg to boot the ball deep back into England's half: Check

Repeat!

The one time we actually tried a few phases at halfway line, Beattie made a break.

So whilst Hogg, Maitland and Visser counter attacking was absolutely top drawer, the rest was just crap in my opinion.

Scotland should be optimistic.

I think it's wrong to expect instant improvement when the coaches are having to use pretty much the same team.

Improvement will come but it won't be instant, the real barometer will be Italy, usually a boring match that kills off the old and infirm watching it. If Scotland can win and win well then yes they're on the right road, if they lose or its a dull fest then you can be a little worried.

When England changed coaches the actual gameplan and skill levels were terrible in the first few games compared to the England of the season before, we fluked/lucked out in our wins against Italy and Scotland, but we've steadily improved and now bettered that (hopefully, touch wood).

I think this Scotland side are a lot better. Unfortunately for them, everyone else is a lot better too. It think the standard of rugby in the 6 nations this year is (so far) higher than I've seen in a while.

New coach - which may explain why the team didn't seem to gel - and lacked a plan b, however, there are some seriously skilled and powerful players there. I think that once a "team" mentality is in place they will be a serious threat to anyone.

screamingaddabs wrote:I think this Scotland side are a lot better. Unfortunately for them, everyone else is a lot better too. It think the standard of rugby in the 6 nations this year is (so far) higher than I've seen in a while.

It did seem much better, but was it a case of defense just being worse. I sadly didn't get to see Sunday's game but defense seemed poor enough for the two games saturday. Maybe attack was just alot better. For Ireland we seemed happy in the second half to let them just run up the field but in the last five minutes we defended and they got struck in thier 22

Yes, plenty of reason for optimism- you have a top back three, your back row, when one of your 7s is fit, will always be a handful, and Scott is well worth persevering with in the centre. Plenty to build on there.

At half back, I'm not at all sure that the brains trust knows what the ideal combination is. It needs to be decided once and for all whether Laidlaw is a 9 or 10, for example. If a nine, fine, sort out the all-important 10 quickly. It's evidently not Ruaridh, and I'm sure Scottish watchers will have their own opinions of which of the current candidates will do a better job. This is a fixable conundrum, I would think.

The real difficulty is the front 5. I notice that dummy half reckons that it stood up well on Saturday. I'd sort of beg leave to differ. The selected unit was just about the biggest that Scotland has ever fielded. As Gavin Hastings said before the game, the objective was to smash England up front and take the route one approach to victory. With that in mind, the experiment was a total failure. If the Scots did get parity in the scrum, it was only just - I saw a fair bit of creaking there, falling just short of reverse gear. Even parity against an inexperienced (Cole aside) England 5 would have been insufficient compared with the pre-game expectations.

The locks - well I have to choose my words carefully here. They're huge, and Gray is obviously a major talent, but I can't help thinking that with his physical attributes, he should be an intimidating rock, glowering and thundering across the field and in the tight. On Saturday, he tackled plenty, but was neutralised in the line-out and nowhere to be seen in the loose. Why, with such beef to call on, were Scotland smashed out of sight at the contact area? You have a right to expect much more of the guys at the coal face. More aggression from Gray, commensurate with his size, wouldn't go amiss, while Hamilton has surely got to be replaced. To see him lumbering after Youngs, crouch at the ensuing ruck and then paw ineffectually at the new man at the base of the breakdown spoke volumes. If the big men aren't going to do it, then Scotland are going to be far better served by a return to the traditionally smaller, more mobile front 5. Fix that and optimism can really return.

So is summary

If we change half our team we can start to be optimistic

You can start to be optimistic now. When you've weeded out one or two others, you can edge towards bullishness!

Probably a silly and obvious point to make, but we won't be playing England at Twickenham every week of the 6 Nations, and England on Saturday produced a top drawer performance.

It's easy to be down after a game like that, and yes, last season our possession and territory stats were better, but frankly who gives a monkey about either of those things if you can't convert into point. Given the slivers of possession and territory we had, scoring two tries and 18 points isn't that bad.

Yes, the breakdown was a disaster, but the balance in our pack was wrong. We had Gray, Denton and Beattie all hanging about in the backs waiting for some headline grabbing carry, meanwhile the remainder or our pack were outnumbered at the breakdown, so we were turned over time and time again. Painful as this is, it can be addressed. One of our three top class opensides will return soon, and hopefully the merits of Tim Swinson will become apparent to the Scotland coaches, as will Pat MacArthur. Both those guys are selfless workhorses and should have started against England to counter their efficient and mobile pack.

Italy played well to win yesterday, but they were not facing England at Twickenham, and France played with 1/10 the intensity that England did.

I think we'll find a way to win on Saturday, and then we'll be facing two home games against Ireland and Wales to actually make something of this tournament. Everything hinges on Saturday, but I'll quietly confident we'll turn things around.

FES - I will await with baited breath and if we turn it around, I will ask the same question above, but may have a different answer :-)

You'll need to change "week 1" to "week 2" though, so not exactly the same question...

funnyExiledScot wrote:You'll need to change "week 1" to "week 2" though, so not exactly the same question...

FES -

The thing about Scotland is that normally you could rely on Scottish defence holding up. That's why Calcutta matches were such dull affairs. At least the Scottish line could hold. The attack was like a fart in the wind: potentially threatening but far too fleeting to cause any serious concern.

Now it seems you have very useful players like Denton, Beattie, Maitland, Visser and Hogg who can add some cut and thrust and linger around longer to cause some problems but your defence is all too easily breached. Instead of coming up quickly in the line and suffocating opposition attacks, players are standing back and allowing the opposition all too easy yards over the defensive line. SJ was right to address this problem as Scotland's main area of concern. Saturday showed it still is the main problem.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:The thing about Scotland is that normally you could rely on Scottish defence holding up. That's why Calcutta matches were such dull affairs. At least the Scottish line could hold. The attack was like a fart in the wind: potentially threatening but far too fleeting to cause any serious concern.

Now it seems you have very useful players like Denton, Beattie, Maitland, Visser and Hogg who can add some cut and thrust and linger around longer to cause some problems but your defence is all too easily breached. Instead of coming up quickly in the line and suffocating opposition attacks, players are standing back and allowing the opposition all too easy yards over the defensive line. SJ was right to address this problem as Scotland's main area of concern. Saturday showed it still is the main problem.

You're spot on

Reasons for optimism is that we have good players in every position and very good players in most, players like Grant, Denton, Beattie, Gray, Brown, Rennie, Maitland, Visser, Hogg and Tonks who are currently very good players and also players like Weir, Heathcote, Kennedy, Bennett,Scott, Dunbar, Tom Brown, Fusaro, MacInally, Harley, Wilson and MacArthur coming through and perhaps in two years time players like Hidalgo-Clyne, Allan, Sinclair and Ashe in the u20s who showed great potential on Friday. Add to that players like Ford, Barclay and Laidlaw who are very good players on form.The truth is that if we can get a coach that can make these players into a team we could become very very competitive.

I think we need a reshuffle of the pack, as most people have been stipulating.

Get Hamilton out, possibly Kellock in, and I remember from what I saw of Swinson he is quite a handy player to have in contact, which against Italy is vital.

If our forwards pull their finger out on Saturday, I can see us winning by a couple of tries even.

If our forwards lose the battle its going to be another very long afternoon, Italy could well ship 10 points on us.

Agree risky it is NO

I spent nearly a grand going to watch my team being humiliated by a very savvy and talented English rugby team. There were players there who have done nothing for Scotland - ever - e.g. Hamilton and Murray. Get rid of them. One can pick and choose when he wants to play- what sort of message does that send other young props. Hamilton reminded me of some sort of half peed amateur player and at one stage I thought he was going to spew up. Yes Jim who is the w***ker now?
Hogg, Maitland, Brown, Beattie were good. Visser needs to watch the grand slam 1990 when from ko Findlay Calder powered into the English. To watch Morgan run all over him in the first minute set a very bad tone for proceedings. Grant, Gray, Scott and Hall did ok at times. Ford and Pyrgos ok when they came on. The rest were bloody awful although i felt for Laidlaw and Jackson behind that rubbish scrum.

Appears now we have an 8 crisis if Vernon is called up ahead of Wilson who has an ankle injury as does Beattie. Tonks out too, which is a shame as he looked excellent on Friday - as was Wilson. Depressing times peeps.

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:Agree risky it is NO

I spent nearly a grand going to watch my team being humiliated by a very savvy and talented English rugby team. There were players there who have done nothing for Scotland - ever - e.g. Hamilton and Murray. Get rid of them. One can pick and choose when he wants to play- what sort of message does that send other young props. Hamilton reminded me of some sort of half peed amateur player and at one stage I thought he was going to spew up. Yes Jim who is the w***ker now?
Hogg, Maitland, Brown, Beattie were good. Visser needs to watch the grand slam 1990 when from ko Findlay Calder powered into the English. To watch Morgan run all over him in the first minute set a very bad tone for proceedings. Grant, Gray, Scott and Hall did ok at times. Ford and Pyrgos ok when they came on. The rest were bloody awful although i felt for Laidlaw and Jackson behind that rubbish scrum.

Appears now we have an 8 crisis if Vernon is called up ahead of Wilson who has an ankle injury as does Beattie. Tonks out too, which is a shame as he looked excellent on Friday - as was Wilson. Depressing times peeps.

Haha I don't believe 21st, did you just compliment an Edinburgh player?! in all fairness though I reckon Beattie will recover so no need to worry about 8... I think we miss our Mike Blairs, Jason Whites, Cusiters, Hines' and Scott Murrays -people who were undoubtedly good, maybe not the best, but who gave it 100% and would rarely give ground to any England team! People often talk about teams having grit and the players who are meant to have it in our team aren't giving it out!

Tramptastic wrote:

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:Agree risky it is NO

I spent nearly a grand going to watch my team being humiliated by a very savvy and talented English rugby team. There were players there who have done nothing for Scotland - ever - e.g. Hamilton and Murray. Get rid of them. One can pick and choose when he wants to play- what sort of message does that send other young props. Hamilton reminded me of some sort of half peed amateur player and at one stage I thought he was going to spew up. Yes Jim who is the w***ker now?
Hogg, Maitland, Brown, Beattie were good. Visser needs to watch the grand slam 1990 when from ko Findlay Calder powered into the English. To watch Morgan run all over him in the first minute set a very bad tone for proceedings. Grant, Gray, Scott and Hall did ok at times. Ford and Pyrgos ok when they came on. The rest were bloody awful although i felt for Laidlaw and Jackson behind that rubbish scrum.

Appears now we have an 8 crisis if Vernon is called up ahead of Wilson who has an ankle injury as does Beattie. Tonks out too, which is a shame as he looked excellent on Friday - as was Wilson. Depressing times peeps.

Haha I don't believe 21st, did you just compliment an Edinburgh player?! in all fairness though I reckon Beattie will recover so no need to worry about 8... I think we miss our Mike Blairs, Jason Whites, Cusiters, Hines' and Scott Murrays -people who were undoubtedly good, maybe not the best, but who gave it 100% and would rarely give ground to any England team! People often talk about teams having grit and the players who are meant to have it in our team aren't giving it out!

Yes I did because he (Tonks) deserved it as did Greig Laidlaw last season. The constant hyping of Denton though gets most Warrior fans annoyed as he would not get anywhere near the Glasgow team, nevermind Scotland or the British Lions ffs

We do need the 100% players as you listed - there were those on Saturday who need reminded who, ultimately, pays their wages.

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:

Tramptastic wrote:

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:Agree risky it is NO

I spent nearly a grand going to watch my team being humiliated by a very savvy and talented English rugby team. There were players there who have done nothing for Scotland - ever - e.g. Hamilton and Murray. Get rid of them. One can pick and choose when he wants to play- what sort of message does that send other young props. Hamilton reminded me of some sort of half peed amateur player and at one stage I thought he was going to spew up. Yes Jim who is the w***ker now?
Hogg, Maitland, Brown, Beattie were good. Visser needs to watch the grand slam 1990 when from ko Findlay Calder powered into the English. To watch Morgan run all over him in the first minute set a very bad tone for proceedings. Grant, Gray, Scott and Hall did ok at times. Ford and Pyrgos ok when they came on. The rest were bloody awful although i felt for Laidlaw and Jackson behind that rubbish scrum.

Appears now we have an 8 crisis if Vernon is called up ahead of Wilson who has an ankle injury as does Beattie. Tonks out too, which is a shame as he looked excellent on Friday - as was Wilson. Depressing times peeps.

Haha I don't believe 21st, did you just compliment an Edinburgh player?! in all fairness though I reckon Beattie will recover so no need to worry about 8... I think we miss our Mike Blairs, Jason Whites, Cusiters, Hines' and Scott Murrays -people who were undoubtedly good, maybe not the best, but who gave it 100% and would rarely give ground to any England team! People often talk about teams having grit and the players who are meant to have it in our team aren't giving it out!

Yes I did because he (Tonks) deserved it as did Greig Laidlaw last season. The constant hyping of Denton though gets most Warrior fans annoyed as he would not get anywhere near the Glasgow team, nevermind Scotland or the British Lions ffs

We do need the 100% players as you listed - there were those on Saturday who need reminded who, ultimately, pays their wages.

We seem to have lost players like Blair and Hines very quickly. In fact if they could convince Hines to return just for the remainder of the six nations it would be a master stroke. The sooner Cusiter is back the better and Rennie and Barclay too. Fusaro should definitely start because I can't imagine him retreating in the same way as Denton did at points.

Yes, as Scotland have scored more tries in 1 match this year than they managed throughout the whole of the 6 nations last year!

Except we haven't

I think that there is definitely cause for optimism, sadly I am not sure if it will make a difference in this tournament.

We have made massive strides in areas of our game that were simply abysmal for far too long. At the end of the last season I was hopeful that Visser would make an impact but could see him being marked out of the game once this had become apparent. Now with the potential for attack coming from very good players who are all relatively inexperienced at international level in the back three we can threaten out wide. We also have more good youngsters who will be looking to break through into the 3/4 at international level.

Over the weekend pundits made a lot of the fact that the Scotland team had over 400 international caps between them, I don't think that this had any real bearing on the match, especially when you consider that the majority of them (282) were held by just 6 players. Realistically this is a young team that will get younger as more players force their way into it, some of the experienced players had poor games with the youngsters being the stars. The potential for development is definitely there, whoever is in charge of the team going forward and the members of the SRU need to come together to make sure that our young boys develop into well grounded, professional athletes it would be a crying shame if the cautionary tale that a certain Mr Cipriani has provided south of the border was not heeded. We can develop and we can grow, but we need to do so in the right way, whether Scott Johnson is the right man to do this is hard to say at the moment. I would like us to hire someone in the mould of Clive Woodward, that is someone who surrounds themselves with excellent coaches and focuses on delivering players with the right mental attitude to play and win AS A TEAM.

Our biggest shortfall on Saturday as has been highlighted many times already this week was our pack. Sadly this is an area that we have gone backwards in recently, this is not the end of the world, the same players who have dominated the breakdown over recent years are still there and are still capable of doing this, they just need to be coached right. If anyone is capable of this it is Dean Ryan who, lets face it, only really had one week with the boys before the England game I am sure we can improve here.

The short version:

Yes there is cause for optimism if we get things right.

IanBru wrote:Except we haven't

OK perhaps not yet, but at least the backline looks more settled and now looks very potent in attack, particularly with a back 3 of Visser, Maitland and Hogg all of which have serious gas to burn.

The main issue in the calcutta cup match was clearly a lack of competing at the breakdown - why I don't know but that can be addressed. Some of the big blokes should be ashamed of themselves for not doing this part of their job. Gray in particular I noticed arriving at rucks but not actually doing anything

I have followed rugby for many years and this is the best set of players I can remember for a long time. The 1990 team maybe? It just needs someone to make a team out of them rather than a rabble. some encouraging signs in this direction - they played to the end and heads did not drop

TJ wrote:The main issue in the calcutta cup match was clearly a lack of competing at the breakdown - why I don't know but that can be addressed. Some of the big blokes should be ashamed of themselves for not doing this part of their job. Gray in particular I noticed arriving at rucks but not actually doing anything

I have followed rugby for many years and this is the best set of players I can remember for a long time. The 1990 team maybe? It just needs someone to make a team out of them rather than a rabble. some encouraging signs in this direction - they played to the end and heads did not drop

Well England have always had superiority over Scotland in the Forward Battle Exchanges in Calcutta Cup matches, particularly in the 1991 match at Twickenham when England's 2 big giants Wade Dooley and Paul Ackford totally overshadowed and dominated their shorter and less skilled Scottish rivals Damian Cronin and Chris Gray.

Gboycott, do you have any anecdotes that aren't from the days when I was in nappies?

I look forward to the team announcement, as it may signal whether the management has a clue

funnyExiledScot wrote:Probably a silly and obvious point to make, but we won't be playing England at Twickenham every week of the 6 Nations, and England on Saturday produced a top drawer performance.

It's easy to be down after a game like that, and yes, last season our possession and territory stats were better, but frankly who gives a monkey about either of those things if you can't convert into point. Given the slivers of possession and territory we had, scoring two tries and 18 points isn't that bad.

Yes, the breakdown was a disaster, but the balance in our pack was wrong. We had Gray, Denton and Beattie all hanging about in the backs waiting for some headline grabbing carry, meanwhile the remainder or our pack were outnumbered at the breakdown, so we were turned over time and time again. Painful as this is, it can be addressed. One of our three top class opensides will return soon, and hopefully the merits of Tim Swinson will become apparent to the Scotland coaches, as will Pat MacArthur. Both those guys are selfless workhorses and should have started against England to counter their efficient and mobile pack.

Italy played well to win yesterday, but they were not facing England at Twickenham, and France played with 1/10 the intensity that England did.

I think we'll find a way to win on Saturday, and then we'll be facing two home games against Ireland and Wales to actually make something of this tournament. Everything hinges on Saturday, but I'll quietly confident we'll turn things around.

Yes, I agree with this.

Previously we had a collective that were marginally greater than a sum of their limited parts.

Now it's the opposite, the individuals are better than the team played and that's by far a better position to start from.

It's been said already:

1. It will take a while, but the dead wood (Hamilton, Murray) will fall away as a great deal of other jetsom has over the past few seasons - not seeing Morrison, Danielli, Godman, Parks, Jones, Dewey and the like in a Scotland shirt is a source of continuing pleasure and a sign of improvement in its own right. Swinson, MacArthur, Fusaro, Cairns are genuinely international options who will come good.

2. Key players are missing in Rennie, Cusiter and, er, someone who is an international quality 10. On the latter, Heathcote might feasibly be the answer.

3. We have strength in depth in almost all positions for the first time in living memory. Beating the Saxons twice in succession is not an accident, however much some people would like it to be.

4. There are genuinely young players to be excited about with Turner, Ashe, Eadie, Gray Jnr, Fife, Farndale, Messiah and quite a few others.

Having just read the article with SLamont in the Herald publically wondering how people are writing the team off after one game, I am becoming less optimistic. The press is no place for this kind of whining, people are sceptical of the team because our results over the last decade speak for themselves, publicly moaning about it makes him and by association the whole team look weak.

If the team wants people to get behind them then they need to f*@king man up and provide us with performances that will make the fans proud, not give interviews like this. I just hope to god that this is the press somehow twisting his words.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/rugby/lamont-how-can-people-write-us-off-after-just-one-game.20117546

Awesome. How can we write you off after one game, Sean?

Tradition, mostly.

Have to say I agree with Lamont.

Scotland should not be written off instantly. Scotland probably had the toughest match they could feasibly get up first. They faced an England side who were at home and full of confidence due to strong performances for their top 3 clubs in the HC and that win vs NZ.

Scotland should feel optimistic that you have found a 14 and 15 that can actually threaten opposition. Should feel optimistic you have a decent backrow in the making once one of your 7s is fit - a backrow of KB,Rennie and Beattie should be good.

Writtne off after one game - no

After 10 years - yes

We see the same rubbish year after year

We hear the same rubbish year after year

We get disappointed year after year

Win some blinking games and we might stop being down on you

Simples

I have been busy this weekend, saw the match but have been unable to comment on it untill now.

It was a strange game for me.

For the 1st time in a long time we got absolutley smashed, and not just on the score board.

We were thouroughly 2nd best in the physical aspect of that game. We were murdered up front with the English backrow running riot and the frontrow and both locks making a shambles of the breakdown. They turned us over more times than I could count and our backs were given no space whatsoever.

I see a lot of people criticising Jackson, but to be honest he had a tough tough game. Most of that blame can be laid at the feet of our lethargic pack who spent most of the game trying to make a big carry to get noticed rather than doing their damn jobs.

Denton, Hamilton and Murray really let themselves down. Hamilton and Murray were just too slow in the loose and didn't IMO exonherate themselves at Scrum time either, and as for Denton he did nowhere near the ammount of dirty work that was needed from a no.6. He spent most of the match posing in the backline flicking his hair out of his face instead of having his head and body in the way of counter rucking, rampaging Engish forwards.

Ford too when he came on did more in 20 minutes than Murray, Hamilton and Denton combined in the loose, making a good few carries and forcing a crucial turnover penalty near the conclusion of the 2nd half. I still want to see Macarthur starting but Ford did better than Murray, Denton and Hamilton for sure.

Something is fundamentally wrong here though, 2 years running we have somehow beaten the Saxons... we can clearly beat England at the level below international and on paper that Saxons side was far better. So what is going on?

So my XXIII for Italy :

1. Grant / Welsh
2. MacArthur / Ford
3. Lowe / Murray
4. Gray
5. Kellock / Swinson
6. Brown
7. Harley
8. Beattie / Denton

9. Laidlaw / Pyrgos
10. Jackson / Heathcote
11. Visser
12. Scott
13. Dunbar
14. Maitland
15. Hogg / Tonks

/ = Subs.

Lamont just isn't a 13, I said that numerous times before the match.

Riskysports I am saying you shouldn't be so hard on the side for losing to England away from home.

I can understand anger for the lack of wins for Scotland but you need to look at it realistically.



Scotland have 3 home games and should be looking to win them all. That's a realistic target.

Lose to Italy at home and I can understand you would be very angry

beshocked wrote:Riskysports I am saying you shouldn't be so hard on the side for losing to England away from home.

I can understand anger for the lack of wins for Scotland but you need to look at it realistically.



Scotland have 3 home games and should be looking to win them all. That's a realistic target.

Lose to Italy at home and I can understand you would be very angry

Why shouldn't we be hard on them, there are a number of good players on a team that seems incapable of playing together. I did not see too much reason to be pessimistic until I read the sentiments expressed by Lamont, those players are not owed anything by anyone they have to earn wins in the same way they have to earn the respect of the Scottish fans. I will always support my national team representing the country I love in my favourite sport, but I reserve the right to criticise them when they undererform. To question the support of people who have stood by a team through a decade of dross performances is out of order and if it is representative of the rest of the squads attitude then there is no cause for optimism because until they change it we will continue to lose.

Solid8 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Riskysports I am saying you shouldn't be so hard on the side for losing to England away from home.

I can understand anger for the lack of wins for Scotland but you need to look at it realistically.



Scotland have 3 home games and should be looking to win them all. That's a realistic target.

Lose to Italy at home and I can understand you would be very angry

Why shouldn't we be hard on them, there are a number of good players on a team that seems incapable of playing together. I did not see too much reason to be pessimistic until I read the sentiments expressed by Lamont, those players are not owed anything by anyone they have to earn wins in the same way they have to earn the respect of the Scottish fans. I will always support my national team representing the country I love in my favourite sport, but I reserve the right to criticise them when they undererform. To question the support of people who have stood by a team through a decade of dross performances is out of order and if it is representative of the rest of the squads attitude then there is no cause for optimism because until they change it we will continue to lose.

It's not good for confidence. As tough as it is you need to get behind Scotland. You need realistic expectations - wins against Italy,Ireland and Wales should be your target. You need to rebuild confidence. Kicking the Scottish team too hard for probably losing to one of the favourites for the tournament is harsh IMO.

Scotland are going through the rebuilding phase. You still need to solve the problem at fly half. Beat Italy and you can go from there.

Scotland's rebuilding phase has been going on for longer than any other team in the history of rugby!

Also you miss my point, it is not the loss that angers me, it is the attitude expressed in that interview.

Scotland team to play Italy on Saturday:

Hogg; Maitland, Lamont, Scott, Visser; Jackson Laidlaw; Grant, Ford, Murray, Gray, Hamilton, Harley, Brown Beattie

Bench: Hall/MacArthur, Low, Cross, Kellock Denton, Pyrgos, Weir, Evans

To be fair to Lamont he's usually the first one to pipe up and say that the performances aren't good enough. In this instance I sympathise.

I actually think the main issue was the lack of balance in the pack (not that I think it would have changed the result, but maybe the scoreline), something that can be remedied (although the selection against Italy suggests that the coaches aren't quite on top of the issue).

I'm not writing us off after one game. We now have three games at home in a row. Win two and we can claim that improvements are being made. If we lose to Italy then I'll be more critical, but Saturday felt more like an ambush, and as shown in the AIs, when England play like that they cause any side problems. We didn't have the personnel on the pitch to cope, but there were some good performances regardless in blue.

For many years I have felt that Scottish sides have had to pick several players who simply were not up to international standard (avaerage club players at best). The main positive I see from Saturday is that I'm not sure that I'd say that of the present bunch. Sure they couldn't cope with the pace that England put on the game and, sure, they lack a general at 10, but all in all these are players who deserve to be on an international pitch. Some need to re-find their intensity/passion, but I thought there were good reasons to think this long drought may be ending.

SneakySideStep wrote:For many years I have felt that Scottish sides have had to pick several players who simply were not up to international standard (avaerage club players at best). The main positive I see from Saturday is that I'm not sure that I'd say that of the present bunch. Sure they couldn't cope with the pace that England put on the game and, sure, they lack a general at 10, but all in all these are players who deserve to be on an international pitch. Some need to re-find their intensity/passion, but I thought there were good reasons to think this long drought may be ending.

I agree with that. Compared to some of the total nonsense that we capped during the 90s and early 00s, this isn't a bad side player for player. Where I actually think we've regressed is in tactical nous and team selection. It may well just be perception, but I used to feel in the late 80s and early 90s that Scotland made the most of what it had (and there were some good players back then to be fair), whereas now I feel that there are teams beating us who perhaps don't necessarily have better players (I put Italy, Argentina and Tonga in this group), and I feel like we are not maximising our resources effectively.

You may be interested to know that the announced Scotland side for Saturday apparently features Harley....at 6. Ford keeps his place at 2, otherwise, as you were. Front 5 all fine, apparently.

FES

Interesting comments - I do think you are perhaps a couple of players short still (10 and 13), and obviously there are some areas where your squad is shallow (Rennie was a big miss for you on Saturday), but overall on paper your team has been going the right way for a couple of years.

I do agree that presently you have quite a few games where the team is less than the sum of its parts (an accusation that could certainly also be levelled at England for large parts of the time between 2003 and 2012). When you do get it together (as you seem to quite frequently against Australia), you've a tough team to beat, but these games are not frequent enough yet. It's odd, because back in the 80s and early 90s the one thing that marked Scotland out was the intensity of their play, always a difficult team to take on and one who would scrap for every loose ball.

Perhaps a team talk from the likes of Finlay Calder or John Jeffrey would be more beneficial than Telfer giving the opposition theirs...

There seems to be very little intensity and aggression from Scotland these days; Murray and Ford never appear to up for it when you watch them. What we wouldn't give for some Calder and Jeffrey attitude. Shame Hines retired ,we could do with him this season.

Since Taylor has taken over as defensive coach we have been either quite passive (first half of new zealand and Boks games) extremely passive (Tonga game) or missing in action (England game).

Dont see how Taylor is going to suddenly change his defensive patterns and systems in a week.

So i see no reasons for optomism for this weekend. Harley will make a bit of a difference defensively, i hope. he certainly has a better work rate in the tackle than Denton

However if Ford has his ususal game at the lineout (ie mince) then i dont see us winning this one, but maybe the players will ignore Taylor and give Gary Mercer (glasgow's previous excellent defense coach) a phone for some tips!

Yes things not looking good once again. As The Who once sang "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss". Baws !

More bonkers yet was the apparent fact that Steadman (whose defense won matches against the Wallabies and Boks in 2009-2010) wanted to stay as defence coach but the SRU declined to extend his contract.

Robinson called Taylor's capture from the Reds "a coup". A coo pat more like.