Scotland Fans' 2014 6N of hell Post-mortem

• 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)
  

kiakahaaotearoa wrote: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...

MacKnocked-on wrote: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.  

BigGee wrote: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!

beshocked wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote: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...

You joke about it but I can see Scotland being much improved against England if they make correct selections.

Can't see the lineout being as poor as 10 won, lost 5. Or Scotland conceding as many penalties.

Scotland will be fired up.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote: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...

Meatball wrote:"We'll analyse the game and England's defeat by France, but I don't think we'll change too much"

"It's just about that final pass and I believe we'll come good in the end.

TheMildlyFranticLlama wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26027075

This has me worried, with quotes from Duncan Weir including

Meatball wrote:"We'll analyse the game and England's defeat by France, but I don't think we'll change too much"

"It's just about that final pass and I believe we'll come good in the end.

Worried because there was an awful lot more going wrong than the final pass, and if the squad are taking the attitude (although the Humpries article suggests not) that only minor tweaks are needed then I can't see much changing this weekend!

funnyExiledScot wrote:That makes grim reading. The final pass had very little to do with it on Sunday. Sounds like he's just spouted a silly cliche without really giving it any thought.

A future BBC pundit in the making.....

Nematode wrote:

TheMildlyFranticLlama wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26027075

This has me worried, with quotes from Duncan Weir including

Meatball wrote:"We'll analyse the game and England's defeat by France, but I don't think we'll change too much"

"It's just about that final pass and I believe we'll come good in the end.

Worried because there was an awful lot more going wrong than the final pass, and if the squad are taking the attitude (although the Humpries article suggests not) that only minor tweaks are needed then I can't see much changing this weekend!

Weir's comment is probably the message for the backs. To be fair they didn't play that awfully but were just really blunt. Scott in and a good set piece might be more promising. Just wondering if anyone can remember the 2012 game in Dublin. We seemed to play a similar style of back play (pass behind forwards) for the first 20~ and were equally poor then.

Interesting opinion though coming from Humphreys. I slightly wonder if the Scotsman has got R Gray and J Gray muddled up though. Would certainly be good for them to play together though.

Humphrey on playing a specialist 7 was an interesting one. Kelly Brown can't do anything wrong to the SRU so I can't see them dropping him out of the 23 at least.

Here are the good quotes from the article:

"Humphreys said: “There will be some change in the positions that we feel we have strength."

"A question over whether the management have thought again about the need for a specialist openside flanker, as highlighted in yesterday’s Scotsman, was met with the reply: “You will have the answer to that in a couple of days”

This seems an improper response if they weren't going to pick a specialist 7 - if they had been picking Brown then surely they'd merit his performance and leadership? On the other hand we don't know how the question was asked and the manner of the reply. We could be being overly optimistic - this could just be an off-the-cuff "wait until team release" statement. We have Rennie and Fusaro. My prediction would be Fusaro/Rennie at least on the bench

TheMildlyFranticLlama wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26027075

Interesting opinion though coming from Humphreys. I slightly wonder if the Scotsman has got R Gray and J Gray muddled up though. Would certainly be good for them to play together though.

Humphrey on playing a specialist 7 was an interesting one. Kelly Brown can't do anything wrong to the SRU so I can't see them dropping him out of the 23 at least.

Here are the good quotes from the article:

"Humphreys said: “There will be some change in the positions that we feel we have strength."

"A question over whether the management have thought again about the need for a specialist openside flanker, as highlighted in yesterday’s Scotsman, was met with the reply: “You will have the answer to that in a couple of days”

This seems an improper response if they weren't going to pick a specialist 7 - if they had been picking Brown then surely they'd merit his performance and leadership? On the other hand we don't know how the question was asked and the manner of the reply. We could be being overly optimistic - this could just be an off-the-cuff "wait until team release" statement. We have Rennie and Fusaro. My prediction would be Fusaro/Rennie at least on the bench

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:
and can someone tell me why Barcs isn't being considered?

Nematode wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:
and can someone tell me why Barcs isn't being considered?

Knowing why Barclay isn't picked is as clear as mud. It's actually disgusting that he hasn't been picked. We need our best XV, not our 'team for the future'. If our best XV has some over 30s, then fine. We need to win these games. 28-6 is shocking.

Winger Lee Jones has been added to the Glasgow Warriors squad for the forthcoming RaboDirect PRO12 matches, to provide injury cover until the end of the season. wrote:

GLove39 wrote:Right, know this isn't international related but figured we could all do with a good laugh...      

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Heads certainly have to roll in the Scotland camp. I also feel Humphries is one of them.

Granted he doesn't coach the lineout to be in disarray, nor the scrum to be a shambles but he will have huge influence in selection. It's not as if Ford's failings at the scrum and lineout are a new problem.

Ford is the quintessential pro rugby player. Super fit, super strong but no technical acumen for his position whatsoever.


and can someone tell me why Barcs isn't being considered?

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Heads certainly have to roll in the Scotland camp. I also feel Humphries is one of them.

Granted he doesn't coach the lineout to be in disarray, nor the scrum to be a shambles but he will have huge influence in selection. It's not as if Ford's failings at the scrum and lineout are a new problem.

Ford is the quintessential pro rugby player. Super fit, super strong but no technical acumen for his position whatsoever.


and can someone tell me why Barcs isn't being considered?

 Radge, he may be both of those things, but he's been using those attributes to less and less affect as far as I can tell - gone are the barnstorming runs, the fearsome tackles, the smashing of rucks, etc. - now he misses a lineout, his head goes down and he's pretty much gone from the game - its actually very sad to see

Scottish rugby’s inadequate system

If Sunday followed a dismal pattern of Scotland’s Six Nations Championship launches there was a similar familiarity to the words from new forwards coach Jonathan Humphreys yesterday.

He was critical of the Scottish pack’s performance against Ireland – rightly, as it was lamentable – but also was accurate in his assessment that the problems in Scottish rugby run far deeper. To cynics sensing another coach distancing himself, the Welshman quickly accepted blame for the performance.

We can argue over the merits of the players and coaches, but while we do that we’re ignoring the elephant in the room: Scottish rugby and its woefully inadequate system of development. What other professional sport would accept a ‘system’ where the most talented players disappear into a vacuum at the age of 17/18 and rather than be exposed to ever-more demanding games they drop off whatever intensity they experienced as an early to mid-teen?

The SRU have twisted this way and that over the past 20 years to find a structure and while, as the governing body, they are the main culprit in failing to achieve anything significant and lasting, they occupy a packed dock.

I grew up in a Borders school that had 1st XV fixtures from September to March, a national schools cup competition that brought us a run of games and end-of-season sevens tournaments. We won many games, but were stuffed in others, notably by independent schools, but the fixture list ensured frequent challenges.

That school, in common with all in the Borders, no longer turns out regular 1st XV teams. They appear for a few games in the Scottish Schools Cup/Plate/Bowl, but development at that level is now left to local clubs who acted in the best interests of the young players and their clubs when schools began to ship extra-curricular rugby.

We can talk about the inconsistency that brings in voluntary coaching, from exceptional to poor, but in reality there are too many such knock-on problems to detail in one column. The key at the heart of it all, for me, is simple – the lack of games of rugby.

That is where players learn most. That is where tighthead props are tested, learn, are tested again – for ‘tested’ you can substitute ‘hurt’ – and it is similar with stand-offs, for whom there is no greater embarrassment than failing to execute kicks properly, get passes to hand or tackle than in front of a crowd including peers, parents and local reporters. Hurt and embarrassment, crucial natural spurs to learning in rugby, do not exist to the same degree on a training field, and so development can never be as quick there.

Yet, the reason we are talking about players ‘maturing at 24/25 years of age’, which Humphreys wants to stop, is because players like Duncan Weir, Ruaridh Jackson, Moray Low, Ross Ford, Ryan Grant, even Kelly Brown, the skipper, did only start to mature in international rugby at those ages. Because from 17-22 they did not play regular competitive rugby – the period where their peers in England, Ireland, Wales and France are being put through the mill.

There has been no academy system for these players to hone their skills, develop the necessary physique and play week in week out in Scotland, and too few opportunities to play in the two-team pro arena. Mark Bennett, who left Glasgow for Clermont Auvergne, must wonder why he came back. He may be ‘learning’ from Gregor Townsend, but he hardly plays any rugby.

Tommy Allan turned down Edinburgh because he could not see a route to regular rugby. The 20-year-old joined Perpignan instead and made his Six Nations debut for Italy against Wales on Saturday.

Weir played 30 minutes of rugby in the six weeks prior to Sunday’s game with Ireland, as Townsend tried to give Jackson a run of starts to develop. Glasgow have 53 players to keep happy and games to win, and, while important in other ways, handing pros amateur club matches does not develop Test performers.

The oft-promised district academies are still to launch and the clubs are queuing up to knock down the SRU’s latest plan for a more professional top club tier.

As SRU director of rugby in the 1990s, Jim Telfer asked all of Scotland’s independent school headteachers to support a national schools league, pitching the best against each other at 16-18 years, but one voted against it and, in an intriguing show of ‘independent’ solidarity, the rest decided ‘one out, all out’.

The crusade has continued. Colin Thomson, the SRU’s director of rugby operations, treks to innumerable meetings across the country with schools, clubs and coaches, seeking a competitive Scotland-wide youth/academy structure, but when supported in one place, he is condemned in another.

The SRU, sportscotland Institute of Sport and clubs have improved the training of young players, Ayr now and Stirling County, still, flag-bearers for youth development in the west and midlands while the Borders hangs on to its semi-junior league. But then what? Where does Scotland’s talent go for the next, intense test, the springboard to pro and Test rugby, in the crucial 17-20 years?

Humphreys is right. Scottish rugby does not develop its players for a professional and international game. Instead, we throw players into it and hope for the best, and then demand answers when they fall short.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:What do you reckon of that wee cracker Schitz?

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:What do you reckon of that wee cracker Schitz?

They are havin a feckin laugh surely! Lee startled rabbit jones in a warriors shirt ffs  all we need now is for ran c to pick that clown ford tomorrow and it's the end of a perfect 4 days   

George Carlin wrote:Depressing, but correct Asbo.

We were told for years that there was no money for a 3rd team or grassroots development because McKie was still paying off the famous Scottish Rugby Debt. Is this still the reason?

Nobody in their gripping sense expects 20 years of mismanagement and poor structuring to be rectified overnight but the article paints a picture that we still have not chosen a route. I actually thought that had ratified structural changes in the junior system (someone posted a thread here about it) - is that wrong?

Surely it is fairly transparent how every other domestic RU runs its business. Is there really not enough information out there for the SRU to have a fairly educated guess as to what is likely to work? If not, surely to god we can pay PwC, EY or someone like to break down the options for us to make a recommendation. What would that be? A couple of hundred grand, maximum, and a guaranteed Someone Else To Blame if a recommended new system fell on its arse after 5 years.

What is stopping the SRU, exactly?

Ineffable wrote:Here's the deal GC - topic name gets changed if Saturday goes "as expected" (see OP)   just in time for two weeks of Italy preparation

BigGee wrote:Lee Jones, the butt of many a joke on this forum, looked like a poor player in a bad team last year when he had clearly lost all form and confidence. He has since then struggled to get it back and has been denied the game time to potentially do so. This at times can be the harsh reality of professional sport.

With the benefit of a slightly longer memory,  you may remember he was before that hailed as a shining example of someone who rose up from the club game to gain a professional contract. Something lots of posters claim they would like to see more of. There were not to many people complaining when he got his contract, nor when he was capped either. He was playing well for Edinburgh at the time and was scoring tries. He only lost his place through injury if I remember correctly and has never quite looked the same player again.

Here is a good chance to see if the fresh start theory, allied to a change of scenery, that plenty of us believe would do some other Scottish players the world of good, will work here. Plenty people probably thought Glasgow had been sold a ringer when Ryan Grant was moved over as well. It certainly worked for him. It looks as if he is going to get some game time so I hope for his sake and for Glasgow that it works out well.

George Carlin wrote:Depressing, but correct Asbo.

We were told for years that there was no money for a 3rd team or grassroots development because McKie was still paying off the famous Scottish Rugby Debt. Is this still the reason?

Nobody in their gripping sense expects 20 years of mismanagement and poor structuring to be rectified overnight but the article paints a picture that we still have not chosen a route. I actually thought that had ratified structural changes in the junior system (someone posted a thread here about it) - is that wrong?

Surely it is fairly transparent how every other domestic RU runs its business. Is there really not enough information out there for the SRU to have a fairly educated guess as to what is likely to work? If not, surely to god we can pay PwC, EY or someone like to break down the options for us to make a recommendation. What would that be? A couple of hundred grand, maximum, and a guaranteed Someone Else To Blame if a recommended new system fell on its arse after 5 years.

What is stopping the SRU, exactly?

Alasdair Reid wrote:The Scottish Rugby Union have been forced into a humiliating climb-down after their plans to introduce a semi-professional super league at the top end of the club game met with fierce opposition from the wider rugby community.

The Scottish Rugby Union have been forced into a humiliating climb-down after their plans to introduce a semi-professional super league at the top end of the club game met with fierce opposition from the wider rugby community.
Custom byline text: Alasdair Reid
The proposals were unveiled in December, as part of a strategic plan to raise the quality of the club, academy and women's rugby. In detail, the Union said they would fund an elite level of clubs, using some contracted semi-professional players, and would also provide coaching support.

The move was inspired by poor displays by Scottish sides in the British and Irish Cup, where Gala, Stirling County and Edinburgh Accies suffered heavy defeats by better-funded clubs from England, Ireland and Wales, and recognition that Edinburgh and Glasgow - the Union's two pro sides - need a better feeder stream of talent.

A new league of eight top clubs, to be called the Scottish Super League, was to be established ahead of season 2015/16, governed directly by members of the SRU board and senior club representatives. In effect, those clubs would come under direct administration from the Union, creating a clear division between them and the country's purely amateur sides.

After a hostile reaction from other clubs, the SRU have now performed an embarrassing U-turn.

Officially, implementation has only been delayed until season 2016/17, but the fault lines the proposals have revealed suggest it may have to be shelved indefinitely. As in the 1990s, when there was a plan to create a professional district structure, it appears a fear of "player poaching" has been a major factor in resistance.

"Although many clubs accept and appreciate the need for increased quality at the top end of our amateur game there is concern the proposed model creates tensions lower down the leagues and the semi-professional level we recommend may result in a player drain from National and Championship clubs," said SRU chief executive Mark Dodson in a letter to Scottish clubs.

He said the Union's proposals to help women's rugby and the academy structure would go ahead

EWT Spoons wrote:

George Carlin wrote:Depressing, but correct Asbo.

We were told for years that there was no money for a 3rd team or grassroots development because McKie was still paying off the famous Scottish Rugby Debt. Is this still the reason?

Nobody in their gripping sense expects 20 years of mismanagement and poor structuring to be rectified overnight but the article paints a picture that we still have not chosen a route. I actually thought that had ratified structural changes in the junior system (someone posted a thread here about it) - is that wrong?

Surely it is fairly transparent how every other domestic RU runs its business. Is there really not enough information out there for the SRU to have a fairly educated guess as to what is likely to work? If not, surely to god we can pay PwC, EY or someone like to break down the options for us to make a recommendation. What would that be? A couple of hundred grand, maximum, and a guaranteed Someone Else To Blame if a recommended new system fell on its arse after 5 years.

What is stopping the SRU, exactly?

The clubs in short.

I think I posted this before, but the proposed changes have apparently been shot down by the clubs and therefore look doomed.  There is a peice in the Hearld about it

Clubs oppose SRU plan

Alasdair Reid wrote:The Scottish Rugby Union have been forced into a humiliating climb-down after their plans to introduce a semi-professional super league at the top end of the club game met with fierce opposition from the wider rugby community.

The Scottish Rugby Union have been forced into a humiliating climb-down after their plans to introduce a semi-professional super league at the top end of the club game met with fierce opposition from the wider rugby community.
Custom byline text: Alasdair Reid
The proposals were unveiled in December, as part of a strategic plan to raise the quality of the club, academy and women's rugby. In detail, the Union said they would fund an elite level of clubs, using some contracted semi-professional players, and would also provide coaching support.

The move was inspired by poor displays by Scottish sides in the British and Irish Cup, where Gala, Stirling County and Edinburgh Accies suffered heavy defeats by better-funded clubs from England, Ireland and Wales, and recognition that Edinburgh and Glasgow - the Union's two pro sides - need a better feeder stream of talent.

A new league of eight top clubs, to be called the Scottish Super League, was to be established ahead of season 2015/16, governed directly by members of the SRU board and senior club representatives. In effect, those clubs would come under direct administration from the Union, creating a clear division between them and the country's purely amateur sides.

After a hostile reaction from other clubs, the SRU have now performed an embarrassing U-turn.

Officially, implementation has only been delayed until season 2016/17, but the fault lines the proposals have revealed suggest it may have to be shelved indefinitely. As in the 1990s, when there was a plan to create a professional district structure, it appears a fear of "player poaching" has been a major factor in resistance.

"Although many clubs accept and appreciate the need for increased quality at the top end of our amateur game there is concern the proposed model creates tensions lower down the leagues and the semi-professional level we recommend may result in a player drain from National and Championship clubs," said SRU chief executive Mark Dodson in a letter to Scottish clubs.

He said the Union's proposals to help women's rugby and the academy structure would go ahead

Six Nations 2014: Scotland's gradual demise since 1984 Grand Slam due to failure to seize professionalism

By Alasdair Reid

Scotland enjoyed an age of plenty from 1984 to 1999 but their dire Six Nations form can be attributed to Union's inability to adapt to reality of the modern game. The seeds were sown on the other side of the world. In the wake of the 1983 Lions tour to New Zealand, Scotland went into the following year’s Five Nations with a host of players who knew they were as good as, and in many cases much better than, the best the other home nations could offer.

There was indignation among those who felt they had been overlooked and, more significantly, in the heart of Jim Telfer, the steely coach who felt he had been undermined by the Lions management the previous summer.

So all that knowledge and anger was channelled into a Scottish Grand Slam, the first for 59 years. The Scottish forwards rampaged through the 1984 Five Nations Championship, John Rutherford was an imperious playmaker, and the nation suspended its obsession with football and went mad for rugby instead.

It was clinched on an emotional Murrayfield afternoon, March 17, 1984, when Jim Calder’s late try, and a conversion and penalty by Peter Dods, helped Scotland pull away from France for a 21-12 win.

For some of those players, it was a swansong. But the end of one era helped to ignite another as, in the words of the great and fearless flanker David Leslie, rugby became Scotland’s “vehicle of national aspiration” in sport.

There was another Grand Slam in 1990, a World Cup semi-final in 1991, final-day showdowns with England in 1995 and 1996, and the last Five Nations title in 1999. It was an age of plenty for Scottish rugby.

And now this. The last match of the Six Nations’ opening weekend saw Scotland humiliated by Ireland, beaten 28-6 in Dublin. They have lost the key battles, at half-back and in the back row, areas of traditional Scottish strength, but the most alarming statistic concerns the composition of their side.

Of the starting line-up, only seven are really the products of a Scottish rugby background; of the others, five learned the game in England, the remaining three overseas.

What happened? Why did the golden era end so abruptly? Between 1984 and 1999 Scotland’s Five Nations success rate was 53 per cent, but since the turn of the Millennium – in a time when the arrival of Italy should have made things easier for the Scots – that figure has dropped to 27 per cent. Only twice in the last 10 championships have Scotland finished above fifth place.

According to Keith Robertson, the Melrose wing/centre who was one of the stars of the 1984 side, the root cause is that Scottish Rugby Union was hopelessly ill-prepared for the changes that swept through the game with the arrival of professionalism in 1995. Its senior officials were apparently more concerned with preserving their old privileges than with adapting to the new reality of a sport shaped by market forces.

In the late 1990s, Robertson and a few others wanted powers, and particularly the right to compete in European competitions, to be given to Scotland’ s leading clubs. A bitter debate ensued, but the Union, supported by the votes of smaller clubs, won the day. They would sign up leading players on central contracts and enter four district sides into Europe. Problem was, no one had done the maths.

Within two years, the system had collapsed. Players who had given up careers were sacked, and the four districts merged into two. A third side, representing the Borders, was revived for a few seasons, but financial pressures led to its axing seven years ago.

“The SRU made the decision to invest in the professional game, but they didn’t know how it was going to develop and they didn’t have the people who could take it forward,” Robertson says. “That’s why they have lost so much money along the way. They just threw good money after bad. That has had a massive bearing on where we stand now as a country, a Union and in terms of the quality of rugby we are producing now.”

Rutherford agrees. “The professional game has taken off in other countries, but it just hasn’t happened here,” the 42-times-capped former fly-half says. “Two professional teams just isn’t enough. I’m envious of what has happened in Ireland because they seem to be flying at the moment. And to think, we used to be far ahead of them.”

In 1973, Scotland has stolen a march on other countries by implementing a national league structure for all clubs. The 1984 Grand Slam was, in part, the consequence of that competitive backdrop, although Rutherford puts more emphasis on the fact the squad had come together over the course of a few seasons, and on the involvement of eight Scots on that 1983 Lions tour.

Robertson fears that talent is wilting because there are so few opportunities. He cites the case of Lee Millar, the former Gala fly-half, who moved to London Scottish at the end of last season as there were no openings at either Edinburgh or Glasgow.

“Because of the current structure, players aren’t being developed in the most important positions on the field,” he says. “ Lee is potentially as good as any of the others at the moment, but he just didn’t get a chance.”

Robertson remains optimistic. “There have always been good times and bad in Scottish rugby. We have these phases when we are in the doldrums. But you’ve got to give yourselves the best chance, and we haven’t done that for a long time.”

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:

BigGee wrote:Lee Jones, the butt of many a joke on this forum, looked like a poor player in a bad team last year when he had clearly lost all form and confidence. He has since then struggled to get it back and has been denied the game time to potentially do so. This at times can be the harsh reality of professional sport.

With the benefit of a slightly longer memory,  you may remember he was before that hailed as a shining example of someone who rose up from the club game to gain a professional contract. Something lots of posters claim they would like to see more of. There were not to many people complaining when he got his contract, nor when he was capped either. He was playing well for Edinburgh at the time and was scoring tries. He only lost his place through injury if I remember correctly and has never quite looked the same player again.

Here is a good chance to see if the fresh start theory, allied to a change of scenery, that plenty of us believe would do some other Scottish players the world of good, will work here. Plenty people probably thought Glasgow had been sold a ringer when Ryan Grant was moved over as well. It certainly worked for him. It looks as if he is going to get some game time so I hope for his sake and for Glasgow that it works out well.

OK BG take your point - I actually thought you were going to talk about Big Al Kellock but Ryan Grant makes your point very well.    I just can't see Lee Jones fitting in at The Warriors is all.   Big AK and Ryan G are big hard hitting forwards - we like that in Glasgow.   I hope I am wrong and Lee Jones scores a barrowload for us and I will prostrate myself on the altar of mammon and hope.   I just can't see it tbh  

funnyExiledScot wrote:Lee Jones playing for Glasgow may well be the only happiness I can glean from this dark 6 Nations period!!

I personally think we should get DTH in return. Fair's fair.

RDW_Scotland wrote:The rucks were absolute carnage in those days - the tactic seemed to be hit anything that moved, and why send one or two players to clear the ruck out when the entire pack can do it!

Modern refs would have nightmares trying to make some sense of the ruck area!