Should Hogg get a run at 10 for Scotland?

by **RDW** Tue Jun 11, 2013 5:17 pm

First topic message reminder :

I know he has just had one game at 10, and it was against pretty poor opposition, but by all accounts it sound like Hogg had a strong game at 10 today. So that begs the question – should he be played at 10 for Scotland? I thought I’d look at the arguments.

For

Hogg is the most naturally gifted player in the Scotland squad.

He has a massive boot, good passer, outrageous sidestep and gas to burn.

He also has a good rugby brain and, at 20, has plenty time to develop.

Scotland have not had a good stand off for a long time, and lets face it our options for the future aren’t exactly setting the heather on fire.

Turns out he is a pretty good goal kicker – removes the reliance on Ladilaw

Against

Can Hogg produce for Scotland against top opposition when he has Matt Scott and De Luca outside him instead of Roberts and BoD, and his pack are getting a limited supply of ball?

Do we need to consider him at 10 when we have put a lot of time and effort into Weir, Jackson and youngsters such as Heathcoat, Leonard, Hunter, Rusell etc?

Do we sacrifice one of the best attacking fullbacks in NH rugby for a solid yet unspectacular fullback such as Tonks or Murchie?

Will Glasgow want to play Hogg there when they have plenty 10s but a limited number of 15s?

His tackling is generally pretty good but with the odd laps – is this an issue?

My view

Hogg is an incredible talent and, at 20, has a whole lot of developing still to do. At fullback he gives us real security with his big boot and a lethal counter attacking option. However I think it’s fair to say our current 10s are solid if unspectacular, and he could be the spark that sets off Scottish rugby.

However I don’t want him to be messed around like Mossy was and to a certain extent Laidlaw – he needs his position to be sorted.

Saying that my personal view is to continue the experiement for a season – primarily play him at 15 but slot him in for the odd game for Glasgow and maybe Scotland. This will give him time to decide whether he likes to play there, and also give the Scottish coaches time to determine whether he is a viable option.

by doctornickolas Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:47 pm

I think Hogg had a really good game at 10. What impressed me most was his passing. usually a back 3 player does not have the best passing skills ( I know because I was one) because they are on the end of moves and usually its just maybe offloads they have to give. But I thought he looked good there. His pace is a big asset as well especially if he can get good quick service where he is running on to the ball not standing still. I would think it is worth Glasgow giving him some games there.

Obviously we have to take in to account the opposition because they were not quick to push up and afforded him lots of space and time. Also he was behind a dominant pack, so there was probably no easier game to try him out in. That said I think he does possess the skills to do that.

However taking him away from fullback then creates a hole in the side there. I am however not convinced by Jackson or Weir as being good enough for Scotland. I have not seen Heathcote play so cannot really give an opinion there.

If Scotland can get all their first choice players on th epark at the same time then I think they have the makings of a very decent team over the next few years, plenty of youngsters as well who will be aroung for maybe the next 8 - 10 years.

by tigertattie Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:49 pm

You still think Bennett is the 2nd coming of christ?

I think he is over-hyped and bog standard at best!

by **LondonTiger** Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:49 pm

Unless Hogg is playing at 10 at club level, then no I do not think he should play there for Scotland.

by Comfort Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:54 pm

I think people may be getting a bit over-excited (thats not a bad thing Hogg's a spectacular talent):

I just want to add some hard realism (dont shoot!)

1. The back 5 of that lions pack was probably one of the most dominant you can get out of the NH.

2. The midfield he had outside him was Roberts/BOD - if ever there was a pair you'd want outside you from 10.....

3. Phillips at 9 - regardless what you think of him, he controls the game and nurtures 10s through pressure.

4. The opposition - only half that team even had S15 experience, let alone regular playing time.

Hogg made some deft passes, some nice touches and generally did very well.

However...
...never again will his experience at 10 be anything like that, nowhere near as comfortable. I think these exceptional circumstance could be being a tad overlooked here Wink

by **RDW** Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:56 pm

Comfort wrote:I think people may be getting a bit over-excited (thats not a bad thing Hogg's a spectacular talent):

I just want to add some hard realism (dont shoot!)

1. The back 5 of that lions pack was probably one of the most dominant you can get out of the NH.

2. The midfield he had outside him was Roberts/BOD - if ever there was a pair you'd want outside you from 10.....

3. Phillips at 9 - regardless what you think of him, he controls the game and nurtures 10s through pressure.

4. The opposition - only half that team even had S15 experience, let alone regular playing time.

Hogg made some deft passes, some nice touches and generally did very well.

However...
...never again will his experience at 10 be anything like that, nowhere near as comfortable. I think these exceptional circumstance could be being a tad overlooked here

Comfort - I said earlier in the thread that our opinions shouldn't really be based just on that one game, but the potential that he has. I agree that it is not the best game to judge, which is why I don't think our arguments should be based on that game!

by Comfort Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:03 pm

sorry RDW, it was just aimed at a few getting a bit overexcited.

I'm a big Hogg fan, and personally I think you could fit him into anywhere from 10-15 and he'd excel with time. But 10 especially is a different animal, learning from the bottom up is the only real way for me and agree with most who have said it needs to be club level first.

I would love to see the Lions bring him into first receiver starting NOW though just to mix things up, the's the sort of player who just seems to make the right decisions. His unpredictability coming into the midfield in phase posession would create space and BOD will be able to use this space to direct his centre partner (Roberts/Tuilagi/JD2) or North/Bowe (from the blindside) through that space and we're on our way.

I also think this is something Scotland should certainly consider, you guys have the potential for a sparkling backline, I think you need a director at 10, not an attacker.

by Solid8 Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:41 pm

Comfort wrote:I also think this is something Scotland should certainly consider, you guys have the potential for a sparkling backline, I think you need a director at 10, not an attacker.

I could not agree with this more. Our first choice back three consists of two classy players in Hogg and Maitland who are both at the end of their first season of international rugby and a natural, powerful finisher in Visser the emphasis has to be one of maximising the potential present in our back three not pushing them into positions that they are less comfortable with.

These guys should be encouraged to come into the line to mix things up and keep the oppo guessing, if they can learn to do this effectively then the potential is there to free up space for less talented players in the team and also to encourage those players to play above themselves. A solid pivot at ten would help them to achieve this, so would a policy of not kicking away +70% of the ball we do have because it is in our own half or not recycled quickly enough. There are much bigger issues to address before we consider whether or not our most gifted players should start to play out of position.

Also I would encourage every Scotland fan to keep everything crossed that these players do not go the way of Haircut Denton.

by MacKnocked-on Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:46 pm

Hogg played fantastically well at 10 yesterday I thought, looked like a fulltime 10. Of course,he was playing behind a dominant pack which would seldom happen playing for Scotland. Maitland was also very good at 15, created a lot of the Lions tries with his awareness and link play.

by DrTreasure Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:03 pm

One real bonus that we have seen recently in Hogg is that he has the makings of a really competent goal kicker. This means that we don't have to rely on Laidlaw and can be more flexible with our scrum half options although they do look pretty weak at the moment. Hopefully Kennedy can continue to develop well as he has a sharpness about his game that could work well for us.

I maintain that Hogg would be better developed at 13 than 10 as it suits his skill set and is a position we struggle with (queue the derision of the debate being revisited!) Alex Dunbar is a very good 12 (i dont think he is a 13) playing a darcy, nonu, barritt type role there and would be a good foil for a fast skillfull 13. Would have rather seen Scott touted as our potential 10 saviour than Hogg though agree we need to give heathcote and weir a shot. Maitland looked very competent at full back which is encouraging and Lamont is a better player than visser currently and has been playing much better form on the wing in recent months.

A backline that I would have liked to have seen developed out of curiosity of what they could achieve would be;

Cusiter
Scott
Lamont
Dunbar
Hogg
Visser
Maitland

Please don't disregard this as folly, it is only for debate purposes because there remain shortfalls in our backline given the Samoa game and de Lucas inability to meet his potential due to his CBD (chronic brainfart disease)!!

by funnyExiledScot Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:10 pm

I've never seen Scott at 10 so can't really comment. I know he started out in that position but with his size I'd say he's best deployed at 12, where he coincidentally plays most of his rugby. Has he ever played a minute of pro rugby at 10?

I know Hogg as has some gametime this season at 13 with some success, but I really think he's best suited to 15. That he can come into the line as a first or second receiver is an added bonus. Bennett will presumably come into the reckoning at 13 if he can convince anyone to play him in serious rugby matches on a consistent basis, and there's Duncan Taylor and Alex Grove as well, each offering something different at centre. I also wouldn't rule out NDL returning to some form, assuming Edinburgh can figure out how to play rugby again next season.

We know Hogg is a top class 15. Let him develop there.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:17 pm

tigertattie wrote:You still think Bennett is the 2nd coming of christ?

I think he is over-hyped and bog standard at best!

Yes. He is.

And it's ok for you to be wrong. Again.

by funnyExiledScot Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:23 pm

The key for Bennett is going to be to convince Townsend to shunt Dunbar to 12 and to let him have a 2-3 game run in the 13 jersey at the start of next season to prove himself. Tough competition at Glasgow with Lamont and Dunbar also in for the 13 jersey, and Horne playing at 12, but if he can't wrestle the jersey from those guys and persuade Toonie to back him, then he certainly isn't going to convince Scott Johnson or Vern Cotter to take a punt in a Scotland jersey.

He played well when given a shot last season, and the Glasgow style of play suits him down to the ground, as he's a good broken field runner and runs good lines. Whilst ASBO was horribly premature in calling for him to don international colours, I think it's clear that Bennett will play for Scotland at some stage. He just needs to convince Toonie to show some faith in some big games.

by Captain_Sensible Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:48 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:The key for Bennett is going to be to convince Townsend to shunt Dunbar to 12 and to let him have a 2-3 game run in the 13 jersey at the start of next season to prove himself. Tough competition at Glasgow with Lamont and Dunbar also in for the 13 jersey, and Horne playing at 12, but if he can't wrestle the jersey from those guys and persuade Toonie to back him, then he certainly isn't going to convince Scott Johnson or Vern Cotter to take a punt in a Scotland jersey.

He played well when given a shot last season, and the Glasgow style of play suits him down to the ground, as he's a good broken field runner and runs good lines. Whilst ASBO was horribly premature in calling for him to don international colours, I think it's clear that Bennett will play for Scotland at some stage. He just needs to convince Toonie to show some faith in some big games.

I think Bennett was on the bench for the semi vs Leinster. I seem to remember him coming on late and scoring a try. So, the management obviously think a lot of him. I’m assuming that Horne and Dunbar will see plenty of action for Scotland next season, so hopefully Bennett can come in and make a claim when they are away. Or, even better, force either of them out of the side outside the international window. Remember, he can play 12 too.

The centre combo for Scotland is really difficult to pick right now. Horne and Scott are both 12s, they offer decent pace and a lot of passing nous. Dunbar can play 12 and 13 and is more of a blunt force instrument, albeit with a decent range of passing too. Bennett hits hard in defence, but is a rapier, not a sledgehammer, with ball in hand. A lot will come down to whether the management want to emphasise brute force or creativity at 12. If they go for the former, Dunbar at 12 and Bennett at 13 looks a good bet. If the latter, Scott/Horne at 12 plus Dunbar/Bennett at 13.

My preference is always to have a big ball carrier somewhere in the backs. Sean Lamont is the best example of that, and Dunbar is a more rounded player than he. If Bennett turns out to be the real deal, playing Dunbar as a smasher at 12 and Bennett as a slasher at 13 could work very nicely. Scott or Horne to cover from the bench.

by Manky-Flanker Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:52 pm

I think the selections for Glasgow are going to be interesting next season.

Where does Hogg play, will we see him at 10 more?
Where will Horne play, 12 or 10?
Where will Low/Welsh play, LH and TH or TH and LH?
Will Bennett get more game time at 13?
Where will Slamont play wing or centre?
Where will Maitland play, wing or 15?
Where will the rumoured new NZ centre play 12 or 13 and how does that affect things?
Where will Vernon play, 8 or 7?
Will Matawalu make the odd appearance on the wing from 9.

The mind boggles Shocked

by **RDW** Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:54 pm

Manky-Flanker wrote:I think the selections for Glasgow are going to be interesting next season.

Where does Hogg play, will we see him at 10 more?
Where will Horne play, 12 or 10?
Where will Low/Welsh play, LH and TH or TH and LH?
Will Bennett get more game time at 13?
Where will Slamont play wing or centre?
Where will Maitland play, wing or 15?
Where will the rumoured new NZ centre play 12 or 13 and how does that affect things?
Where will Vernon play, 8 or 7?
Will Matawalu make the odd appearance on the wing from 9.

The mind boggles

If there is a Kiwi centre on the horizon and he goes to Glasgow (5 or 6 good quality centres) over Edinburgh (2 or 3 good centres, plus Atiga) I will personally find Lineen and and give him a noogie.

by **George Carlin** Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:11 pm

Am assuming the new Kiwi centre for Edinburgh will be Atiga's 'bit lazy' older brother who 'likes' his food.

by funnyExiledScot Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:43 pm

You mean the one with the dodgy knee GC? He'll be our marquee signing, along with new the head coach Andrew Nonymous.

by **George Carlin** Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:21 pm

It's been very quiet with signings for the Scottish clubs generally, to be honest. Surely there must also be a correlation between not having a head coach and not being able to sign players?

Who decides the players that are signed in any event? Am I just naive in assuming that it's the head coach?

by **RDW** Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:25 pm

GC - gonna reply to your post in the 'Scottish Pro team thread' to avoid this thread going too much off topic!

by yappysnap Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:29 pm

How longs his contract at Glasgow? As I'm sure there are a couple of Prem clubs that'd love to try him at 10. Sale and Saints come to mind.

by **George Carlin** Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:42 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:GC - gonna reply to your post in the 'Scottish Pro team thread' to avoid this thread going too much off topic!

That's actually where I meant to post it.

What thread is this? Where am I? Who's the Prime Minister? I need to go the toilet.

by tigertattie Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:46 pm

I thought Hogg was the prime minister?

And if yu need to pee. Pee on ASBO to hopefully dampen his flames of rage that not everyone thinks Bennett is brillient!

by **RDW** Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:48 pm

yappysnap wrote:How longs his contract at Glasgow? As I'm sure there are a couple of Prem clubs that'd love to try him at 10. Sale and Saints come to mind.

Hands off!

I’m pretty sure he signed a long term contract recently. However you do raise a point – if by the age of 23 / 24 (he’s only bloody 20 remember!!) he’s dabbled at 10 and shown some promise but wants to take it to the next level, a move to a top AP or French team to play as a full time 10 would work for everyone – he gets the top level exposure and young Scots don’t get held up.

by funnyExiledScot Wed Jun 12, 2013 7:05 pm

I think he'll stay with Glasgow for so long as they continue their upward trajectory. They are a very exciting team to be playing for at the moment, and should make more of a splash in the HC over the next season or two. It helps to be playing with top class players such as DTH and Maitland. He isn't the only talent in that backline, and he isn't as yet a big fish in a small pond. Whilst Glasgow continue to grow, he should stay.

Clearly if progress stalls, and key players such as Matawalu, Strass, Grant and Maitland start leaving, then it becomes understandable.

He isn't in Bennett's league - clearly he had to go to France. He had out grown Scottish rugby.

by R!skysports Thu Jun 13, 2013 1:59 pm

Only now getting round to watch the game, and I am now a little bit on the fence.

While I agree tough to assess on this game on its own, what really made me happy was his composure.

It is a long time I have seen a Scots 10 not look in panic every time they get the ball. Our usual fare tends to get the ball, kick it, ship it or run into the line as a set plan.

What hog did in this game was actually assess the situation and had the best hands I have seen for a Scots 10 for a VERY long time

One other point I would say is in favour of his move to 10, is defence. I am not 100% convinced about Hoggs tackling at 15 (is ok, but not great), it makes me nervous. This is a less of a concern at 10

I also think having a great 10 is more important than having a great 15, has mor influence on the game

So at this time, I am on the fence...

by **RDW** Thu Jun 13, 2013 2:01 pm

Risky - you haven't listed any negatives, are you sure you're on the fence?? Very Happy

by R!skysports Thu Jun 13, 2013 2:09 pm

We well all know his positives at 15, so did not want to re-state them Smile

It will also be interesting to see how Heathcote and Weir develop

Ruparb is not going to do it for me

by yappysnap Thu Jun 13, 2013 6:23 pm

Do Scottish 10's usually look a lot less composed because of the backline around them, tactics being used and the inefficient pack in front of them though?

by IanBru Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:08 am

Crazy statistic time:
Ruaridh Jackson has more international caps than points scored.

Sweet jesus.

by maestegmafia Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:22 am

IanBru wrote:Crazy statistic time:
Ruaridh Jackson has more international caps than points scored.

Sweet jesus.

Wow...!

I thought Heathcote did really well last weekend.

Jackson is an odd guy, sometimes I think he looks very accomplished, other times, whats the scottish word I am looking for??? Thats it, he looks Pisshhh

by CraigS1874 Fri Jun 14, 2013 4:25 am

In my opinion if hogg is to be playing anywhere it is 13 with a big offloading 12. There he can use his speed to make breaks from any offloads. Failing that he is a 15 who can have the freedom to move around and counter when it is on. And use his boot to get us out of trouble

Scotland's answer to 10 is heathcote, he will put hogg and maitland into space, lets face it out of the youngsters there is no better runner than hogg ? Hoggs main strength is speed and agility this is wasted at ten in a test match environment as he will not be wide enough to get into space.
Scotland's back line is improving and people forget weir is only 22 and heathcote is 21, with matt Scott and Dunbar/the messiah we have a young midfield so I feel we will do well over the next few years. All of these players are good runners but will have to improve defensively for test match rugby. I do feel maitland is a good 15 though we just need to find some young powerful wingers then we will have a solid back line.

by **George Carlin** Fri Jun 14, 2013 9:37 am

Yappy - poor show at a troll there, young man.

We do need to consider some permutations in the Scottish backline though, because the fact remains that we have options. What would people say to something like:

09 Pyrgos/Laidlaw (I am coming to terms with the fact that Cus may not get back to speed)
10 Heathcote
11 Visser
12 Dunbar
13 Bennett
14 Hogg/Maitland/Seymour
15 Maitland/Hogg

Not the silliest everest.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Fri Jun 14, 2013 10:02 am

GC, we're getting there, but I'm hopin that if Cus is injured, we'll look to progress Sean Kennedy in the 9 shirt as Laidlaw has not set the heather on fire and Henry just isn't an international calibre player. Visser then is the weak spot until he sorts his defenc out, positioning and execution

by tigertattie Fri Jun 14, 2013 12:10 pm

Stop picking Bennett at 13!

Dunbar to 13 and Scott at 12 is the way forward!

by **RDW** Fri Jun 14, 2013 12:11 pm

tigertattie wrote:Stop picking Bennett at 13!

Dunbar to 13 and Scott at 12 is the way forward!

But tattie, he's the Messiah! notworthy

by funnyExiledScot Fri Jun 14, 2013 12:58 pm

GC - why drop Matt Scott for Mark Bennett? I'd settle for one half sensible reason.

What I'd like to see in place for the 2014 6 Nations is the following:

9.Laidlaw 10.Heathcote 11.Visser 12.Scott 13.Dunbar 14.Maitland 15.Hogg

20.Kennedy 21.Weir 22.S Lamont

Scotland A would then be:

9.Pyrgos 10.Jackson 11.Farndale 12.Horne 13.Bennett 14.Taylor 15.Tonks

20.Hidalgo-Clyne 21.Grove 22.Murchie

by Hood83 Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:37 pm

I don't watch a huge amount of Glasgow or Edinburgh games so probably not the most informed poster on this BUT...I've seen Heathcote play a fair bit, on one occasion against Leicester and George Ford I think, where he seemed vastly the better player. In fact, he looked like he had an excellent all-round game.

I honestly think he can develop into a decent international 10, with Hogg a world class 15. If Scotland can get a pack and game-plan to deliver quickish ball, you guys are going to have a whole load of running threats. I do think you should look to get Hogg on the ball a lot more though. As well as hitting the line more I think he can come into it as a second receiver - similar to what England tried with Goode, but, you know, actually effective instead.

by funnyExiledScot Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:56 pm

Couldn't agree more Hood83. What this tour has shown us is that we haven't even started to maximise Hogg's potential at fullback yet, and we really ought to be getting him coming into the line as first or second receiver, or using him to change the direction of attacks. I agree that with Heathcote at 10, Scott at 12 and Hogg at 15 (and Maitland on the wing), we have a collection of good footballers in the backline who can make us less predictable.

If Heathcote and Hogg can sort out the kicking between them, it also makes us less reliant on Laidlaw, meaning we can pick our 9 purely with service and attacking capability in mind (which means a swift promotion for Kennedy in my book).

by Hood83 Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:03 pm

funnyexiledScot - I wonder if Scotland, and to a lesser extent England, are actually ahead of the curve for once. Over the last few years backs have been getting bigger and bigger but I think losing some of the footballing nous - Shane Williams goes, Cuthbert comes in. For teams like ours that don't seem to be producing these giants, perhaps increasing the number of genuine footballers is the key. Unlocking defences with good hands, vision and quick feet rather than brute strength. It'll be interesting to see.

Would you say your front row and centre are your biggest areas for improvement?

by funnyExiledScot Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:14 pm

Centre most certainly. It's a position we've really struggled with since Leslie and Tait both retired. We've had ok options at 13 with Ansbro, Grove and NDL, but 12 has been a dark place for some time. Now with Scott and Dunbar both good options at 12 and playing regularly, we have two players who are both physically strong but most importantly can pass a rugby ball and play with their heads-up - Scott in particular in that regard, Dunbar is more direct (but offloads well in the tackle).

Front row is less clear cut. The trio of Murray, Ford and Jacobsen we are pretty good combination truth be told, and whilst Ryan Grant is a better player than Jacobsen, Murray and Ford are still both first choice but neither are quite the player they once were. I think we have better depth; Welsh, Low, Cross, Dickinson, MacArthur et al are all more competent than the likes of Gavin Kerr and Mattie Stewart, but in terms of the first choice front row, I think we've been ok in the department for a number of years now.

Other than centre, the other big change in the last 12 months is the back three. Hogg, Visser and Maitland are the best back three Scotland have had in my rugby supporting lifetime, and have the potential to play seriously good rugby in the coming years. It's given us a real added dimension. Under Robinson we were a team that was able to win lots of possession, but had zero cutting edge or any ideas what to do with it. Hopefully that'll change, and the Italy and England games in the 6 Nations in particular showed that we're getting much sharper at sniffing out and taking opportunities.

by **RDW** Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:08 pm

I think the word to describe a lot of the Scotland team just now is potential. We potentially have very good centres now, we also potentially have a very good back 3. It remains to be seen whether they fulfil this potential, but it is looking at lot more promising than it ever has.

by Captain_Sensible Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:14 pm

Getting more time for Kennedy is hugely important. He’s the closest thing we’ve got to a Matawalu in that he can deliver quick ball from the breakdown and keep the fringe defence tied in with his pace. I don’t know whether it is the tactics currently in use, but Laidlaw has fallen pretty far in my estimation. Too slow with his service and too keen to do it all himself with those bloody box kicks.

We’ve finally got a set of backs that do good things with the ball. Our number 1 priority should be getting the ball to them quickly.

As for Bennett, it might be hard for him to get look in – Scott and Dunbar looks like a nicely balanced combo, and Bennett only covers the centres from the bench, so if a wing goes off injured we’d be in a pickle.

by funnyExiledScot Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:23 pm

I'm sure the Messiah could cover wing or fullback if needed. There are no limits to his abilities, and it's not like actually proving himself matters does it?

by Captain_Sensible Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:29 pm

Now now, FES, you can’t deny he’s been impressive when he’s played for Glasgow this season.

If I was a betting man, I’d put money on him forcing his way into the 13 shirt for Scotland sooner or later. Whether that means Dunbar shifts to 12, or Scott stays at 12 is another matter. Some tough calls to be made there, especially with Horne in the mix too.

by funnyExiledScot Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:35 pm

I actually agree. I do think Dunbar will ultimately settle at 12 for Glasgow with Bennett at 13. That looks like a good combination in terms of skill sets, and I'd like to see that combination in place this season.

Unlike the rest of my posts today, I'm not actually being sarcastic this time!

by sensisball Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:37 pm

I dont think Dunbar has the gas to play o/c at the highest level. I see him as a 12 where his direct running and strength in the tackle will allow a quicker 13 ( messiah anyone?) to exploit space and actually link up with our talented back three.

At the moment we are relying too heavily on counter attack but we need to develop our own running game. Looking at the way Cotter has his team play at Clermont i hope that he tries to create a set of backs that can actually run the ball as well as hoof it when required.

One of the big questions for Toonie next season is can he get over his love in with peter Horne and allow a Dunbar, bennett parnership the time to flourish?

by tigertattie Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:46 pm

I'm sorry but I really do not rate Horne. I would say he was unspectacular at best!

Totally agree about Laidlaw though. Maybe harsh on him as I think he may be playing to the game plan he has been told. I wish he would stop looking to kick the ball away all the time.

Quick ball from the ruck to heathcote, Scott, Dunbar to then use Visser, Maitland and Hogg would bamboozle many an opposition team!

Once Maitland settles into the team I really think we will see something special from him! And Hogg of course

by Captain_Sensible Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:53 pm

Horne is a good player who had a bad game vs Samoa. His attacking instincts were on full display for Glasgow throughout the season. I would like to see a Dunbar/Bennett combo given time to bed in, with Jackson or Horne at 10 for the early past of the season.

Hopefully Weir can come back soon, it was a Weir/Dunbar/Bennett line-up that tore the Dragons a new one back in the winter. 3-60 it finished.

by Captain_Sensible Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:54 pm

In fact, a Niko, Weir, DTH, Dunbar, Bennett, Maitland, Hogg backline with Pyrgos, Horne and Lamont/Seymour on the bench has a lot going for it.

by **George Carlin** Fri Jun 14, 2013 4:45 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:GC - why drop Matt Scott for Mark Bennett? I'd settle for one half sensible reason.

1. He's my girlfriend. 2. I know how much it upsets you when I do.

by Sponsored content