Scotland Fans' 2014 6N of hell Post-mortem

First topic message reminder :

EDIT March 18th post-Scotland's capitulation to Wales

So, it's the end of the six nations. I have to say the intention of this early prediction thread was to calm all suppositions that Scotland might be anywhere near a threat this year. I have maintained that things look better with Cotter coming in (and hopefully not having to resort to 5th/6th choice wings, though that couldn't have been predicted).

Someone pointed out that in this last game if Wales had received the red card the scoreline would not have been the same in reverse. In fact I would be very worried that we still would have lost. To me it feels like it was an excuse to put the heads down/give Johnson the farewell he deserves.

Personally, I am lost for words. Not really sure where to go from here.

Anyone?

***

EDIT March 8th post-Scotland's capitulation to France.

Come hither one and all and we shall drink our sorrows away...

***
EDIT February 8th post-Scotland's capitulation to England & Ireland

I was right all along.

***

I got this in early because I did not want to see anybody from any nation suggest for any minute that Scotland has a chance of doing anything other than :

a) Cleaning their dirties in a smeg [White Wash]
b) Making lots of soup this winter [wooden spoon]
c) Scraping a win against Italy , in the dying seconds after a urine poor performance , which still might result in "b)" anyway.

No they did not beat Ireland.  
No they did not beat England.
No they did not beat France.  
No they did not beat Wales.  

They might *look* like they are going to win to any outsiders no privy to the Scotland set up, but I guarantee you no sensible Scottish fan will be expecting anything but a, b & c this season.

Why?

• We have an interim coach (for over a year!!!)who is more worried about what he says on camera than apparently coaching a sensible game plan
  
• Our breakdown is awful
  
• We have the psychological hardness of my nan - you don't know my nan but that's not good
  
• Our best players are either never played in position, not allowed to play in the XXIII at all, or are just awful at the moment. Not making the injury excuse because frankly it doesn't apply with exception of 2 key players that might be back in time. Happens in every squad
  
• etc, etc (feel free to add to this list)
  

So look, when we are compiling our 6N predictions this year, can we just for once all agree on something?

1. AN Other
2. AN Other
3. AN Other
4. AN Other
5. Maybe Scotland
6. Probably Scotland

Anyone mentions "dark horses" and "Scotland" in the same sentence without a negation clause in there somewhere (and you KNOW what I mean) I am getting our the knuckle dusters    

tigertattie wrote:

Our line out has gone from one of the best in the NH, to one of the worst. Ford can't throw but our lifters/jumpers are not functioning also. We keep hearing that Hamilton needs to be picked as he is the only on that knows the calls.  Well it looks like the calls aint working so why bother???

I agree with this completely. I feel kind of bad picking on Ford, but he is not the only culprit. Hamilton needs to sit out a few games.

We also need a decent forwards coach

fa0019 wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Take the scoreboard out the way and I think the overall play has improved. I thought Weir looked half decent with the ball in hand but the clinical issue is still very apparent. Ran away from us in the end but rugby is like that.

Why is Gray out the side? Off form? I think the set piece would improve if he's back. He's a huge lump in the scrums and if we can get him lifting then the lineout would surely improve with his added height and reach. Hooker needs to be replaced though. You can't play yourself into form... not at one of the key positions in the game. You have to be on it all the time. 1 mess up out of 10 is the max allowance.

fa, Can you detail which aspects?  I don't think the players are helped by bizarre selections/substitutions, but I'm struggling to see anything except a group of players in reverse?

Up to a recently the team couldn't hardly put 2 phases together without being turnovered, dropping the ball etc. They would drop tackles in midfield and the kicks were at best pointless. This is different. The same issues of struggling to look clinical (i.e. a class difference) but I saw a lot of improvements.

Doesn't mean they played well but the team is far better then they were under Robinson. The backline actually has some promise to it. The centres for the first time look like they can cut it at test level. The 3/4s when all fit are very dangerous and the halfbacks are no longer 2nd division.

The backrow balance looks a little off and no.2 needs to change as Ford has lost confidence...we saw that in the AIs.

It was eventually a bad result and it was frustrating to see them lose so much ball and not look threatening when in possession but for me there were aspects which showed they are on a upwards curve... my only issue is that I'm not sure if the next step is out of their reach and beyond their talent capabilities.

Sadly, fa, that is where I now find myself - I don't think there's much else to be done. We have one world class player at the moment (Hogg), Barclay or Rennie plus Scott might make incremental improvements, but there really isn't anyone else that can come in an boost the collective performance above 5 out of 10 for me. Commenting on the second half for he BBC, even the normally extremely upbeat/can even see the positive in Ford's lineout contribution Mike Blair had this to say:

if you don't make your first-up tackles, don't defend the driving maul, gain parity in set-piece and win the battle of the breakdown then you don't win Six Nations matches.

He could have added 'and do pretty much nothing with the ball when you have it', and I think that covers it. I wish that I could see this "upward curve" that you mention and the "improvements", but I suspect I'm too busy greeting for my eyes to clear sufficiently

Scotland's lineout was surprisingly really really bad.

What we're also missing is good old fashioned hardness.

We needs some really hard forwards who look to hurt the opposition when it comes to the collision. Our current crop just seem soft as sh1te.

It's been a long time since any opposition players are scared of ours.

GunsGerms wrote:Scotland's lineout was surprisingly really really bad.

Not really surprising Guns, it's been decaying like a rotten carcass for months.

fa0019 wrote: Up to a recently the team couldn't hardly put 2 phases together without being turnovered, dropping the ball etc. They would drop tackles in midfield and the kicks were at best pointless. This is different. The same issues of struggling to look clinical (i.e. a class difference) but I saw a lot of improvements.

Doesn't mean they played well but the team is far better then they were under Robinson. The backline actually has some promise to it. The centres for the first time look like they can cut it at test level. The 3/4s when all fit are very dangerous and the halfbacks are no longer 2nd division.

The backrow balance looks a little off and no.2 needs to change as Ford has lost confidence...we saw that in the AIs.

It was eventually a bad result and it was frustrating to see them lose so much ball and not look threatening when in possession but for me there were aspects which showed they are on a upwards curve... my only issue is that I'm not sure if the next step is out of their reach and beyond their talent capabilities.

See I just don't agree with this at all, yes we have better players available for selection now but the performances being put in are dreadful. Yesterday was a total embarrassment and had Ireland actually put some sort of performance together in the first half we would've been (even more) blown away. As much as I'd love to be proven wrong I genuinely believe the team are going backwards, and while its always the easy thing to point fingers at the coaching team whoever looked at Johnson's coaching record and thought "yes, this is the guy for us" needs their head examined!   

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:What we're also missing is good old fashioned hardness.

We needs some really hard forwards who look to hurt the opposition when it comes to the collision. Our current crop just seem soft as sh1te.

It's been a long time since any opposition players are scared of ours.

I was going to say our players are pampered, that's not quite the right word. Our forwards lack a hard edge because no one is pushing them for their spot. It is interesting reading some of the England players biographies, they talk about fights breaking out at training between forwards who were vying for the spot on the team. None of that competition in the Scotland camp.

Having watched the Scotland game last night there are a lot of areas that need drastic improvement for us to start winning. The main areas though that i spotted that really contributed to Scotland losing and putting in a pretty weak performance were.
1. Lineouts
2. Hooking
3. slowness at the breakdown
4. Backrow combination

The Scottish Lineout has not operated well for a few seasons now. There seems to be various factors for this, Ford not being able to throw straight which has resulted in some players lacking in confidence. Also there seems to be a willingness to try over complicated line out moves that players don't seem comfortable with or seem to know the calls. A couple times yesterday scottish ball was thrown in and the jumper didn't even get off the ground. Not sure if this is purely down to the players but also the coaching of Jonathan Humphries who is forwards and line out coach. The period when the Scottish line out operated best was when Scott Murray was playing. He is coaching these days so why not get him in to work on the line outs!

The hooking or more so non hooking was unforgivable, Ford never even made an attempt at hooking the ball. It wasn't the first time it happened yesterday. In the autumn tests there were at least 2 scrums that we lost against the head, I am sure one was even against Japan! A change at hooker is needed, MacArthur looked more confident throwing the ball in and looked comfortable hooking the ball. He needs to start, yes there might be bulk lost but Ford isn't putting his bulk to good use at the moment.

Scotland seemed to be very slow to the breakdown yesterday and also getting down and across the ball at ruck and tackle situations. Definitely lacking a genuine openside. Noticed at least on 3 occasions Brown and Chris Henry going up against each other for the same ball on the deck and Henry beat Brown to is by a good fraction. For all Brown is a good player he is not a scavenger on the deck, Scotland have some very good 7s in Rennie, Barclay, Fusaro and now Cowan but for what ever reason Johnson just doesn't seem to want to pick a 7 or realise that this is one of Scotlands biggest problems at the moment.

The backrow just didn't gel. Thought it was one of the poorest performances by a Scottish back row in a long time. They were beaten to the ball by the Irish far too often and turned over very little ball where as the Irish were able to get a good bit of turn over possesion or at least slow or ball down. Wilson, Brown and Denton are all good players but it just didn't work as there are too many similarities between them. Brown either needs to move back to 6 which is by far his best position but if Johnson insits on Brown being a 7 then he needs to be dropped becase he just isn't effective enough to be a 7.

Changes for Saturday i think will be limited due to the short turn around but I would change MacArthur for Ford, Brown to 6 and Rennie to 7. I would make more if there was a bigger gap between games but i think those 2 positions are the key for Scotland improving from the Ireland performance. .

Majestic post, Majestic. Agreed on all points. I'd also bring back Scott at 12 - I know he's short on match fitness, but he'll bring more intelligence to our backline.

We also need to get Hogg more involved in our backline moves. Have him pop up in midfield, or act as a dummy runner to distract attention from the real point of attack. We just looked so bereft of ideas with ball in hand yesterday.

If Ford continues to play then there is no need for Duncan Weir to play as his greatest asset is field position which is useless without we win our lineouts or challenge any throws. I wouldn't mind seeing Jacko start with Scott outside him. Cusiter on too, who cares if we don't have a reliable kicker, we're going to get pumped so I'd rather we gave those 'try' things a bash rather than grab the odd penalty.

Majestic83 wrote:Having watched the Scotland game last night there are a lot of areas that need drastic improvement for us to start winning. The main areas though that i spotted that really contributed to Scotland losing and putting in a pretty weak performance were.
1. Lineouts
2. Hooking
3. slowness at the breakdown
4. Backrow combination

The Scottish Lineout has not operated well for a few seasons now. There seems to be various factors for this, Ford not being able to throw straight which has resulted in some players lacking in confidence. Also there seems to be a willingness to try over complicated line out moves that players don't seem comfortable with or seem to know the calls. A couple times yesterday scottish ball was thrown in and the jumper didn't even get off the ground. Not sure if this is purely down to the players but also the coaching of Jonathan Humphries who is forwards and line out coach. The period when the Scottish line out operated best was when Scott Murray was playing. He is coaching these days so why not get him in to work on the line outs!

The hooking or more so non hooking was unforgivable, Ford never even made an attempt at hooking the ball. It wasn't the first time it happened yesterday. In the autumn tests there were at least 2 scrums that we lost against the head, I am sure one was even against Japan! A change at hooker is needed, MacArthur looked more confident throwing the ball in and looked comfortable hooking the ball. He needs to start, yes there might be bulk lost but Ford isn't putting his bulk to good use at the moment.

Scotland seemed to be very slow to the breakdown yesterday and also getting down and across the ball at ruck and tackle situations. Definitely lacking a genuine openside. Noticed at least on 3 occasions Brown and Chris Henry going up against each other for the same ball on the deck and Henry beat Brown to is by a good fraction. For all Brown is a good player he is not a scavenger on the deck, Scotland have some very good 7s in Rennie, Barclay, Fusaro and now Cowan but for what ever reason Johnson just doesn't seem to want to pick a 7 or realise that this is one of Scotlands biggest problems at the moment.

The backrow just didn't gel. Thought it was one of the poorest performances by a Scottish back row in a long time. They were beaten to the ball by the Irish far too often and turned over very little ball where as the Irish were able to get a good bit of turn over possesion or at least slow or ball down. Wilson, Brown and Denton are all good players but it just didn't work as there are too many similarities between them. Brown either needs to move back to 6 which is by far his best position but if Johnson insits on Brown being a 7 then he needs to be dropped becase he just isn't effective enough to be a 7.

Changes for Saturday i think will be limited due to the short turn around but I would change MacArthur for Ford, Brown to 6 and Rennie to 7. I would make more if there was a bigger gap between games but i think those 2 positions are the key for Scotland improving from the Ireland performance. .

Very good Maj. Only sad that you didn't take me up on my offer that I would post less if you would post more.

I would add that it's very difficult to judge Scott Johnson's selections as I suspect he's been told in very clear terms to give lots of new players a chance in both training and match play to see whether they can cut it, prior to the RWC run-in. I think that we have to believe that as the only other alternative is that the man is a batsh!t-poor selector.

There are reasons to be optimistic about the arrival of the Verninator. Vern Cotter was a no.8 so surely if he knows about anything, it's loose forward play. He also regularly chooses a back row of 8 Damien Chouly 7 Julien Bardy/Alexandre Lapandry 6 Julien Bonnaire, sometimes Bardy to 6 if Bonnaire needs to play 8. Either way, that's a chopper, a fetcher/link man and a carrier chosen as a matter of course. Dare we dream?

Ford's position is absolutely unsustainable now. You cannot be first choice in a position and yet be unable to execute the basic skills of the role. He should switch to loosehead now and give us all a break. He's killing us. And that's not hyperbole, it's a fact. If it's bulk that concerns you, then Dougie Hall is only about 8kg lighter and can hit his jumpers although it's Pat MacArthur at 26 years of age that really needs to be brought on now. For continuity purposes against England, an all-Glasgow front row of Grant, Hall and Welsh makes sense to me (although Angela did get on the wrong side of the ref on the Saxons game).

Leave Welsh with us GC - and in any case Big Angela (I have to say that as I know the real Angela) fell out with a barking, daft referee at the A game. TBH they played better as a unit than the big team !

I hope Big Vern is looking on and thinking "the only way from here is up - quick win might be to start with the radical idea of picking players on form and in position".

Perhaps he will also bring in a new forwards coach to look at those darned inconvenient breaks in play we have to endure in between passing the ball horizontally from one side of the pitch to the other...like that breakdown thing and furralineyout.

Failing that, I'd like to see him at least bring over an experienced french hooker to teach us a thing or two....as it were.

Bring back the B's

George Carlin wrote:Effie - can we rename this thread the 'Scotland 6 Nations Victim Support Group Thread'.

I am thinking about it GC! The original point of the thread title was irony but I think some are not reading the OP and thinking we are all completely serious!!

geoff998rugby wrote:

What was so disppointing from a Scottish perspective was that they looked like the one country who didn't have the ability
to develop. Maitland and Hogg apart 10 to 15 were substandard

Italy had backs with far more potential

This.

Although I disagree that it's true - it's just what it looked like. I am pretty sure when Fern Cotton comes in we will see improvement. Maj is right that our biggest problems right now are in our forward play - perhaps our backs are rubbish too but it's irrelevant until we win set pieces and at least gain parity in the breakdown. I've said it from the start of last year, our breakdown has been woeful under SJ when it once wasn't. Although it's not the same level you will notice we're not so blown away in the Rabo with that, and it's a similar bunch of players.

Tactics, tactics, tactics and coaching. That's seriously our problem right now. It IS depressing that we are performing the same as under Robinson but our players are arguably better.

Finally - am I being daft thinking that it seriously cannot be that hard to throw a ball straight say, 10 times in a row, for a professional sportsman? What does Ford DO in training to try help this? Nothing at all?

Score prediction next week by the way is roughly 23 - 12 to England. Not as bad as last week because it's Calcutta in Murrayfield, but they will have too much for us and it could start to look like a tryless 6N.

Whilst there are a number of issues with the side, the single biggest failing is our lineout. No side can win rugby matches if each an every time they establish field position, the opposition can reliably steal the ball back from the lineout.

We need to urgently fix our lineout, and that means removing Ross Ford. Whilst I'm sceptical as to whether MacArthur will do better, he certainly deserves to have a shot at it. The other reason for ditching Ford is his hooking. There is no point in picking players like Low and Hamilton, big units designed to bolster the set piece, if the hooker refuses to hook. Laidlaw's efforts at spinning the ball back in the right direction were admirable, particularly in front of the most whistle-happy ref in world rugby, but Ford just has to start hooking properly.

I've also no issues with the selection of Hamilton. The weather was predicted to be dire, and he's made a mess of the Irish pack before. However he had a poor game in my view. He had little impact on the Irish maul, and our lineout was a mess. His workrate in open play is always a weakness, and with his strengths negated all that's left is his poor relations with every ref on the circuit. Hines lacked discipline as well, but made up for it in other respects. I don't think we can afford Owen Farrell the luxury of all those penalties at Murrayfield.

Ford and Hamilton out, MacArthur and Gray in.

The backrow is another mess. No balance. Whereas SOB gets injured and Schmidt goes looking for a replacement openside, SJ moves Brown to 7 and to compound matters doens't even pick a specialist 6. We all said this was a bizarre selection ahead of the game, and it proved a disaster. Chris Henry is a good player, but we made him look world class. If we're going to play Brown at 7, then we needed Strokosch at 6 (i.e. a player closer to being a 6.5 sort of flanker rather than a specialist number 8).

Regarding the backline I have no issues. Our limitations there are clear, but I don't think there's a magic bullet. Scott should start at 12 instead of Taylor, and I'd pick Seymour to start on the right wing. Presumably Scott won't manage to complete the 80 minutes, so I'd have Cusiter, Taylor and Evans on the bench.

The second half in Dublin was extremely disappointing. We showed good fight in the first half (although poor scoreboard management), but were overrun in the second despite the fact that Ireland didn't really seem to get out of 3rd gear.

+1 (Altho I would add that Laidlaw's speed of service is really starting to tick me off - my wee lad has a faster pass and doesn't feel the need to take 2-3 steps)

We can chatter about selection changes all we like, but does anyone really have any faith or confidence in the necessary changes being made? Our lack of a proper openside, our problems with Ford and the scrum/lineout, and our lack of bite at the breakdown in general, have been obvious for getting onto a year now.

But, nothing has been done. The management have yet to remedy any of these problems. There's no point in capping a whole bunch of new players and expanding the squad depth if we can't fix basic tactical problems. We've got on discernible, consistent style of play, and no obvious plans to use our best assets (Hogg, basically).

Under Robinson, it was always a case of having good basics, but lacking the extra 5-10% in the backs to kill teams off. Now it feels like those good basics are crumbling away in front of our eyes.

We are also faced with the possibility of our current 'approach' being dictated by Cotter behind the scenes. If so, we can hope all we like that his arrival will improve things, but it won't.

It really is infuriating,

Under Robbo we had a powerfull, mobile pack that contested the breakdown and secured us decent ball. This decent ball was then either kicked by our half backs or thrown out to a set of backs with no go forward.

We argueably have the backs to do some damage now but our pack (which is mostly the same personell) has gone into reverse gear.

The Man Humphries can be the only explanation for this unless he has been given some weird SJ order to coach the forwards to not contest breakdowns, not have a functioning lineout and have a scrum that stands still and doesnt hook.

Say what you want about Robbo. He was a damn good forwads coach. He was just not a head coach and knew hee haw about back play or how to select players.

If Cotter can't fix things pronto when he arrives then the SRU could find themselves in a bit of a dark place

ASBO - agreed on Laidlaw's passing. He's made improvements in that regard this season but he seemed hesitant on Sunday, plus some of his box kicks just played right into Irish hands (all credit to Rob Kearney though who was outstanding).

In the first half we weren't bad, and I liked the backs moves designed to get Hogg running onto the ball, albeit slightly deeper. He has the pace and footwork to create space for himself and that nearly paid off on several occassion.

Sean Lamont was his usual combination of power and grit, combined with glacial pace. When he tried to run the ball out of our 22 the speed with which he was caught was criminal. International wingers really shouldn't have to worry about the players behind them, more what's in front. Whilst he put in some decent tackles and made a few barging yards, his lack of pace is seriously hacking me off these days. The only silver lining is that England might start Brown on the wing with Goode at 15, neither of whom can run particularly quickly.

Much work to be done in so little time. Being realistic about what can be achieved, I'd just focus on the lineout this week, and getting Matt Scott working at 12. We can fix more ahead of the Wooden Spoon showdown.

tigertattie wrote:It really is infuriating,

Under Robbo we had a powerfull, mobile pack that contested the breakdown and secured us decent ball. This decent ball was then either kicked by our half backs or thrown out to a set of backs with no go forward.

We argueably have the backs to do some damage now but our pack (which is mostly the same personell) has gone into reverse gear.

The Man Humphries can be the only explanation for this unless he has been given some weird SJ order to coach the forwards to not contest breakdowns, not have a functioning lineout and have a scrum that stands still and doesnt hook.

Say what you want about Robbo. He was a damn good forwads coach. He was just not a head coach and knew hee haw about back play or how to select players.

If Cotter can't fix things pronto when he arrives then the SRU could find themselves in a bit of a dark place

Let's not get our hopes up, tattie, or have expectations soaring - Uncle Vern will inherit Rab C Johnson, Dingbert Humphreys and the rest of the coaching panel, and it'll be a couple of years at least I would imagine before he gets his own coaching team and his message across. My best advice is to write off the RWC 2015

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

tigertattie wrote:It really is infuriating,

Under Robbo we had a powerfull, mobile pack that contested the breakdown and secured us decent ball. This decent ball was then either kicked by our half backs or thrown out to a set of backs with no go forward.

We argueably have the backs to do some damage now but our pack (which is mostly the same personell) has gone into reverse gear.

The Man Humphries can be the only explanation for this unless he has been given some weird SJ order to coach the forwards to not contest breakdowns, not have a functioning lineout and have a scrum that stands still and doesnt hook.

Say what you want about Robbo. He was a damn good forwads coach. He was just not a head coach and knew hee haw about back play or how to select players.

If Cotter can't fix things pronto when he arrives then the SRU could find themselves in a bit of a dark place

Let's not get our hopes up, tattie, or have expectations soaring - Uncle Vern will inherit Rab C Johnson, Dingbert Humphreys and the rest of the coaching panel, and it'll be a couple of years at least I would imagine before he gets his own coaching team and his message across.  My best advice is to write off the RWC 2015

Surely Cotter will be given a free hand regarding his coaching team. If he doesn't want Humphreys, and lord knows why he should on the forwards' showing thus far, he should be able to bin him. Bring in Shade Munro, or someone of his ilk that can restore a simple, aggressive game plan with proper pack selections.

I think we could see Wagga Hines come in as a coach, whether that's as the senior forwards coach and a replacement for Humph, I wouldn't rule it out.

In the meantime I think Scott Murray should be asked to run a session or two on the lineout. Saturday's efforts were embarrassing and it used to be such a potent weapon for us in Murray's time.

Any idea when the team's announced? Is it midday today?

nickj wrote:I think we could see Wagga Hines come in as a coach, whether that's as the senior forwards coach and a replacement for Humph, I wouldn't rule it out.

In the meantime I think Scott Murray should be asked to run a session or two on the lineout. Saturday's efforts were embarrassing and it used to be such a potent weapon for us in Murray's time.

Any idea when the team's announced? Is it midday today?

The announcement will probably be tomorrow.

I'd like Hines to be involved with the squad in some way, but his new contract with Sale might preclude him from proper coaching. I'd still take him as a player.

I wouldn't take Hines as a player. We need a long-term strategy, not a sticking plaster.

Swinson is the right selection at lock. Given Hamilton's poor performance on Sunday, and the queue of good alternatives lining up behind him, I'd promote Richie Gray to the starting lineup and one of Jonny Gray or Grant Gilchrist to the bench.

Lock is one position where we can afford not to tolerate poor performance, as we have plenty of alternative options getting regular club rugby and playing well. Whilst Hines may add something for this 6 Nations, he's not the solution for the World Cup.

The four locks for the WC squad should be Swinson, R Gray, Gilchrist and J Gray. That's the future and the present, and we should now be using this 6 Nations to test that group. I'd start Swinson in every game - he's by far and away the most consistent performer of the group. I'd give Richie Gray the next couple of games with Gilchrist on the bench. If Richie doesn't cut the mustard against England and Italy, or Gilchrist doesn't bring the required impact from the bench, then Jonny Gray comes in.

Whilst there may be players who get an easy ride due to a lack of alternatives, none of the locks can be complacent.

Posted this on a dying thread earlier:

The more I think about this, the more I'm inclined to drop Brown. People say he's in there for leadership qualities (amongst others) but when we're constantly losing, the leadership is lacking when it comes to pulling the guys together after falling behind.

I would like to see this team (although I doubt there will be any tactical changes from last week):

15 Hogg
14 Seymore (or Evans, not fussed)
11 Lamont
13 Dunbar
12 Scott
10 Weir
9 Cusiter
8 Denton
7 Barclay
6 Beattie
5 Gray
4 Swinson
3 Murray
2 Hall
1 Grant

I'd have Harley on the bench in addition to Gray Jnr, MacArthur and Welsh. Swinson or Cusiter as Capt.

Telfer in for a pre-match team talk who would in no uncertain terms tell them to feicin smash anything in a white shirt as hard as physically possible......even Rowntree.

I thought Murray was injured and out of the tournament, plus, rightly or wrongly, I don't think Barclay is part of the squad.

With only 4 useful days between games, we won't be able to make too many changes. If radical changes are to come, then I think we'll see them materialise for the Italy game (which has the makings already of an almighty scrap/race to the bottom).

I agree with lord tweed jacket, HInes, although great, is not the future.

I've said before that we need to get Scott Murray or Stu Grimes or anyone in to give a session or two on line outs.

Maybe get Gordon Bulloch to come speak to Ford

Get Peter Wright or even the Chunk to come speak to the props about lifting in a lineout.

Its the same forwards that Robbo had (mostly) why has the lineout gone from a relative strength to utter poopie? It must be in the head???

funnyExiledScot wrote:I wouldn't take Hines as a player. We need a long-term strategy, not a sticking plaster.

Swinson is the right selection at lock. Given Hamilton's poor performance on Sunday, and the queue of good alternatives lining up behind him, I'd promote Richie Gray to the starting lineup and one of Jonny Gray or Grant Gilchrist to the bench.

Lock is one position where we can afford not to tolerate poor performance, as we have plenty of alternative options getting regular club rugby and playing well. Whilst Hines may add something for this 6 Nations, he's not the solution for the World Cup.

The four locks for the WC squad should be Swinson, R Gray, Gilchrist and J Gray. That's the future and the present, and we should now be using this 6 Nations to test that group. I'd start Swinson in every game - he's by far and away the most consistent performer of the group. I'd give Richie Gray the next couple of games with Gilchrist on the bench. If Richie doesn't cut the mustard against England and Italy, or Gilchrist doesn't bring the required impact from the bench, then Jonny Gray comes in.

Whilst there may be players who get an easy ride due to a lack of alternatives, none of the locks can be complacent.

Agree with much of this. I can no longer see what Hamilton and Kellock add, when compared to Swinson, the Grays and Gilchrist.

Captain_Sensible wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I wouldn't take Hines as a player. We need a long-term strategy, not a sticking plaster.

Swinson is the right selection at lock. Given Hamilton's poor performance on Sunday, and the queue of good alternatives lining up behind him, I'd promote Richie Gray to the starting lineup and one of Jonny Gray or Grant Gilchrist to the bench.

Lock is one position where we can afford not to tolerate poor performance, as we have plenty of alternative options getting regular club rugby and playing well. Whilst Hines may add something for this 6 Nations, he's not the solution for the World Cup.

The four locks for the WC squad should be Swinson, R Gray, Gilchrist and J Gray. That's the future and the present, and we should now be using this 6 Nations to test that group. I'd start Swinson in every game - he's by far and away the most consistent performer of the group. I'd give Richie Gray the next couple of games with Gilchrist on the bench. If Richie doesn't cut the mustard against England and Italy, or Gilchrist doesn't bring the required impact from the bench, then Jonny Gray comes in.

Whilst there may be players who get an easy ride due to a lack of alternatives, none of the locks can be complacent.

Agree with much of this. I can no longer see what Hamilton and Kellock add, when compared to Swinson, the Grays and Gilchrist.

You can probably add Atkins to the list of possible young lock choices as well.

Captain_Sensible wrote:

Surely Cotter will be given a free hand regarding his coaching team. If he doesn't want Humphreys, and lord knows why he should on the forwards' showing thus far, he should be able to bin him. Bring in Shade Munro, or someone of his ilk that can restore a simple, aggressive game plan with proper pack selections.

R Gray (the original) is out in SA coaching the boks. Why the Frak is he not involved with the national team?

Indeed, cakey

cakeordeath wrote:

Captain_Sensible wrote:

Surely Cotter will be given a free hand regarding his coaching team. If he doesn't want Humphreys, and lord knows why he should on the forwards' showing thus far, he should be able to bin him. Bring in Shade Munro, or someone of his ilk that can restore a simple, aggressive game plan with proper pack selections.

R Gray (the original) is out in SA coaching the boks. Why the Frak is he not involved with the national team?

There is really no satisfactory answer to this question.

I thought the team announcement was today. I have this horrible feeling Ford will be in the starting line up.

I feel the pain which has been so eloquently, and often amusingly, expressed here. Just a mild query about the line-out - it does seem to be an area of the game which is becoming hugely over-complicated in the modern world. Just throw the bloody thing straight, try to catch it and make some sort of show of contesting opposition ball, while you're there.

Glitches are forgivable, however. If someone can't throw the ball straight, then get someone else who will. Does the hooker really have to throw in, in any case? Time was when wings got the gig, and I don't understand why that shouldn't happen now if the No 2 really needs a visit to the optician. In any event, the Scots are far from alone with their line-out problems. Hardly a hooker seems able to find his backside with his own hands these days - T.Youngs, Best and a few others can join Ford in that Hall of Shame. I'm sure that you lot will fix what is a technical problem, even though I don't disagree that Ford richly deserves to be binned for a number of reasons.

No, I reckon the more fundamental thing is the breakdown, to which some of you have also referred. It wasn't the line-out that got you hockeyed at Twickenham last year, but a seemingly endless line of ruck inspectors, who made all the effort in the world to get to the breakdown and then either daintily placed their hands on the jerseys of various team-mates and opponents or gazed with varying degrees of curiosity at what the opposition were doing. Tough to recall Leslie, Jeffrey, the Calders, Paxton, Murray etc etc not wanting to smash straight through the nearest opponent, particularly if he was wearing a white shirt.

I may have mentioned this before, but to me, Richie Gray has become a prime offender. He makes his share of tackles and covers the ground, but he makes nothing of his natural physical attributes. He should be a snarling beast, intimidating opponents and setting them back on their heels. When was the last time he did that? His first eighteen months as an international, maybe, but it must be that something has been coached out of him. I'd be playing the most mobile, aggressive Scottish pack possible on Saturday; this would exclude men such as Hamilton, who is a 9-point liability per game, Brown, who just doesn't fit into the best-balanced Scottish back row and, pro tem, Gray. I'd take either his brother or Gilchrist to partner Swinson and I'd tell Humphreys or anyone else to kick Richie's a4se until he finally takes offence and does what any near 7 footer weighing 18 stone should do, and decks him.

It's not that I'm some mad Scottish supporter, but they are capable of infinitely better than they've shown for the past three years and I don't think that the current mess is good for NH rugby or the 6 Nations.

The thing I dont get is everyone on here says the same thing

1. We are jessies at the breakdown
2. Our lineout is a shambles
3. Our scrum is as scary as a new born baby rabbit
4. Our best players need to be picked in thier best positions

Why then cant SJ see this? Oh yeah, coz he is a bloomin diddy!
Why can't the SRU see this? Oh yeah, coz they are a bunch of barbour jacket wearing, dodgey handshaking, guffaws

I still say the Scotland team should be picked by 606v2 popular vote!

Tattie - I actually don't think the breakdown was the biggest issue on Sunday. The Irish commented afterwards that Scotland did a lot to disrupt them at the breakdown. The breakdown issue was one of speed - because we only had one flanker in the back row, and a blindside flanker at that, we didn't have anyone getting over the ball and competing. We hit the rucks hard enough and made life difficult for them, but we didn't have anyone going toe to toe with Chris Henry. As a result, Ireland in the 2nd half were getting good continuity of possession, whereas we didn't have anyone in the forwards tracking the ball and securing quick possession.

It all comes down to balance. I'd love to hear SJ give a detailed explanation as to how he thought the Scottish back row was the right one to compete with Ireland. You can make a case for most team selections, but Wilson at 6 and Brown at 7, working in tandem, I'll never understand.

Team for the England match will be announced Thursday lunchtime

Good, gives SJ some time to think about it properly!

funnyExiledScot wrote:Tattie - I actually don't think the breakdown was the biggest issue on Sunday. The Irish commented afterwards that Scotland did a lot to disrupt them at the breakdown. The breakdown issue was one of speed - because we only had one flanker in the back row, and a blindside flanker at that, we didn't have anyone getting over the ball and competing. We hit the rucks hard enough and made life difficult for them, but we didn't have anyone going toe to toe with Chris Henry. As a result, Ireland in the 2nd half were getting good continuity of possession, whereas we didn't have anyone in the forwards tracking the ball and securing quick possession.

It all comes down to balance. I'd love to hear SJ give a detailed explanation as to how he thought the Scottish back row was the right one to compete with Ireland. You can make a case for most team selections, but Wilson at 6 and Brown at 7, working in tandem, I'll never understand.

Indeed. Sadly the Irish didn't just have Henry first to the breakdown, they also had O'Mahoney there quicker than any of our lot

I'd encourage SJ to watch a video of Chris Fusaro against Toulon. The biggest worry about Fusaro is his size, but against the biggest of big packs I thought he did well, and seemed to be everywhere. Exactly what we need against Wood and Robshaw - someone to beat them to the breakdowns and get in the way.

Assuing SJ will continue to omit Barclay, and assuming Rennie's head isn't in the right place (bizarre he's in the squad given his lack of game time at Edinburgh), Fusaro must surely be in with a shout.

If we must ignore all of our specialist openside, then at the very least we should get a specialist blindside in the 6 jersey to assist Kelly Brown.

I don;t have much more to say on our back row wasted opertunities

so I'll just go   

This sums it up concisely from Blood and Mud in the sh!t /good ratings - let you guess where this was:-
Scotland - Like watching 15 people have an aneurysm at the same time, and that was just in attack. Ross Ford was so SH!T individually that the computer refused to even process his data for fear of irreversible contamination.

This thread is very good - can't we rename it something else?

I wanted to check who started in our back row in some of our better recent victories:

20 March 2010 - Ireland 20-23 Scotland
Brown-Barclay-Beattie

12 June 2010 - Argentina 16–24 Scotland
Brown-Barclay-Beattie

19 June 2010 - Argentina 9–13 Scotland
Brown-Barclay-Beattie

20 November 2010 - Scotland 21-17 South Africa
Hines-Barclay-Brown

5 June 2012 - Australia 6–9 Scotland
Strokosch-Rennie-Barclay

16 June 2012 - Fiji 25–37 Scotland
Strokosch-Rennie-Barclay

23 June 2012 - Samoa 16–17 Scotland
Strokosch-Rennie-Vernon

Worth stating the bleeding obvious that there was a specialist openside starting in each of those victories.

We even had two on the field to beat the Aussies!

I really wish Rennie was fully fit and on form for Saturday, we've seen too little of him in Scotland colours given his talent.

By all accounts, Rennie had a stormer for Bristol last weekend. Ok, you could argue that its not the same level as international but its a start.

At the very least, John Barclay should be given a call up as he is fit and he is on form for the red team in Wales.

Do you think we should all email the SRU and the Beeb and make noise about getting a blooming balanced backrow selected.

Bring back the B's

Interesting interview with Humphreys in today's Scotsman, very angry about the display against Ireland, describing it as awful. Regardless of injuries he said that there will certainly be team changes for the England game. He was particularly angry about the lineout disasters (pointing out that we didn't even need Ireland to challenge for us to muck them up) and hinted that Johnny Gray will play and when asked if a specialist 7 will be picked he said you will see when the team is announced. He said he accepts full responsibility for the poor display and said that the team needs to learn to apply itself.
In another article in the same paper today on the subject of the poor structure in Scotland as far as young players getting playing opportunities is concerned, the Scotsman journalist points out that Mark Bennett must be wondering why he bothered returning to Glasgow.

Sunday was just a dark horse ploy by Scotland to ambush England in the Calcutta Cup. Instead of tackling or passing, they were busy tarring themselves up so they were so dark horses by the time the game comes round this weekend, England won't see what hit them. Like the storm that is forecast to pass through, they will be undone by elements that not even the most visibly gifted could foresee. Horses as pitch dark as the night. Their riders are like KITT. Knight riders...

A refreshingly honest appraisal of the weekends game being reported in the paper this morning from Jonathon Humphries 'we were awful', just about sums it up. He also more or less implied that heads were going to roll as some of the players simply did not play with the required intent. The team announcement is going to be delayed until Thursday due to the amount of injuries, apparently they had to cancel training yesterday as not enough of them were in shape to do so! He did say though that being fit was not going to be a guarantee of a place for anyone!

This is a bit of a departure from previous poor performances when the prevailing wisdom was to give everyone another shot in order to redeem themselves, which on occasions they have done, other times not.

This has got to be a step in the right direction. In the positions were we do have some depth, particularly in the pack, players need to know that if they don't perform then they are not going to play the following match. That is exactly what would happen if they played for Ireland, Wales or just about any other top country.

He also sounded keen on pushing our promising young players forward. You should not be a promising player at 24 years, you should be the finished article!

I think we may see some major changes for Saturday, maybe even Kelly Brown being dropped. I did wonder why he was subbed so early on Saturday, was there a dissatisfaction in his performance and leadership as well. If he is to be selected only as an openside then maybe it has finally dawned that we have better options.

Thursday's team announcement is going to be interesting!