Scotland V USA 27th September

 
SCOTLAND V USA
27 September 2015
KO: 14:30 BST
Elland Road, Leeds

Live on ITV

Referee: Chris Pollock
Touch judges: John Lacey, Mike Fraser
Television match official: Ben Skeen

A. Head to Head

4 Played 4
4 Won 0
0 Drawn 0
0 Lost 4

C. Teams

SCOTLAND

15 Stuart Hogg (Glasgow Warriors) – 34 caps; 9 tries, 1 pen, 48 points
14 Sean Maitland (London Irish) – 17 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
13 Mark Bennett (Glasgow Warriors) – 10 caps; 5 tries, 25 points
12 Peter Horne (Glasgow Warriors) – 11 caps, 1 try, 1 con, 1 pen, 10 points
11 Tim Visser (Harlequins) – 21 caps; 9 tries, 45 points
10 Finn Russell (Glasgow Warriors) – 12 caps; 2 tries, 2 cons, 14 points
9 Henry Pyrgos (Glasgow Warriors) CAPTAIN – 16 caps; 4 tries, 20 points

1 Ryan Grant (Glasgow Warriors) – 24 caps
2 Ross Ford (Edinburgh Rugby) – 90 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
3 Jon Welsh (Newcastle Falcons) – 8 caps, 1 try, 5 points
4 Richie Gray (Castres) – 47 caps, 2 tries, 10 points
5 Grant Gilchrist (Edinburgh Rugby) – 11 caps, 1 try, 5 points
6 Alasdair Strokosch (Perpignan) – 46 caps, 2 tries, 10 points
7 Ryan Bloody Wilson (Glasgow Warriors) – 12 caps
8 Josh Strauss  (Glasgow Warriors) – 1 cap

16 Kevin Bryce (Glasgow Warriors) – 2 caps
17 Alasdair Dickinson (Edinburgh Rugby) – 48 caps, 2 tries, 10 points
18 Willem Nel (Edinburgh Rugby) – 4 caps
19 Tim Swinson (Glasgow Warriors) – 13 caps
20 Fraser Brown (Glasgow Warriors) – 11 caps
21 Greig Laidlaw (Gloucester) – 42 caps; 3 tries, 48 cons, 92 pens, 387 points
22 Duncan Weir (Glasgow Warriors) – 19 caps, 1 try, 6 cons, 9 pens, 1 drop, 47 points
23 Matt Scott (Edinburgh Rugby) – 30 caps, 3 tries, 15 points

USA

(Yes I know she was born in Ukraine but who cares!

1. Eric Fry
2. Phil Thiel
3. Titi Lamositele
4. Hayden Smith
5. Greg Peterson
6. Al McFarland
7. Andrew Durutalo
8. Samu Manoa

9. Mike Petri
10. AJ MacGinty
11. Blaine Scully
12. Thretton Palamo
13. Seamus Kelly
14. Takudzwa Ngwenya
15. Chris Wyles (C)

16. Zach Fenoglio
17. Olive Kilifi
18. Chris Baumann
19. Cameron Dolan
20. John Quill
21. Danny Barrett
22. Shalom Suniula
23. Folau Niua

Some real dilemmas here. Ideally we need to rest the majority of yesterday’s starting XV but if we do that I think we might struggle – hopefully not lose, but it certainly won’t be easy.

I’d swap the entire front row, Ford and Nel on the bench with Reid – Dickinson gets a rest

The obvious choice would be to pair Richie with Swinson, but neither of those two are lineout runners and it would mean having to play Swinson against a pretty meaty USA pack. Gilchrist was subbed off early so I’d go with him and Ritchie.

Back row is the biggest dilemma for me – Samu Manoa won’t be quaking in his boots at the prospect of facing Strokosh and Wilson. Assuming Strauss will be at 8 that puts a lot of pressure on him to make up for the other two, especially on his first start. Ideally we would have one of Denton or Hardie, but they gave their absolute all against Japan and will need rested. I suspect we’re therefore stuck with Strokosh-Wilson-Strauss. If only we had Harley, Cowan and Barclay instead….

Half backs Pyrgos will likely start with Laidlaw rested. Again I’d be much more comfortable with Russell at 10 but he needs wrapped up in cotton wool. Weir or Horne? Will probably be Weir given Scott put in 80 minutes yesterday.

Centres – Horne and Vernon

Back 3 – Visser will surely start with Maitland probably at XV. Lamont on the other wing to make up for Visser’s lack of tackling enthusiasm.

So my squad:

Grant
Brown
Welsh
Gray
Gilcrhrist
Strokosh
Wilson
Strauss

Pyrgos
Weir
Visser
Horne
Vernon
Lamont
Maitland

Subs – Reid, Ford, Nel, Swinson, Denton, Hidalgo-Clyne, Russell, Seymour

RDW, I think your team is spot on the money.

The alacrity with which Bennett and Hogg were replaced once the game was safe shows how important they are. Richie Gray needs game time, as does Tiny Tim Swinson, and as you say Gilchrist runs the line.

Hardie- 21 tackles none missed and Dickinson-18 tackles both need to sleep for a week before thinking about the Boks match.

I saw nothing in the Samoa-Yooessay match to make me think either side could beat us. The team you've picked should do the business for us.

Pretty much totally agree with your squad, but I'd be tempted to swap Gray and swinson.  Not because I want to you understand, just I'd rather we had Gray and Gray fit for the games against RSA and Samoa. If we don't have to risk a player against the USA then lets not.  I would be more than happy for Ritchie to spend 80 mins kicking his heals on the bench rather than risk injury.

Plus if he needs to he can come on against a hopefully tiring USA team to cause issues with his ball carrying.

Other than that total agreement.

Also I believe it will be Lamont's 99th cap (if he plays), not totally relevant I just think that if he gets to 99 he needs to get his 100th, so will probably see him against RSA or Samoa, or both i guess.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

(Yes I know she was born in Ukraine but who cares!

[TBC]

Not me anyway.

what has Ashton Kutcher got that we haven't?

Ok he is rich and good looking, but hey Mila come slum with a broke fattie.

So would three bonus point wins ,if we could get them, be enough to get us through for certain given all the possible permutations even if we failed to get any points at all in one of our three remaining games?

South Africa can get a maximum of 17 points; if they get 5 pointers against everyone.
In which case Samoa could get 10 points from us and Japan, taking them to 14.

If the above happened then we could be looking at 10 points (5 from USA) plus possibly 2 losing bonus points.

However, if we beat Samoa, they drop down to 9 points and we qualify.

Or we beat the Boks and they drop down to 12 points and we qualify.

Basically, if we beat USA plus one other we go through.

I'll put Bru's stones on the table here; I expect us to win this weekend and a surprise in one of Samoa v Boks or Japan v Samoa. Samoa could have lost both those games before they meet us and be out of the tournament or beaten the Boks effectively putting THEM out.

I think we put out RDW's selection on Sunday and then our first XV against the Boks.

I wonder if there are any scenarios where it becomes a 4 way fight - I suspect not as either Samoa or Japan will have lost two games by the time we get to the final game. Unless BPs make things complicated...

Off topic for this thread, but what is the best case scenario for us in the Boks Samoa game?

If Boks lose then they are pretty much out of contention, If Samoa lose then both have 1 win under their belts.

Trying to work out of 1 option is better than the other at this point in time.

I pretty much agree with RDW. My only change would be to include Scott on the bench instead of Russell (Horne covers 10). It wouldn't do Scott any harm to get another 20 minutes under his belt before facing the Boks.

I'm not ready to care about Group permutations. If we can get another 5 pointer against the USA then we'll put ourselves in a great position, and have a decent period off to prepare for South Africa. Let's just take one game at a time.

Regarding the USA game I am slightly concerned about our back row options. Strokosch and Wilson are not a high quality combination, and I'd feel a whole lot more confident were Harley at 6 to tackle his heart out for 80 minutes. Still, with no disrespect to the USA intended, we should be good enough to win this with our second string. It'll be nasty and physical for the first 50 minutes, but we should be able to go for the jugular once their structures start to loosen up.

Chris Pollock reffing the game is another key thing to look out for. He's the clown who made a complete dog's breakfast of the 1st Lions Test against Australia. His breakdown interpretations are beyond eccentic and he has a tendency to turn rugby union into rugby league, making it very hard to compete for the ball without being penalised. In that regard doing without a specialist 7 may well be a blessing. Pollock would penalise someone like Blair Cowan into next Christmas.

Just read the most ridiculous stat – Greig Laidlaw is now Scotland’s joint 10th highest world cup points scorer despite only having played one game!

EWT Spoons wrote:Off topic for this thread, but what is the best case scenario for us in the Boks Samoa game?

If Boks lose then they are pretty much out of contention, If Samoa lose then both have 1 win under their belts.

Trying to work out of 1 option is better than the other at this point in time.

A 3-3 draw, with Etzebeth, Vermeulen, Alberts and Kriel all picking up stingers ruling them out for 10 days.

In all seriousness, I believe the best outcome for us is the Boks winning by a margin of 8, with neither team scoring 4 tries. I don't believe that we will beat the Boks, making Samoa (or potentially Japan) our rivals for the second slot.

We need to stop worrying about who winning what against whom will be best for Scotland!

Scotland just need to win the games they have to play

We can't even look to see where we want to finish in the table in terms of "throwing" the last match if we are in that position! Aus/Eng/Wal are all playing after our game

I don't think it really matters who we would get in the QF if we made it - any of the 3 would be a very tough game where we were the underdogs.

My heart says it would be great to play England at Twickenham, but my head says we'd probably stand a better chance against Wales or Australia!

A four way fight is entirely possible if:

Before Scotland vs Samoa and Japan vs USA

Scotland 5 10 10
Samoa 4 8 9
Japan 4 4 8
South Africa 2 3 8 13
USA 0 0 0 0


Scotland beat the USA with a BP
Samoa beat the boks
Japan beat Samoa
The Boks beat Scotland
The Boks beat the USA with a BP

If we can somehow beat the Boks that would be brilliant for my state of health, there's no way we can go into the final weekend having qualified without them doing so

Doesn't really matter right. Who would you rather face, AUS or ENG?

To be honest it would be better to come runners up. Its not beyond the relms of possibility for Scotland to beat, France, Argentina,  Ireland in a SF albeit small but with NZ in the other corner there is no chance.

But we're getting ahead of ourselves here and truth be told they may not even qualify for the KO stages. Scotland have to beat either SA or Samoa to qualify but push come to shove... there would be nothing better to an Scotland team then a bit of confidence in their bellies.

To be honest I don't think there's much you need to worry about the USA pack. They were pretty much dominated by Samoa in terms of territory and possession.

The only issue could be if Scotland let the back three of USA plus Manoa get into the game.

RDW_Scotland wrote:I don't think it really matters who we would get in the QF if we made it - any of the 3 would be a very tough game where we were the underdogs.

My heart says it would be great to play England at Twickenham, but my head says we'd probably stand a better chance against Wales or Australia!

Given Wales will be down to fielding the Abergavenny under 12s girls team by then they'll almost certainly be the best option and then we have to hope the French do a job on New Zealand and then screw up against us, and then we have the final at Twickenham against England and last minute Duncan Weir slots a drop goal that confirms us as Champions.

fa0019 wrote:Doesn't really matter right. Who would you rather face, AUS or ENG?

AUS.

In my opinion they are the better team, but we have a shocking record against England at Twickenham. Plus we'll be the underdog in that game so the neutrals might be on our side.....maybe.

EWT Spoons wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Doesn't really matter right. Who would you rather face, AUS or ENG?

AUS.

In my opinion they are the better team, but we have a shocking record against England at Twickenham.  Plus we'll be the underdog in that game so the neutrals might be on our side.....maybe.

Think England are slightly susceptible up front.... AUS could tear teams apart if they get it right. Think I'd prefer England to be honest. Both still superior on paper mind... like climbing Everest only to find another sheer face ascent when you think you've got to the summit.

beshocked wrote:To be honest I don't think there's much you need to worry about the USA pack. They were pretty much dominated by Samoa in terms of territory and possession.

The only issue could be if Scotland let the back three of USA plus Manoa get into the game.

I was impressed with their 12, but he faded as the game went on - big physical bloke. Former running back I believe.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

beshocked wrote:To be honest I don't think there's much you need to worry about the USA pack. They were pretty much dominated by Samoa in terms of territory and possession.

The only issue could be if Scotland let the back three of USA plus Manoa get into the game.

I was impressed with their 12, but he faded as the game went on - big physical bloke.  Former running back I believe.

His early hit that broke his Samoan opposite number was brutal. Lucky we have a unit like Peter Horne to take him on.....

I think I'd rather take on Aus at the moment.

I'd say us and Aus have very similar strengths and weaknesses and it would be a great game to watch.  Having to face England on their own turf would probably be a more difficult prospect.

I'd like to face England at Twickers purely for the awesome occasion it would be. We owe them for 1991 as well!

tigertattie I think that must be the first time I've ever heard someone say that Australia and Scotland have similar strengths and weaknesses!

beshocked wrote:tigertattie I think that must be the first time I've ever heard someone say that Australia and Scotland have similar strengths and weaknesses!

Well watching Hardie running around with Pocock in his back pocket would be amusing, but I'd still rather face England.

Now that Japan have a nice rest before the Samoa game, it should be remembered that if they win that there is every chance they are getting through to the quarters.
I fancy them to get a bonus against the USA but if they get one against Samoa as well that should be enough.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

beshocked wrote:To be honest I don't think there's much you need to worry about the USA pack. They were pretty much dominated by Samoa in terms of territory and possession.

The only issue could be if Scotland let the back three of USA plus Manoa get into the game.

I was impressed with their 12, but he faded as the game went on - big physical bloke.  Former running back I believe.

He was impressive.

I'd totally rest Dickinson, Ford, Gray Jnr, Denton, Scott, Bennett, Seymour and would drop Nel, Wilson and Hogg to the bench.


Grant, Brown, Welsh, Gray Snr, Gilchrist, Strokosch, Hardie, Strauss, Laidlaw, Russell, Visser, Horne, Vernon, Lamont, Maitland
Bryce, Reid, Nel, Swinson, Wilson, Pyrgos, Weir, Hogg

That's a pretty physical pack that should be able to do the business, plus there's 3/4 guys who could be starting in the start XV for SA.  Lacking ball-carriers perhaps with Strauss the only top-drawer carrier.

I'd definitely start Russell because I think the more gametime he gets the better he'll be but would hopefully be able to get him off early in the 2nd half.

Couldn't care less who we face, other than the All Blacks and Ireland because the rest of the field is looking a little shaky.

Looking forward to seeing SA vs Samoa, hopefully they batter each other.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'd like to face England at Twickers purely for the awesome occasion it would be. We owe them for 1991 as well!

You can add

1992
1994
1996
1998
2002
2004
2011 world cup pool
2012
2014

to the list whilst you're at it

Be worth it mind to see Flipflop Salmond and wee jimmy krankie kick up a storm the week before.

beshocked wrote:tigertattie I think that must be the first time I've ever heard someone say that Australia and Scotland have similar strengths and weaknesses!

we both have a line out that either works or something messes up and goes horribly wrong

we both have a scrum that is as consitant as the judging abilities on the x factor

we both have a set of exciting backline players but a pack that either functions or decides not to bother turning up for the day!

we both don't get on too well with Engurlund!

fa0019 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'd like to face England at Twickers purely for the awesome occasion it would be. We owe them for 1991 as well!

You can add

1992
1994
1996
1998
2002
2004
2011 world cup pool
2012
2014

to the list whilst you're at it

Be worth it mind to see Flipflop Salmond and wee jimmy krankie kick up a storm the week before.

Nah - I don't care so much about those. Nothing hurt quite like 1991, not even the 1999 game which woud have resulted in a Slam (not that we knew at the time).

The politics these days isn't like it used to be. The indignation in 1990 was on a different and far more populist scale. Always remember that Scotland voted "No". Sturge conveniently skips over that fact, but it remains the only true barometer of Scottish public opinion. Based on a record turnout, we voted "No". They lost. Sense prevailed. Everything else is just posturing and noise.

We've already played them since the vote so I don't see that being a factor.

Despite all their injuries I quite fancy Wales on Saturday in which case England would be in trouble. Lets just make sure we make the quarters before worrying about who we would play.

tigertattie wrote:

beshocked wrote:tigertattie I think that must be the first time I've ever heard someone say that Australia and Scotland have similar strengths and weaknesses!

we both have a line out that either works or something messes up and goes horribly wrong

we both have a scrum that is as consitant as the judging abilities on the x factor

we both have a set of exciting backline players but a pack that either functions or decides not to bother turning up for the day!

we both don't get on too well with Engurlund!

1,2 and 4 I get but come on.... you can't compare the backline of Australia to Scotland!

Scotland still have a lot to prove in terms of their backline and scoring tries in general.

Improving but wouldn't call the Scotland backline "exciting" just yet.

beshocked wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

beshocked wrote:tigertattie I think that must be the first time I've ever heard someone say that Australia and Scotland have similar strengths and weaknesses!

we both have a line out that either works or something messes up and goes horribly wrong

we both have a scrum that is as consitant as the judging abilities on the x factor

we both have a set of exciting backline players but a pack that either functions or decides not to bother turning up for the day!

we both don't get on too well with Engurlund!

1,2 and 4 I get but come on.... you can't compare the backline of Australia to Scotland!

Scotland still have a lot to prove in terms of their backline and scoring tries in general.

Improving but wouldn't call the Scotland backline "exciting" just yet.

This outdated perception is getting rather tiresome.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:

beshocked wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

beshocked wrote:tigertattie I think that must be the first time I've ever heard someone say that Australia and Scotland have similar strengths and weaknesses!

we both have a line out that either works or something messes up and goes horribly wrong

we both have a scrum that is as consitant as the judging abilities on the x factor

we both have a set of exciting backline players but a pack that either functions or decides not to bother turning up for the day!

we both don't get on too well with Engurlund!

1,2 and 4 I get but come on.... you can't compare the backline of Australia to Scotland!

Scotland still have a lot to prove in terms of their backline and scoring tries in general.

Improving but wouldn't call the Scotland backline "exciting" just yet.

This outdated perception is getting rather tiresome.

I'd agree with that, but I'd also agree that tattie is getting a bit carried away with his comparisons!

Unfortunately we're always going to have these stereotypes until we actually do something as a rugby nation - you've got to earn respect in rugby and we've been so inconsistent.

Well this is embarrassing. You guys looked at risky's league recently?

tigertattie wrote:Well this is embarrassing. You guys looked at risky's league recently?

I stormed into the lead last night - was rated 427th in the whole of the UK!

You ain't top

Oh the Scottish backline boys are exciting.... annoying, but exciting.

"Annoying"? Why, Fly?????

Annoying in that this WC seems to have too many exciting backlines for my liking. If you avoid one set of them then you're likely to ram slam yourself into a game against another set of them.

Too many fancy dan offloading asswholes in this WC. I'd prefer a few more muck savages like ourselves in the competition

tigertattie wrote:Well this is embarrassing. You guys looked at risky's league recently?

I'll catch her. Going strong at 4th and I think I've made clever decisions so I won't burn out transfer-wise

Imagine the score I'd have if I didn't have Lamont hogging the wing! Moral victories and all.

The Scottish and Australian backlines are totally comparable. Both sets of players eat food, wear clothes, have hair and say words. Practically indistinguishable. 

Apart from the levels of talent, obviously.

tigertattie wrote:You ain't top

Dammit, pushed into 2nd place!

RDW_Scotland wrote:

tigertattie wrote:You ain't top

Dammit, pushed into 2nd place!

Ok, own up. Who invited the chick who's winning our fantasy league!!?

Well Mrs RDW-to-be hasn’t updated her team since day one, so it isn’t her!

I was really really struggling as after the weekend I had picked all the players who had been yellow carded!

Finally starting to make some progress now and I've still got loads of transfers to use

RDW_Scotland wrote:Well Mrs RDW-to-be hasn’t updated her team since day one, so it isn’t her!

Well whoever you are Kirsty Davies - damn you and your impressive selection tactics.

Now, be honest, did your boyfriend help you?

tigertattie wrote:I was really really struggling as after the weekend I had picked all the players who had been yellow carded!

Finally starting to make some progress now and I've still got loads of transfers to use

Yeh, I also managed to pick out Richie McCaw's debut yellow card as well, plus Nico also.

I foolishly wasted some transfers on forwards for these midweek games - really not worth wasting transfers for 1 or 2 points.

Well if we are coming up with excuses....I didn't read the rules and made transfers, only to find out they took affect the day after the games I was transferring the players in for.

EWT Spoons wrote:Well if we are coming up with excuses....I didn't read the rules and made transfers, only to find out they took affect the day after the games I was transferring the players in for.

Only if you miss the deadline on the day in question (usually the kick-off time for the first match).

My problem is tinkering. It's just so tempting to look at the next couple of games and feel the need to change things around. Transfers are a precious commodity.