Lions Selection - The differnce between Whinging and Frustration.

by RuggerRadge2611 Thu 06 Jun 2013, 11:09

First topic message reminder :

The selection of Corbs has made a lot of Scots guys tempers flare, mine included.

I feel I should create a thread on the mind-set of a typical Scottish and Lions fan (myself) to help the posters from the other 3 nations understand that there is a huge different between whinging and frustration. I'll set my stall out here.

Straight off the bat I felt that Scotland would possibly have a chance of 7-8 tourists. Glasgow's excellent form in the Pro12 and Visser's phenomenal try scoring strike rate made a compelling case for them. As did Kelly Brown's thumping shifts in the 6N and for Sarries ultimitely unsuccessful HC and Premiership charges.

I felt that the following Scots had a chance to tour :

Grant *
Gray *
Brown *
Laidlaw
Scott
Maitland *
Visser
Hogg *

I always said that I would have been over the moon with 5 (*).

We got 3 out of that lot. I whinged a bit then about Lydiate’s selection and I’ll do the same now. Had Scottish captain been left behind for Chris Robshaw or Ryan Jones I would have been devastated but understood 100%. Robshaw and Jones have been fantastic for Quins, O’s, England and Wales all season. Whereas Lydiate had barely played any rugby.

The cycle has repeated itself again with Healy either being flown home through injury or by biting someone, again logic has been ignored and 3 better, fitter players in the form of Sheridan, James and Grant have been left behind.

I was Frustrated when North, Cuthbert and Bowe got ahead of Visser. North and Cuthbert are classy operators and Bowe has already got Lions experience. Visser is a great player and a good try scorer but I understand him being left behind for the players who did travel.

I was also frustrated when Laidlaw got left behind. I have never rated Phillips, but I know what he can bring to the game. Youngs has also been electric for club and country so I can understand his inclusion too.

So to conclude, I am a whinger. I’m whinging because I think the Lions Coaching staff has picked the wrong player for the wrong reason. Frustration for me would come to the fore when I want to see my Scottish players represented but I know in my heart of hearts there are better players out there and they have been picked for that reason.

by reallybored Thu 06 Jun 2013, 17:40

Both Brian Moore and Will Greenwood (both pretty well respected pundits) selected Ryan Grant as their starting LH after the 6 Nations based on his performances.

Why would they possibly do that when they could have selected Healy, Jenkins, Vunipola, Domingo or Marler? Possibly because he played the best?

And for the record, A Jones did not murder R Grant during the 6 Nations. There is a reason that the Welsh front-row only complete 30% of their scrums, they're not trying to scrummage. They are trying to con the ref into giving them penalties or free-kicks, the French, Scots and English came out after the game and questioned their "technique".

by Guest Thu 06 Jun 2013, 18:39

If the Welsh were scrummaging illegally, I'm surprised it hasn't been picked up yet. I'm sure these alleged top referees will watch games or hear of this alleged cheating, particularly if teams are questioning it?

by Taffineastbourne Thu 06 Jun 2013, 18:57

Biltong wrote:To add to what Fes said, if the subject matter is not to your interest, step away.

Beneath you ,my friend.I know that you are removed from all this but the bitter sniping that began before the Lions Tour started is tiresome,boring and pointless and is spoiling discussion on an event that most fans have been looking forward to for four years.The Scots feel hard done by,we have got that.
CAN WE NOW MOVE ON
I like Griff have had a belly full.

by funnyExiledScot Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:04

There's nothing "bitter" about engaging in an informed debate about rugby selection, which is what this is.

In your opinion, what about Corbisiero's abilities and performances as a rugby player do you rate so highly such as to believe him a better replacement than Andrew Sheridan, Paul James or Ryan Grant?

Surely you have an opinion on this (given your obvious interest in this thread) that goes beyond, "Gatland picked him therefore he must be the best" or "Let's not debate this unless the Lions lose, because if the Lions win all decisions made must have been correct"?

by Taffineastbourne Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:10

If you can read you may have spotted that I would have picked Grant but as that does not fit your ranting rabid posturing that passed you by.Not too surprised really.

by 100%beefy Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:11

This moaning about Corbs is pointless. He wasn't picked on merit but because he fits in with what Gatland thinks a 1 should be....a footballer who has more in his armoury than scrummaging. He has Jones fo rthat, in his loosie he wants a mobile prop who has an impact in the loose. He holds Gethin in very high esteem and he is his favourite player in the Welsh camp. Add to that the fact that Rowntree is the forwards coach it isn't hard to see how this decision was made. Ye sothers may have deserved it, Grant, Sheridan, James, Kelly Brown...fact is decision is made get over it.

by funnyExiledScot Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:22

Taffineastbourne wrote:If you can read you may have spotted that I would have picked Grant but as that does not fit your ranting rabid posturing that passed you by.Not too surprised really.

When on this thread did you suggest you'd have picked Grant?

In any case, that's not the point is it. This is a rugby debate about a particular selection, and yet you've failed to articulate a single opinion on the merits of Corbisiero or the alternatives, but rather descended on several occasions into making this all about Wales.

As for the insults, not really relevant here are they?

by Taffineastbourne Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:27

funnyExiledScot wrote:
Taffineastbourne wrote:If you can read you may have spotted that I would have picked Grant but as that does not fit your ranting rabid posturing that passed you by.Not too surprised really.

When on this thread did you suggest you'd have picked Grant?

In any case, that's not the point is it. This is a rugby debate about a particular selection, and yet you've failed to articulate a single opinion on the merits of Corbisiero or the alternatives, but rather descended on several occasions into making this all about Wales.

As for the insults, not really relevant here are they?

Do insults only go one way?
Thought that this thread was about whingeing.I must have misread the title.My bad.

by funnyExiledScot Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:36

You clearly did misread the title.

Radge was articulating the difference between Scots fans "whinging" and being genuinely and validly "frustrated".

How is that an insult in any sense of the word?

by RuggerRadge2611 Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:46

I feel that this thread has been taken out of context. FES understands what this thread was about.

I suppose another frustrating aspect of this thread though is the reluctance of some posters to believe that Warren Gatland is capable of making mistakes.

I'll finish by saying I'm behind the lions 100% but some decisions by the management have disappointed me. The latest call up being one if the worst of the series.

by R!skysports Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:52

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I feel that this thread has been taken out of context. FES understands what this thread was about.

I suppose another frustrating aspect of this thread though is the reluctance of some posters to believe that Warren Gatland is capable of making mistakes.

I'll finish by saying I'm behind the lions 100% but some decisions by the management have disappointed me. The latest call up being one if the worst of the series.

Not the worst though....that has to be Stevens

by RuggerRadge2611 Thu 06 Jun 2013, 19:59

I said one of the worst! There have been a few clangers!

by The Saint Thu 06 Jun 2013, 20:05

Risca Rev wrote:If the Welsh were scrummaging illegally, I'm surprised it hasn't been picked up yet. I'm sure these alleged top referees will watch games or hear of this alleged cheating, particularly if teams are questioning it?

Nobody picked up on Northampton doing it Whistle

....
Saying that, Castro has done it for years and everyone says he's world class while the whole time I've been saying he's overrated. It was sweet seeing Gethin Jenkins get one over on him in the 6 Nations.

by **Rugby Fan** Thu 06 Jun 2013, 21:56

I might think an English player merits going but, unless the alternative is barking mad, I'm not going to be annoyed if he doesn't. In fact, I don't want the Lions squad to have as many English players as possible.

There are a couple of reasons:

(1) If a Test squad ends up being too England-heavy, it becomes frustrating that it's a Lions series rather than a dedicated England series. You wonder at the back of your mind whether you couldn't handle this opposition on your own.

(2) Variety is the spice of life. I want to see different players posed different challenges. I like a lot of England locks but I'm keen to see whether POC and Gray can rise to the challenge. I know a lot about England full backs, let's see just how good Halfpenny is. I'm disappointed Rennie isn't there but I'd love to see Tipuric shine. The Lions seems like a perfect stage to see Sexton make a major impact at international level etc etc.

Yes, I'm disappointed for a player like Chris Robshaw because I worry the non-selection might get to him. Then again, I didn't want Corbs to be called up because I want him in the England camp in Argentina. Now he's there, I hope he shines.

By and large, then, I'm not offended to see other Home Union players get the nod, and I could happily support a Lions team with no English players. It's southern hemisphere opposition, for goodness sake. I'm not saying that makes me a typical supporter but, reading some of the projecting going on here, you'd think people like me didn't exist at all.

by nganboy Sun 09 Jun 2013, 11:37

To me all the noise is from people disagreeing with Gatland and co about their selection. Essentially the argument is simply that "I think Gatland is wrong about this player for these reasons" I often appears unbalanced when that supporter only says that in relation to one of their countrymen not getting picked. As a neutral I find it far more interesting when fans say a player from another country should have been picked instead. It suggests a more balanced view of things.

by Poorfour Sun 09 Jun 2013, 14:57

The Lions should be about the best available players from the home nations; that should be a combination of ability, form, fitness and the strategy that the team plan to play.

The frustration with Gatland's selection is that he seems to have gone with what he knows over form. Warburton had one decent game in the Six Nations playing in a dominant pack and without the worry of captaincy. Lydiate had two club games. And yet they were picked ahead of players whose form and fitness were not in doubt.

Fair enough, they fit well to Gatland's strategy, but the Reds showed up some serious potential flaws. The kicking strategy only works if the kick chase is good enough. The defensive strategy only works if all the players work at full tempo and understand the patterns. Getting the D right is important for the Lions because in the last two NZ and Aus tours they've been exposed by defensive flaws more than by ability in attack.

Can anyone - even the most ardent Welsh fan - really say that after the games so far Warburton and Lydiate have justified being selected ahead of Brown, Wood or Robshaw? The Lions breakdown play was woeful in the first half against the Reds, and the defence gave away a lot of ground. Lydiate made a lot of tackles (though not appreciably more than Robshaw or Wood averages in an international) but did little else and Warburton had very little impact. (The turnover that led to the first try came from Matt Stevens, by the way, who many posters have been knocking).

They may yet come good, and I hope they do. But right now it feels that Gatland has limited his options rather than opened them up because he has chosen what he knows over picking on form.

by wanderingdragon Sun 09 Jun 2013, 15:22

Poorfour wrote:

Can anyone - even the most ardent Welsh fan - really say that after the games so far Warburton and Lydiate have justified being selected ahead of Brown, Wood or Robshaw?

YES!

If you look at the 7 back row players Gatland has picked they all offer something slightly different. None out of Brown, Wood or Robshaw offer anything that one of those 7 don't already offer.

Brown was a bit unlucky but his opposition are really O'Brien and Croft - not Warburton
Same applies for Wood.
And Robshaw was completely outplayed when it really mattered in the run up to picking the squad.

Both Lydiate and Warburton had decent games yesterday - not the best, not the worst. Nothing to say that anyone else would have fared any better.

I know they are Welsh but why not give them a chance!

by Poorfour Mon 10 Jun 2013, 00:42

wanderingdragon wrote:
Poorfour wrote:

Can anyone - even the most ardent Welsh fan - really say that after the games so far Warburton and Lydiate have justified being selected ahead of Brown, Wood or Robshaw?

YES!

If you look at the 7 back row players Gatland has picked they all offer something slightly different. None out of Brown, Wood or Robshaw offer anything that one of those 7 don't already offer.

Brown was a bit unlucky but his opposition are really O'Brien and Croft - not Warburton
Same applies for Wood.
And Robshaw was completely outplayed when it really mattered in the run up to picking the squad.

Both Lydiate and Warburton had decent games yesterday - not the best, not the worst. Nothing to say that anyone else would have fared any better.

I know they are Welsh but why not give them a chance!

Well, as clear from my earlier post, I disagree with you on several points there. To be specific, I would have expected either Robshaw or Wood to hit a lot more rucks and contribute more in link play, the lineout and cleaning up slow ball than Warburton and Lydiate managed. I think you miss the point about them: neither of them is the best in the NH at any one skill; but neither of them is weak in any one area and both of them have a work rate that few others can match. Yes, the Welsh back row had the better of the game in Cardiff, but the English back row was seriously unbalanced with Wood out of position at 8 and Walsh's interpretation of the breakdown that day was far more sympathetic to the Welsh style of play.

I have given them a chance. I held back from commenting until I saw them play against half-decent opposition. Against a less than full strength Reds side, I was worried by what I saw. The scoreline flattered the Lions - they got most of their points from the scrum and from turnover or counter attack ball. Phase play in both attack and defence was weak and the back row are a major factor in that.

by wanderingdragon Mon 10 Jun 2013, 01:48

You are picking at the wrong players from Saturday though - Faletau had a shocker.

You have an English bias, I have a Welsh one. I don't think we will ever agree on this.

I would have taken Wood not Croft but Croft has money in the bank with Gatland from SA. Lydiate is lucky to be there but I understand why he is. Robshaw had a shocking end to the season and was so outplayed in Cardiff that was the end of that (not to mention the several better players outlined in my previous post).

You seem to be expecting a certain style of play from Lydiate and Warburton that isn't their game. Warburton only smashes into the rucks when he has a chance of getting the ball. Otherwise he tries to free himself up to defend the fringes (something he did much better than Croft or SOB against the Force). He isn't going to do a lot of link work when it is chucking it down with rain and everyone (esp Faletau) is dropping the ball. Lydiate is a tackling machine, not a massive ball carrier. He is there for that and does a lot more at the rucks than he is given credit for. If he had white blond hair people would probably notice him more. He doesn't do anything flash but you clearly didn't notice that Cooper dropped further and further back on Saturday because Lydiate kept getting him when he tried to play flat.

To be honest Gatland could have picked any of about 12 back row forwards and some of us would be happy, others unhappy, but none of them would let us down. I am happy with what has been picked and it will be interesting to see what happens come the tests.

Don't write off Warburton too soon. People did that before and he killed you in Cardiff!!

by Poorfour Mon 10 Jun 2013, 06:00

Well, there you go. That's the root of my frustration, right there.

You keep going back to Cardiff as a reason not to pick Robshaw or Wood. It was a poor team performance, but individually they both played better than Croft. Robshaw had one bad game all season, which is one fewer than Lydiate had games of any kind.

If Gatland could have chosen from any of 12 backrow players, wouldn't you say it's reasonable to be annoyed that he picked two who are struggling for form and march fitness?

by wanderingdragon Mon 10 Jun 2013, 12:32

Cardiff was not a reason not to pick either of them. I don't believe that any of these decisions were made on the basis of one game but the way that game went didn't help either Robshaw or Wood (who was stuffed by being played out of position by England more than anything).

I have already said I would have picked Wood not Croft.

As far as Robshaw is concerned neither Lydiate nor Warburton were his competition. Warburton was always going to be there with Gatland as coach (or probably anyone else).

I have already said why Gatland picked Lydiate so no point going there again.

I actually feel quite sorry for Robshaw - he got hyped to the point of ridiculousness by the English media (all the talk of him being Lions captain which was never going to happen) in spite of Gatland saying a long time ago he didn't see him as a true 7.
Robshaw's competition was Tipuric who had an outstanding 6N and then completely outplayed him in a game billed by Gatland as 'as close to a final trial as you could get'.

I also don't think you can judge whether Warburton is struggling for form on the basis of the game the other night - he didn't have a bad game - maybe not as 'visible' as SOB or Tipuric in the previous games but it was a completely different type of game.

Pretty much the same applies to Lydiate (the Barbarians game was never going to be his type of game but he played because of the finals eliminating so many players). He had a very solid game and is heading in the right direction. If you want to know why he is there have a look at this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hD6cbaRANE
This is why Gatland loves him!

by R!skysports Mon 10 Jun 2013, 12:44

wanderingdragon - without even checking, I assume that video is from his 2012 season

Which kind of highlights the main point most people are making about Lydiate

A very good player, but injured all year and not the form selection

by wanderingdragon Mon 10 Jun 2013, 12:52

Riskysports wrote:wanderingdragon - without even checking, I assume that video is from his 2012 season

Which kind of highlights the main point most people are making about Lydiate

A very good player, but injured all year and not the form selection

It is from 2012 - it also explains why he was picked
If you are going on form selection, which clearly is not the case, then you would not have Gray, Heaslip, Lydiate, Murray, Croft, Farrell, Bowe, Corbisiero anywhere near Australia

by R!skysports Mon 10 Jun 2013, 13:02

wanderingdragon wrote:
Riskysports wrote:wanderingdragon - without even checking, I assume that video is from his 2012 season

Which kind of highlights the main point most people are making about Lydiate

A very good player, but injured all year and not the form selection

It is from 2012 - it also explains why he was picked
If you are going on form selection, which clearly is not the case, then you would not have Gray, Heaslip, Lydiate, Murray, Croft, Farrell, Bowe, Corbisiero anywhere near Australia

Most of us Scots were surprised at Gray and a few of the others raised eyebrows

I think the difference is, for some of the others (i.e. Bowe) there was no-one else really putting their hand up to take the place, so worth a gamble on a player coming back against very poor options

Back row, however this is not the case. You had people like Kelly Brown who has had 12 months of outstanding performances for club and country overlooked for a player who has played almost zero game

Anyhoo - he is there and so I hope he gets some form soo

by fa0019 Mon 10 Jun 2013, 19:32

Guys like tommy Bowe are easy to understand.... Form is temporary, class is permanent. He's done it year after year and proved he can pick up form very quickly and hardly ever has a poor game.

Guys like lydiate are less proven, one flash season isn't enough and whilst the welsh posters may vouch for his form and gatland too, we just haven't seen it back... Understandable given his injury.

You have to give the coach room to build his side though. He has a specific idea and likes certain players.... You know mike Phillips will play even though Youngs has often got the better of Genia unlike Phillips and is playing well.

That's why he's paid the big salary, he's done pretty well with Wales.... Although I think it's credible to say his method falls apart against the 3N sides, 1 win in 25 odd matches in five years.... That's what worries me, I'm not a believer that Wales have lost all those games vs the SH sides because they lack one or two players.... They've had the players,their form in the 6N has proved this... And regularly beats teams like England and Ireland who do get 3N scalps now and again.... It's the strategy...and it gets me nervous for our chances.

by Converter Fri 21 Jun 2013, 01:00

When was the last time a Scottish player was picked as a starter for a 1st or 2nd Lions Test ?

2013 - None, so far.
2009 - Gordon Ross, 3rd Test, dead rubber.
2005 - Gordon Bulloch (came on as a sub in the last 10 mins of the 3rd Test), not surprising with Woodward.
2001 - Tom Smith, 1st Test.

So, Radge, I very much share your frustration. I say that as a Scottish Lions supporter who attended the 1st and 2nd Tests in SA and didn't see a Scottish player start. I can't recall the team for the midweek game against Western Province. My only memory of that game is the appaling weather that day and Willem de Waal kicking a last minute penalty to draw the match, thereby making my Lions matches: Played 3, Won 0.

As the intervening years progressed since SA, I saw Gray and POC as the Lions second row. At last, after how many Lions starts (?), AWJ finally puts a game together for the Lions, knocking Gray from the Test start. I was shocked too, like FES, to find that Parling had replaced Gray on the bench. Like many, of all hews, I have been at best confused by Galtand's sacrifice of Hogg at 10. Three Scots played in the shambles on Tuesday that was Gatland's doing and there was not a player on that pitch that walked off having improved his chances.

Yes, my jersey is pressed and ready for Saturday. And, like many on the 1st Test thread, I cannot figure out what the hell Gatland is up to. For twelve years I have looked forward to revenge against Australia where the Lions were the better side and lost; I fear that I may have to wait another twelve, never mind the 'frustration'.

by Converter Fri 21 Jun 2013, 01:01

Not Gordon Ross. Why woould the LW Fly half be playing hooker ? Ross Ford, of course.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Fri 21 Jun 2013, 08:47

Some sensible realism from Scott Johnson:

THE British and Irish Lions line-up for tomorrow’s first Test in Australia is clear evidence of the low esteem in which Scottish rugby is held by other national coaches.... the Lions selection shows us why it’s important, I’m not saying the [Lions] team is right, I’m saying that that selection tells us how other people view us. It’s not only in [Warren] Gatland’s eyes. Look at the last four Lions tours – same thing. We’ve got to change perceptions, and broadening the base and making kids competitive right across the board, as we’re doing on this tour, is a good start

And he's almost certainly right - Scots fans on here perhaps overestimate their players' abilities, and most other countries' fans underestamite then - as others have said, only results at international level will change that.

Braveheart

by fa0019 Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:16

In the end its not about where the players come from and we have to accept that the coach has his own ideas and the Lions board accepted this... they accepted it when SCW took over in 05 and they accepted it when England were dominant in 97 yet only achieved 6 players in the lineup.

England are ranked 4th in the world and hold overall ranking points higher than Wales, Ireland & Scotland have ever achieved in the professional era.... yet they only have 3 players in the starting lineup.

Its a certainity that had Gatland not been coach that certain players would not be in the starting lineup and 23 but we have to accept this and have faith that he will take them over the line... we're not lions fans on condition, we're lions fans full stop.

We all know how Gatland likes to approach the game and he has chosen players to reflect his strategy.... the only issue is this strategy has proved toothless against SH opposition throughout his tenure (1 win in 23 matches) and playing slightly better quality players than he usually has such as Croft, O'Driscoll and Sexton isn't going to change this in all probability... at least 2 games out of 3 anyhow.

Its the strategy not the players.... Wales have had the superior players and team in the home nations for the last 4 years... yet whilst others have got over the line against SH teams, Wales have continued to come up short.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:30

I certainly agree with the statement that many Scots overrate Scottish players whereas other supporters underrate them, and it's certainly true that the only way to change perception is to win international matches. Until other sides stop coming to Murrayfield expecting to win, then we cannot expect the recognition of our players to improve.

I've said it before, but I actually think the representation of Scots on this Lions tour was about right. I'm disappointed Hogg didn't get much of a chance on the tour itself to play in his specialist position, but with Halfpenny's kicking I think it unlikely Hogg would have started in any case, although I think he could have made the bench. Richie Gray has had chances and hasn't been able to assert himself, and Maitland (not a player I'd have personally taken on tour) is on the bench - to much protest from the Irish.

I think Matt Scott could have added something to the Lions as I believe they needed 5 centres on the tour and not 4, and I would have called up Ryan Grant ahead of Corbisiero personally, although a strong scrummaging performance tomorrow will clearly vindicate Gatland's decision.

We just need to wait until the NZ tour in 2017: angel

by Tattie Scones RRN Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:34

As long as we don't go doing something stupid like......I dunno.......lose to Japan or something really dumb like that.

It's more frustrating in that we have the players - some of them better than most of their counterparts but there's just something missing - possibly psychological.

We've beaten all but NZ in the last few years so we can do it.....it's just getting that consistency and belief installed into the players.

Put it this way, if we really were as cr@p as most posters continually state, we'd be shipping 50+ points on a regular basis but we're not.

Hopefully Vern will bring that missing piece of the jigsaw.

by fa0019 Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:36

In some ways I'm glad we don't get any token selections. That would be worse our current status of zero selections.

by RubyGuby Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:40

Tattie - I always love your enthusiasm but Scotland have a decent front row, 1/2 a 2nd row, a decent (and no more) back row - Poor and ineffective lightweight half backs, 1 good centre, very good wings and FB. It's just not enough. You don't have the players IMO but perhaps you could be making more of what you have. You beat Ireland in yet another dour battle but you can't let that paper over the lack of real quality throughout the team. If you and your fans do that then I think you're setting Cotter up to fail and you will continue the cycle - Just my view - It's certainly not just "Psychological" though.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:42

I think it's as much the balance of the side that hasn't been right in recent years as well. Team selection under AR was a bit of a mess, and Johnson and Ryan during the 6 Nations got as much right as they did wrong.

Where Gatland has been really successful is coaching a good style of rugby and picking his sides to play - in other words tactics and team selection working together. Scotland haven't had that for a long time.

1.Grant 2.Ford 3.Murray 4.Swinson 5.Gray 6.Brown 7.Rennie 8.Beattie 9.Laidlaw 10.Heathcote 11.Visser 12.Scott 13.Dunbar 14.Maitland 15.Hogg

Playing a fast paced brand of rugby and looking to keep the ball alive, there's no reason why that side cannot be finishing in the top half of the 6 Nations next season. France are in a total mess under Saint-Andre and we should be targeting them for a home win next season, beating Italy away and completing baco to back wins over Ireland at the Aviva. A big ask that last one, but it's doable.

by Guest Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:45

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:As long as we don't go doing something stupid like......I dunno.......lose to Japan or something really dumb like that.

It's more frustrating in that we have the players - some of them better than most of their counterparts but there's just something missing - possibly psychological.

We've beaten all but NZ in the last few years so we can do it.....it's just getting that consistency and belief installed into the players.

Put it this way, if we really were as cr@p as most posters continually state, we'd be shipping 50+ points on a regular basis but we're not.

Hopefully Vern will bring that missing piece of the jigsaw.

You can't read much into that Japan debacle and to be fair no player has been called up to the Lions from that tour. The only similarity is that you might end up being relieved not many Scots were subjected to Australia, like I am that not many Dragons went to Siapan.

You have a great stepping stone now having finished third. In the next few years Glasgow need to keep up their great work this season and also it would help if Scotland won a championship nearer 2017. I think Vern Cotter will be a very positive addition.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 21 Jun 2013, 09:50

That's a good point, it's not just international rugby that matter in terms of improving the profile of your players. As the Irish have shown, competing strongly in the HC is a great way for players to make that step up. Kelly Brown has certainly improved both his skillset and his profile since becoming a key part of the Sarries back row, and hopefully Richie Gray can do great things with Castres as well.

From a club perspective it's all on Glasgow at the moment. Edinburgh aren't competitive. The HC semi-final two seasons ago sadly looks a fluke, and it's widely accepted now that it papered over the cracks at Edinburgh. Glasgow will be a real force next season though - great backline and a solid if unspectacular pack.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Fri 21 Jun 2013, 10:08

Risca Rev wrote:
Tattie Scones RRN wrote:As long as we don't go doing something stupid like......I dunno.......lose to Japan or something really dumb like that.

It's more frustrating in that we have the players - some of them better than most of their counterparts but there's just something missing - possibly psychological.

We've beaten all but NZ in the last few years so we can do it.....it's just getting that consistency and belief installed into the players.

Put it this way, if we really were as cr@p as most posters continually state, we'd be shipping 50+ points on a regular basis but we're not.

Hopefully Vern will bring that missing piece of the jigsaw.

You can't read much into that Japan debacle and to be fair no player has been called up to the Lions from that tour. The only similarity is that you might end up being relieved not many Scots were subjected to Australia, like I am that not many Dragons went to Siapan.

You have a great stepping stone now having finished third. In the next few years Glasgow need to keep up their great work this season and also it would help if Scotland won a championship nearer 2017. I think Vern Cotter will be a very positive addition.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Fri 21 Jun 2013, 10:09

funnyExiledScot wrote:I think it's as much the balance of the side that hasn't been right in recent years as well. Team selection under AR was a bit of a mess, and Johnson and Ryan during the 6 Nations got as much right as they did wrong.

Where Gatland has been really successful is coaching a good style of rugby and picking his sides to play - in other words tactics and team selection working together. Scotland haven't had that for a long time.

1.Grant 2.Ford 3.Murray 4.Swinson 5.Gray 6.Brown 7.Rennie 8.Beattie 9.Laidlaw 10.Heathcote 11.Visser 12.Scott 13.Dunbar 14.Maitland 15.Hogg

Playing a fast paced brand of rugby and looking to keep the ball alive, there's no reason why that side cannot be finishing in the top half of the 6 Nations next season. France are in a total mess under Saint-Andre and we should be targeting them for a home win next season, beating Italy away and completing baco to back wins over Ireland at the Aviva. A big ask that last one, but it's doable.

fES, dear boy, are you missing someone?!?! I'll give you a clue: angel

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Fri 21 Jun 2013, 10:10

funnyExiledScot wrote:I certainly agree with the statement that many Scots overrate Scottish players whereas other supporters underrate them, and it's certainly true that the only way to change perception is to win international matches. Until other sides stop coming to Murrayfield expecting to win, then we cannot expect the recognition of our players to improve.

I've said it before, but I actually think the representation of Scots on this Lions tour was about right. I'm disappointed Hogg didn't get much of a chance on the tour itself to play in his specialist position, but with Halfpenny's kicking I think it unlikely Hogg would have started in any case, although I think he could have made the bench. Richie Gray has had chances and hasn't been able to assert himself, and Maitland (not a player I'd have personally taken on tour) is on the bench - to much protest from the Irish.

I think Matt Scott could have added something to the Lions as I believe they needed 5 centres on the tour and not 4, and I would have called up Ryan Grant ahead of Corbisiero personally, although a strong scrummaging performance tomorrow will clearly vindicate Gatland's decision.

We just need to wait until the NZ tour in 2017:

The Demented mole would certainly agree with you on that, fES: http://dementedmole.com/2013/06/21/the-curious-incident-of-stuarty-hogg-and-the-long-shadow/ - an excellent read

by Tattie Scones RRN Fri 21 Jun 2013, 10:13

Yeah I was kidding Risca Wink

Agree with what you say though.

Ruby - I'll admit we're 3-4 players away from a great team but thankfully we may have some younger guys coming through that can plug in the gaps.

For years we were the butt of all jokes when it came to the old 'Scotland can't score tries' or 'Scotland will win through multiples of 3' etc. Thankfully that has changed now so the firepower is beginning to appear.

Put it this way - a second string team that pushed SA close last week???? Not long ago first team would have been blown away with ease.

Scotland fans are certainly aware of the difference in quality over the last 6-7 years so at last, optimism might be justified. We'll see the end of March next year anyway.

by Guest Fri 21 Jun 2013, 10:24

Championship Decider in Cardiff next year aye Wales

by RubyGuby Fri 21 Jun 2013, 10:27

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:Yeah I was kidding Risca ;)Agree with what you say though.

Ruby - I'll admit we're 3-4 players away from a great team but thankfully we may have some younger guys coming through that can plug in the gaps.

For years we were the butt of all jokes when it came to the old 'Scotland can't score tries' or 'Scotland will win through multiples of 3' etc. Thankfully that has changed now so the firepower is beginning to appear.

Put it this way - a second string team that pushed SA close last week???? Not long ago first team would have been blown away with ease.

Scotland fans are certainly aware of the difference in quality over the last 6-7 years so at last, optimism might be justified. We'll see the end of March next year anyway.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 21 Jun 2013, 10:34

Nope ASBO - didn't forget anyone Wink

I'll read the article at lunchtime - a welcome distraction.....

by RuggerRadge2611 Fri 21 Jun 2013, 11:03

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I certainly agree with the statement that many Scots overrate Scottish players whereas other supporters underrate them, and it's certainly true that the only way to change perception is to win international matches. Until other sides stop coming to Murrayfield expecting to win, then we cannot expect the recognition of our players to improve.

I've said it before, but I actually think the representation of Scots on this Lions tour was about right. I'm disappointed Hogg didn't get much of a chance on the tour itself to play in his specialist position, but with Halfpenny's kicking I think it unlikely Hogg would have started in any case, although I think he could have made the bench. Richie Gray has had chances and hasn't been able to assert himself, and Maitland (not a player I'd have personally taken on tour) is on the bench - to much protest from the Irish.

I think Matt Scott could have added something to the Lions as I believe they needed 5 centres on the tour and not 4, and I would have called up Ryan Grant ahead of Corbisiero personally, although a strong scrummaging performance tomorrow will clearly vindicate Gatland's decision.

We just need to wait until the NZ tour in 2017:

The Demented mole would certainly agree with you on that, fES: http://dementedmole.com/2013/06/21/the-curious-incident-of-stuarty-hogg-and-the-long-shadow/ - an excellent read

That's the whole problem Asbo, with so few Scots on the tour, and noone who could really be considered a Senior Player, there was noone to stand up for Hogg when some of these suggestions were thrown around.

He's the youngest guy on the tour and would probably have played in the front row if Gatland had asked him to, mainly becuase he would have been so proud to have been given the chance.

Had Euan Murray, Ross Ford or Kelly Brown been taken on tour one of them would have probably questioned Gatland's decisions for the benefit of Hogg in the long run.

As the Mole said: "I don’t think Hogg would have been used in the same way on tour were he a Welsh player."

by funnyExiledScot Fri 21 Jun 2013, 11:08

To be fair Gatland saw Hogg as a utility back from the word go, and I don't think any player would have changed his mind. I think we were all surprised at Gatland's comments at the beginning of the tour that Hogg could play 10 - it wasn't a particularly well-informed view in my opinion, and it concerned me at the time that Kearney and Halfpenny were going along as well - two specialist fullbacks.

I personally don't see Hogg as a utility player at all. He's a good footballer with good footwork and good pace, so of course he can do a job in several positions, but his skillset overwhelming points to fullback, as does his background as a player. If Gatland didn't want him at 15, then I don't think he should have toured.

Hook and Madigan would have been better options for the utility role.

by RuggerRadge2611 Mon 24 Jun 2013, 12:19

Hogg's treatment is going from bad to worse. He is still not getting a chance to make a claim for his best position. He's going to have learned a lot on the tour but it's a shame he isn't getting a start again at 15.

by funnyExiledScot Mon 24 Jun 2013, 13:42

In essence Gatland has chosen Kearney ahead of Hogg at 15, a top class defender ahead of a top class attacker (clearly a simplification before the Irish crew get overexcited).

Hogg will have learned a lot from this tour, and assuming Glasgow and Scotland don't do anything stupid like move him to 10 and 13 and muck him about, he'll be in a good position to tour at 15 for the next tour - as a specialist!

by GunsGerms Mon 24 Jun 2013, 13:43

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Hogg's treatment is going from bad to worse. He is still not getting a chance to make a claim for his best position. He's going to have learned a lot on the tour but it's a shame he isn't getting a start again at 15.

He is just unlucky that Halfpenny is the Lions most important player.

by SecretFly Mon 24 Jun 2013, 13:48

funnyExiledScot wrote:In essence Gatland has chosen Kearney ahead of Hogg at 15, a top class defender ahead of a top class attacker (clearly a simplification before the Irish crew get overexcited).

Overexcited??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Over F**kin' Excited???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The cheek!!!!!!!!!!

by funnyExiledScot Mon 24 Jun 2013, 13:54

I'm sorry - I just wanted to be clear for the record that I'm fully aware of Kearney's attacking abilities before receiving another lecture Wink

GG - totally agree that Halfpenny will start Tests and rightly so. I just think that Hogg should have played at 15 on the tour, and 15 only - ahead of Kearney. Hogg isn't a 10. Never has been, never will be. Imagine if the roles had been reversed and Gatland had stuck Kearney at 10 and then dropped him. A fair few from the Emerald Isle would be unimpressed, and Hogg is no more a 10 than Rob Kearney.

by Sponsored content