Glasgow underrated?

Glasgow sit a very good 2nd in the Pro 12, made the play offs the year before.

They have a very good first XV and a good squad. Some of thier players are very high class as well, yet I don't think they get the respect they deserve yet.

Ok they haven't done much in the H-cup and that is the stage to get noticed.

They have the best defense in the league (points conceded and one of the best points scored), yet yet are very under rated by opposing fans (think Glasgow fans are happy to go under the radar at present, and quietly go about thier buiness).

My point is why do teams like Scarlets garner respect and Glasgow haven't quite got this same level yet, and have outperformed them the last 2 years (not to single out Scarlets just using an example)?

A team that finishes 2nd in the Top 14 or Jeff, is one most people look to avoid yet I don't think Glasgow will receive the same respect as the other 2 teams that finish second in thier league.

Is it because these other teams are better supported therefore get more media hype, and Glasgow are outside the limelight? Is it becuase of Glasgows failure recently on the European stage to make other fans take notice? Are other teams worried about facing them yet, and are English wishing to avoid them in the H-cup.

What do Glasgow need to do to earn it?
2nd in league would do it?
Get to play off final?
Get to knock outs in H-cup?
Beat a big English/French team for the media to take notice?
Any of the above?

Not sure people don't respect them. In fact, a lot of fans on here openly admit they are worried when travelling to Scotstoun.

If they continue as they are next season with the 1st choice players back, I reckon we'll see them through to the HC knockout stages.

Unlike Edinburgh, I thought Glasgow were pretty unlucky to lose some of their HC games. They've improved as the season has gone on, if the HC pool games were being played now I'm sure they would have won more.
They have good strength in depth so I expect them to continue doing well next year, who knows they may even unearth another Maitland.

Sorry didn't mean don't respect them, but don't give them as much respect as they prob deserve.

Scotstoun isn't a place Rabo fans like visiting, I knew it would be a tough game for Ulster and a loss was probable this weekend, but earlier in the season in H-cup was looking at at win there, next year if drawn again I wouldn't be so sure.

But is it a place English fans would be as worried about heading to as (to keep same example above) Parc ya Scarlets? I think most English press would rate a visit to Parc ya Scarlets as a tougher palce to go, or would rate Sandy Park as tougher yet Glasgow have outperformed these two in recent years.

Think we would get more respect if we turned over a few French sides in the HC. We seem to do it to Aviva sides (at home anyway) - Saracens, Wasps, Bath and Northampton in the last 4 seasons HC. Otherwise in the Rabo/Magners we have to go to Dublin, Cork and Belfast and start winning there - our record away is deplorable. One Dan Parks kicking victory at Ravenhill a few seasons ago is not good enough.

I think if they hadn't had so many injuries during the group stages they would have shocked Saints, and maybe have caused Ulster more trouble...

I'd be very afraid if any big English or French teams get them next year. They'll still be 3rd seeds and could really trouble some teams... And even with the likely losses this year (Barclay, Morrison, Wight) they'll have a hell of a starting XV and some very good squad guys!

I think Glasgow's First XV is still not yet, at the same level as the other big clubs around Europe. Where we have improved is that our squad depth has improved beyond recognition and has allowed us to compete in the league far better during the year.

In France, Scottish sides are generally rated lower than any English, Welsh and Irish sides (Castres fans were hoping for a bonus point win against Glasgow, only a 15 vs 13 advantage and a missed penalty by Jackson gave them the win).

For me it's pretty obvious they are a much tougher side than the Scarlets and i think Glasgow will get better and better, they have 6 really good props and very dangerous backs.

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:I think if they hadn't had so many injuries during the group stages they would have shocked Saints, and maybe have caused Ulster more trouble...

I'd be very afraid if any big English or French teams get them next year. They'll still be 3rd seeds and could really trouble some teams... And even with the likely losses this year (Barclay, Morrison, Wight) they'll have a hell of a starting XV and some very good squad guys!

I think its going to be interesting who we bring in. I agree that the three above will go and will free up some budget but not huge amounts. We are well covered in most areas, its quality we need not quantity this year in terms of signings. Will we have the budget and will the signings fit in with the SRUs signing policy.

Cusiter and Rory Lamont actually getting fit I see as being key. If both continue to not play then they are huge drain on finances. If Cusiter is not the highest paid player at Glasgow, he is not far off it and unfortunately he has not made it onto the park anywhere near enough for us in the past 2 years.

Ramont must be close to retiring, Dot?

I agree with UiG that injuries basically ravaged the Warriors during the early Heino group stages, and until they progress on that front, the level of respect they get will be diminished. As Dot says, it's a moot point whether the starting XV are at the right level to make Heino progress, even tho squad depth is superb right now. Playoff success in the Rabo would also help

Dot, I honestly can't see Ramont continuing after this year... He's not played in 12 months really... Even if he does come back, with Murchie and Hogg at FB, SLamont, Seymour, Paris, McGuigan, DTH, Niko etc on the wings is there actually much need for him anymore?

Cus is more likely to make it back, maybe even the tail of this season...

With RV coming back, there's less pressure on the back row with Barcs and Gus gone. Maybe another openside would be nice, but then again Ashe coming up from the EDP and RV covering 7, there's maybe enough there.

Dunbar is G-Dogs replacement, and Bennett might be staying, from what I've heard.

Probable 23 for Next Season

1. Grant 2. McArthur 3. Cusack 4. Swinson 5. Kellock 6. Strauss 7. Fusaro 8. Wilson 9. Pyrgos 10. Jackson 11. DTH 12. Dunbar 13. Bennett 14. Maitland 15. Hogg
16. Hall 17. Welsh 18. Low 19. Ryder 20. Harley 21. Niko 22. Weir 23. S Lamont

Plus Gillies, Reid, Kalman, Gray, Campbell, Vernon, Eddie, Ashe, Cus, Horne, Kennedy, Paris, McGuigan Seymour etc...

That's a pretty bloody good team tbh!

Actually where's Maitland?

Looks like he forgot our other best back !

Whoops fixed now.....

Surely Matawalu is the best scrum half - he's absolutely lethal!

Cusiter is also surely better than Pyrgos, even when he is broken.

Oh, and Kennedy belongs to Edinburgh!

Glasgow are not underrated. I think they are acknowledged as regular play-off contenders for the Rabo who simply haven't had the depth or experience to cope with the step up to the HEC, especially when faced with international call-ups and injuries. Since the 2007 season, we've probably had two seasons where we lost a lot of players and had to rebuild and maybe another when we were just poor. Other than that, we have been there or thereabouts and, in my opinion, it has been our lack of tries stopping us from getting a home semi-final that has been our biggest problem.

That looks like it may have been sorted. Glasgow need a home semi-final and to win the Rabo, if not this year then within the next couple. I think once you have that level of success and consistency, then they can look at the HEC with a view to progressing in the knock-out stages.

I cannot help but feel that other fans only judge a club's worth by where they feature in the Heineken and whilst there's some sense in that, it can be exceptionally short sighted.

As I've tried to point out before on the 'who will make the play-offs thread', people decided a month into the season with the usual attention span of a squadron of guppy fish that Glasgow's slow start to the season meant that they Weren't Very Good, despite the fact that Strauss, Niko, Maitland and the Messiah hadn't arrived yet and a number of the first XV were badly injured.

I can't really explain the poor HC run this year. We were carrying injuries but we should still have done much better and we need to be unsparing in that sort of criticism in order to be considered premier league. Everyone in our pool was beatable, everyone.

What is true, however, is that the quality of our first XXIII has improved beyond measure in recent years and we appear to have received first dibs on the marquee signings who have wanted to come and play in the Rabo - Niko, Swinson, Strauss and Maitland are our most important 4 signings in at least 5 years. I would like to think that they arrived more by judgement than by luck, but that's something we may simply never know.

6 excellent props, a world class back three by NH club standards, a hard working boiler room, a young Scottish 8 who has excelled himself this year, a massive chunk of Super XV quality at blind and Scotland's best young players at 2, 7 and 15 means that I genuinely don't think that we have anyone to fear in the run in to the playoffs.

I'll stop wibbling and feck off now but the key, key thing is how many of the above players we've managed to re-sign this year. Who's coming over next is very hard to tell. I think that in typical Scottish fashion we've underestimated the quality of player for whom pulling on an international jersey is a key incentive. It's clearly a real thing and we have to use it.

If a young player as good as Craig Clarke can sign for Connacht, then I think we're in clear blue water in terms of what's possible.

Didn't Glasgow beat Toulouse (in France?) a few seasons back?

I don't think they are being underated as such. I believe that the majority of the followers of the Rabo sides are fully aware of how good Glasgow are/can be, and we treat them with the respect they deserve. However, and not being disrespectful, the followers of the Jeff (and many pundits on sky) don't seem to pay too much attention to the Rabo etc, so they tend to just expect them to be an average plugging away side. I honestly don't think that opinion will change until Glasgow lift a trophy.

I think it may be a case of selective memory for some. As a Dragons fan it is much easier to remember the fact that we nearly always used to beat you and Edinburgh (or so the memory seems) home and often away, than the more recent memories of being beaten or thrashed (the other day). When you've been the better of someone consistently over the years, I guess it's easy to underestimate or underrate someone when their fortunes change for the better. At the back of your mind it will always be a case of 'it's only Glasgow, we used to beat them all of the time, they're in a purple patch'. I think the same was thought for most when facing Exeter, as they were 'just that team from the Championship', but they've proved a lot of people wrong too.

But good luck to Glasgow, keep proving people wrong. It's good for the league to have another strong team, and good for Scottish rugby. Just wish the Dragons could find the magic formula to change around out fortunes.

I think Glasgow are very quickly becoming highly-rated, or at least rated by most people.

Funnily enough, it's quite tough to pick the strongest Glasgow team. As it stands my best guess would be -

1. Grant
2. MacArthur
3. Cusack
4. Swinson
5. Kellock
6. Harley
7. Barclay
8. Wilson
9. Niko
10. Weir
11. DTH
12. Dunbar
13. Bennett
14. Maitland
15. Hogg

Bench - Hall, Welsh, Low, Ryder, Strauss, Pyrgos, Jackson/Horne, Seymour

Bit controversial to pick Bennett at 13, but he and Dunbar have looked good together, and he's such an incisive runner.

The good thing is, I'd be comfortable with quite a few versions of the Glasgow 1st XV, such is the squad depth at the club. Remains to be seen whether the good form of late and be continued once the internationalists are reintegrated back into the squad.

I think Griff you may be onto it, people are used to winning the games so are slower to give credit when a team comes good rather than a team thats always been there or there abouts.

Connacht and Terviso are changing preceptions of them after being whipping boys. Terviso in the the H-cup are not a team everyone wants in their group as much as a few years ago. Zebre will have to do alot to change peoples precieption that they are fairly beatable home or away.

Put finishing in the Pro 12 playoff doesn't seam to give out the same respect as finishing in play offs in Jeff or Top 14.

Anyway I hope Glasgow make the play offs, and if Ulster don't win I hope Glasgow do (this isn't a slant against the other provinces who I would normally want to win, but for the overall good of the League a Scottish winner would prob do more good than if Leinster won it). Winning the Pro 12 could be the catalyst to promoting Rugby in Glasgow, a team to be proud of draws in supporters, a good h-cup and we could see a Scottish revival. It would promote the Pro 12 in Scotland, and howfully increase intrest in the League. Next year I also hope Terviso make th eplay offs for the same reasons.

I think that this Glasgow squad is superb and it has depth in almost all positions, in some respects I think it's a shame that Gray, Beattie and Brown left because with them I think Glasgow would have one of the best packs in Europe, still they're a top, young side without them and could easily be competing for the Heineken cup and the Rabo in a few years.

Griff wrote:I think it may be a case of selective memory for some. As a Dragons fan it is much easier to remember the fact that we nearly always used to beat you and Edinburgh (or so the memory seems) home and often away, than the more recent memories of being beaten or thrashed (the other day). When you've been the better of someone consistently over the years, I guess it's easy to underestimate or underrate someone when their fortunes change for the better. At the back of your mind it will always be a case of 'it's only Glasgow, we used to beat them all of the time, they're in a purple patch'. I think the same was thought for most when facing Exeter, as they were 'just that team from the Championship', but they've proved a lot of people wrong too.

But good luck to Glasgow, keep proving people wrong. It's good for the league to have another strong team, and good for Scottish rugby. Just wish the Dragons could find the magic formula to change around out fortunes.

Very much agree with this, Griff.

Preconceptions are hard to shift. It's only the passing of the years that makes you realise great teams are cyclical. Lots of people pointed out that Scotland had lost 5 or 6 on the bounce to Ireland at home. What was referred to less was the fact that before that, we'd won the previous 8 on the trot.

I remember getting smacked by the Dragons every bit as well as putting in a good show last week.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Surely Matawalu is the best scrum half - he's absolutely lethal!

Cusiter is also surely better than Pyrgos, even when he is broken.

Oh, and Kennedy belongs belonged to Edinburgh!

Fixed that for you, fES - no charge on this occasion

123456789 wrote:I think that this Glasgow squad is superb and it has depth in almost all positions, in some respects I think it's a shame that Gray, Beattie and Brown left because with them I think Glasgow would have one of the best packs in Europe, still they're a top, young side without them and could easily be competing for the Heineken cup and the Rabo in a few years.

True but if those three had stayed we would have not been able to sign a number of the guys we did.

Yep, they are, but there are certain parts of the season you have to perform to earn respect like the Pro12 playoffs and the Heineken Cup group stages and knockouts. Glasgow had a pretty poor season last year for a few reasons and that affects how they are perceived, plus they underperformed this year in the HC.

But if you watch them in the Pro12 I think you can see it's just a matter of time until they start doing the business in Europe and they should be real contenders in the playoffs. If they can do that, it's only a matter of time until they are being talked about with the big boys.

Also, Glasgow are stuck in the vicious cycle Ulster were in for a wee while regarding HC seedings. Being third/fourth seed every year is tough- you need a good breakthrough season where you lay down a marker in terms of results and surprise people by qualifying.

From a neutral's perspective I am stunned that Glasgow are second.

From what I'd read on here I genuinely thought they were a lot worse then that.

One question, are they a lot better then they showed in Europe, as I watched a couple of their games this season and I have to admit that they were awful.

Pleased that Scotland have a team doing so well, but it seems to me that unless you score a bundle of tries you won't get recognition. Just look at Edinburgh, Scarlets, Quins, Glos, Ulster. Yes some of those teams are doing well now but they all get talked up so much because once a season they'll score a jaw droppingly amazing try and everyone judges them on that.

yappysnap wrote:From a neutral's perspective I am stunned that Glasgow are second.

From what I'd read on here I genuinely thought they were a lot worse then that.

One question, are they a lot better then they showed in Europe, as I watched a couple of their games this season and I have to admit that they were awful.

Pleased that Scotland have a team doing so well, but it seems to me that unless you score a bundle of tries you won't get recognition. Just look at Edinburgh, Scarlets, Quins, Glos, Ulster. Yes some of those teams are doing well now but they all get talked up so much because once a season they'll score a jaw droppingly amazing try and everyone judges them on that.

Horne's try vs the Saints and Matawalu's last week were exactly what you are describing.

Get a video up quick!

Matawalu's (around 3:30):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whTY18hL7Yc

Horne's:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UWfEwTCOhw

yappysnap wrote:From a neutral's perspective I am stunned that Glasgow are second.

From what I'd read on here I genuinely thought they were a lot worse then that.

One question, are they a lot better then they showed in Europe, as I watched a couple of their games this season and I have to admit that they were awful.

Fair comment Yappy, but the answer is unquestionably yes, they are considerably better now that they are settled than they were in Europe.

All of their players are fit now and the guys that took a while to arrive like Matawalu, Bennett and Strauss have shown real impact.

George Carlin wrote:

yappysnap wrote:From a neutral's perspective I am stunned that Glasgow are second.

From what I'd read on here I genuinely thought they were a lot worse then that.

One question, are they a lot better then they showed in Europe, as I watched a couple of their games this season and I have to admit that they were awful.

Fair comment Yappy, but the answer is unquestionably yes, they are considerably better now that they are settled than they were in Europe.

All of their players are fit now and the guys that took a while to arrive like Matawalu, Bennett and Strauss have shown real impact.

Erm ... apart from Michael Cusack (shoulder) Gordon Reid (head) Finlay Gillies (neck) Chris Fusaro (leg) Chris Cusiter (shoulder) James Johnstone (head) Rory Lamont (ankle) [George Hunter EDP (foot) Fergus Scott EDP (neck)]

Er, yes. Apart from those boys. Any longer on the sidelines and I'm worried Big Mike will eat Cusiter out of sheer boredom.

Out of interest, and a bit of jealousy, what do you think has been the reason for the turnaround in fortunes at Glasgow? Is it coaching? Cash injection so that you can afford better players? Improvements in academy structures? Haven't you changed grounds recently too??? A combination of these factors?

A bit of everything Griff, the underage system has been turning out guys like Weir, Gray, Harley, Hogg, Bennett etc. but the recruitment has been top class too (DTH, Strauss, Niko, Lamont, Grant, Swinson) and that seems to be a hallmark of Sean Lineen's connections, similar to Humphreys at Ulster.

Lineen set the foundations with a tough as nails defence but Toonie has allowed them to play it a bit more, and that seems to have unlocked something in the players, they're enjoying their rugby and that makes them want to keep up this good run.

The move to Scotstoun has helped, as has the new supporters club, but it's a real feelgood factor around Glasgow Warriors at the minute and it's going to be interesting towards the end of this season and going into next...

Not a Glasgow fan, Griff, but I think the turnaround has been mainly down to a change in SRU policy and the Scottish teams receiving better funding (it happened a couple of years ago).

It helps but doesn't guarentee success, as Edinburgh receive the same funding (one semi final aside the league and H-cup this year have been poor).

Glasgow have had good coaches, the NSQ level of player has increased to real quality players.

Academy was always good, and provides most of the players, but recuiment is better, in both Scottish qualified and NSQ players
Sean Lamont
Nikola Matawalu
Josh Strauss
Sean Maitland

I'd put it down as better SRU support coupled with good coaching and good recuitment.
It requires all 3 to work, if one lets you down they you won't improve by what you could.

IE
Edinburgh, better SRU support, poor coaching and mixed recuitment, has seen them not reach their potentional.

The leadership of Al Kellock should not be dismissed either - he may not be the best lock in the world but his effort and captaincy really galvanise his teamates and the crowd.

I certainly wouldn't call Glasgow underrated. We have been dicked by them in the 1872 fixtures for nearly as long as I can remember.

They are a tough nut to crack and since discovering Jackson, Weir, Dunbar & Horne and ditching guys like Morrison they are now a potent attacking threat but have not lost any of their steely defence.

Whoever takes over at the Burgh... take note!

Don't really understand the topic.Who underrated Glasgow?They are a top side in our league.If some people think that our league is poor then the Irish success in the HC,Wales recent 6N's success and Scotland's record against SH sides must have been a dream.
I sense that more notice in the media is desired.Sorry but that is Anglocentric and is never going to happen.

Taffineastbourne I think they are even underrated by some pro 12 fans, it has not so much to do with the league.

Earlier this season as an Ulster fan I thought we'd get two wins over them in the H-cup (they were injury hit), and we got it, but looking back it was quite an achievement, and I at the time I prob under rated them.

They were in play offs last year should be again this year, yet I bet I'm not the only fan that when facing Glasgow consider it an easier game than say Munster or Scarlets, yet there really is no logic for this assessment anymore.

PS I always though Glasgow were good and tough to beat, I just tought there were tougher teams in the league, but really Glasgow should be mentioned with the top teams, not as being just below them.

Only losses were Ulster away and Scarlets at home, first two games of the season, and with new coach, new ground and a few new players, a slow start maybe should have been expected, since then they have only lost 2, home to Leinster and away to Munster or home to current European Champions (lots of teams lose at home to them) and away to European q-finalists, no bad losses, or slip ups and have put a few impressive wins on the board.

Glasgow as a tier 3 side next year will be one to avoid, and can hopefully boost Scottish rugby and can boost the attendance from about 3500 average to capacity 9,708 for most games, this is what Glasgow really needs for a city its size and a team of its quality.

Depends what you mean by underrated. I wouldn't call Glasgow a top 10 side in Europe.

Glasgow are 2nd in the Pro12. Compare that to the 2nd in the AP and Top 14. Saracens and Clermont are quite clearly stronger. For the record Glasgow have not beaten Saracens contrary to what someone said earlier.

Glasgow have shown they are a pretty good side - 2nd in the pro12 is good but their European record is poor. Saints only lost to them recently because they were chasing the try bonus. Saints are arguably better and they are 6th in the AP. No top 6 AP or Top 6 top 14 side would worry about Glasgow. Why should they? It's been the Big three Irish clubs doing the damage in the HC from the pro12. Scots, welsh and Italians haven't really joined the HC party yet.

Edinburgh were earning respect with their semi final in the HC but this has been extinguished now.

If Glasgow want respect they need to earn it just like Clermont,Ulster,Quins,Saracens,Toulon etc are.

I think its the same way a team like Castres dont get that much respect.

2013 - Currently 4th in French league
2012 - Finished 4th in French league
2011 - Finished 3rd in French league

In a competitive league (Toulouse, Clermont, Toulon, Stade Francais, Perpignan, Biarritz, Racing Metro etc) that is a big achievement.

By contrast a team like Perpignan or Stade Francais or Biarritz tend be rated higher by most neutral fans despite them doing much worse in the leauge.

League form doesnt hold that much sway particularly when so many do not rate the Pro 12 as all that meaningful a competition.

The reason that Glasgow do not get more repsect is that their form from the Pro 12 has never really been translated to the Heineken Cup or to the Scottish international team.

I was thinking today, it may also have something to do with the fact that Glasgow have not always been the top scottish side. Back at the start of the Magners/Rabo I think they were the worst of the three. And up until the last two or three years Edinburgh have probably been better than them, which then tends to scew opinion slightly.

I certainly underrate them, if I'm honest. As said before, I only think of the Glasgow of old and not the Glasgow of new. Maybe because I don't watch them play. The Glasgow fixture, from memory, rarely seems to be one that is shown on welsh rugby tv, so my perception of them is based solely on the celtic league of the last 10 years or so, and their visits to Rodney Parade to face my side, most of which we won. And, as they haven't always been good, my opinion of them is (wrongly) that they're still not very good. It's taken a hammering of my side to make me start to realise that they're a very good side.

I expect the same would occur if the Dragons were to suddenly get good: it would take a few years for the clubs/fans that are used to beating them to accept that recent Dragons wins were due to improvements and not luck.

Agree red stag. Castres are pretty much a failure in the HC hence a lack of respect.

beshocked wrote:Depends what you mean by underrated. I wouldn't call Glasgow a top 10 side in Europe.

Glasgow are 2nd in the Pro12. Compare that to the 2nd in the AP and Top 14. Saracens and Clermont are quite clearly stronger. For the record Glasgow have not beaten Saracens contrary to what someone said earlier.

Glasgow have shown they are a pretty good side - 2nd in the pro12 is good but their European record is poor. Saints only lost to them recently because they were chasing the try bonus. Saints are arguably better and they are 6th in the AP. No top 6 AP or Top 6 top 14 side would worry about Glasgow. Why should they? It's been the Big three Irish clubs doing the damage in the HC from the pro12. Scots, welsh and Italians haven't really joined the HC party yet.

Edinburgh were earning respect with their semi final in the HC but this has been extinguished now.

If Glasgow want respect they need to earn it just like Clermont,Ulster,Quins,Saracens,Toulon etc are.

I was fascinated by that comments about the comparative strengths of the leagues, Beshocked and I spent a while thinking about whether that's actually true. Just comparing the first XV for each club:

15 Chris Wyles v Stuart Hogg
14 Chris Ashton v Sean Maitland
13 Joel Tomkins v Mark Bennett
12 Brad Barritt v Alex Dunbar
11 David Strettle v DTH van der Merwe
10 Owen Farrell v Ruaridh Jackson
9 Richard Wigglesworth v Niko Matawalu

8 Ernst Joubert v Josh Strauss
7 Will Fraser v Chris Fusaro
6 Kelly Brown v Robert Harley
5 Mouritz Botha v Tim Swinson
4 Steve Borthwick v Al Kellock/Tom Ryder
3 Matt Stevens v Mike Cusack/Moray Low
2 Schalk Brits v Pat MacArthur
1 Mako Vunipola v Ryan Grant

I don't agree that Sarries would be "quite clearly stronger" at all at the moment - only really at 2 and 10 is there a discernible increase in quality on the Sarries side and there's a good argument that Glasgow are stronger in a number of positions. I disagree that Saints are stronger - Glasgow were crippled with injuries they played them.

What I do think we all agree on is that unless you advance strongly in Europe, most other teams' fans think that you are nowhere.

That's a load of rubbish George carlin. Most of the Sarries guys are internationals and pretty big names. Most of your lot haven't got the same class. Just look at the experience seriously.

Good argument? Ha!

Only Hogg and possibly Maitland would get into our XV, based on current form though Goode and Ashton are decent.

Ryder who is pretty much your 1st choice moved from Saracens because he couldn't get into our 23.

Wyles is 2nd to Alex Goode.

Plus of course it's a squad game. We could have guys like De Kock,Hodgson, Smit,Wyles, Kruis on the bench. The bench showed their importance vs Leicester.

Our strength in depth means we do relatively well during the international level.

I was wondering why you got so excited by this, Beshocked. Then I read the word "our". Let's have a look at your claims, then.

1. You seem to be obsessed with internationals. Let's swap Fusaro for John Barclay with his 41 caps in that case and say that with the exception of Strauss, Swinson, Dunbar and Bennett, every Glasgow player is an international.

2. Strauss kept Joubert out of the 8 shirt at the Lions (Strauss also being club captain), so I'm assuming that he passes muster in your eyes.

3. Hogg and Maitland, you have dealt with and I agree.

4. Daniel van der Merwe is second top scorer in the Rabo and has scored 13 tries for Canada (a weaker team than England), so I'd take him over Strettle with his solitary England try any day of the week.

5. Niko Matawalu has an unprecedented 4 consecutive man of the match awards in Rabo games this season and has scored more international tries than Wigglesworth so I would prefer him as well.

6. Strauss over Joubert is a no-brainer at present.

7. You're comparing Will Fraser, a 23 year old whose current honours are that of being an England U16 player, with John Barclay? Honestly? I would even prefer Fusaro who is the same age but who is a mainstay of the Scotland A side.

7. Cusack would eat Stevens in a scrum - something very obvious to anyone who has seen both players.

8. Let's see which of Vunipola or Grant makes the plane for the Lions, shall we? I will personally post you twenty quid if it isn't Grant.

I'm trying hard not to be antogonistic. It's just that it's fine to like your team and fete its players, but I think you have very little basis to suggest that Sarries are streets ahead. It's simply not true.

(They probably do have a better squad, though. ) Solidarity brother.