Scotland v Samoa, 10 October

   
SCOTLAND V SAMOA
10 October 2015
KO: 14:30 BST
St. James' Park, Newcastle

Live on ITV

Referee: Jaco Peyper (South Africa)
Touch judges: JP Doyle (England) & Marius Mitrea (Italy)
Television match official: Ben Skeen (New Zealand)

A. Head to Head

9 Played 9
7 Won 1
1 Drawn 1
1 Lost 7
218 Points 122

B. Recent Form

8 June 2013
Mr Price Kings Park, Durban, South Africa
27 – 17 Samoa

23 June 2012
Apia Park, Apia
16 – 17 Scotland

27 November 2010
Pittodire, Aberdeen
19 – 16 Scotland

20 November 2005
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
18 – 11 Scotland

4 June 2004
Westpac Stadium, Wellington, New Zealand
3 – 38 Scotland

18 November 2000
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
31 – 8 Scotland

C. Teams

SCOTLAND

15 Stuart Hogg 14 Sean Maitland, 13 Mark Bennett, 12 Matt Scott, 11 Tommy Seymour, 10 Finn Russell, 9 Greig Laidlaw (capt); 1 Alasdair Dickinson, 2 Ross Ford, 3 Willem Nel, 4 Richie Gray, 5 Jonny Gray, 6 Ryan Wilson, 7 John Hardie, 8 David Denton.

Replacements: 16 Fraser Brown, 17 Gordon Reid, 18 Jon Welsh, 19 Tim Swinson, 20 Josh Strauss, 21 Henry Pyrgos, 22 Peter Horne, 23 Sean Lamont.

SAMOA

15 Tim Nanai-Williams, 14 Paul Perez, 13 George Pisi, 12 Rey Lee-Lo, 11 Fa'atoina Autagavaia, 10 Tusi Pisi, 9 Kahn Fotuali'i (c); 1 Sakaria Taulafo, 2 Ma'atulimanu Leiataua, 3 Census Johnston, 4 Teofilo Paulo, 5 Kane Thompson, 6 Maurie Faasavalu, 7 Jack Lam, 8 Alafoti Faosiliva.

Replacements: 16 Motu Matu'u, 17 Viliamu Afatia, 18 Anthony Perenise, 19 Faifili Levave, 20 Vavae Tuilagi, 21 Vavao Afemai, 22 Patrick Faapale, 23 Ken Pisi.

Last pool thread.

'Fallen heroes' is the theme for team reps this week.

Scotland were poor yesterday. Samoa were poor yesterday. I still think we will beat them. Which will be enough for us to progress. I also fancy the USA to beat Japan.

Samoa have probably been the most disappointing team in the tournament so far - poor discipline, bad set piece, lack of coherent game plan, everyone acting as individuals and some of their players looking over the hill.

They still have some incredibly talented individuals though so will always be a threat, especially if we play stupid rugby.

It sounds obvious but we have shown this WC that when we don't have the ball we struggle, when we do have it we look good. Because we struggle to get turnovers we need to keep the ball when we have it!

We need to put a lot of pressure on the Samoan set piece - particularly the lineout - and play a ball retention game plan, no aimless box kicks (I'm looking at you Laidlaw).

I think we'll win this, and relatively comfortably in the end, but can see Samoa causing us some problems.

Finally, restarts, restarts, restarts!!!!

The constant kicking away of possession yesterday was frustrating, how the players think that is a viable tactic is beyond me, even kicking to touch would be better than giving the SA back three the ball in space, baffling stuff really.
Also the sight of Horne trying to play crash ball against the SA midfield when he came on, ???

As team selection goes I expect to see our first XV start and then get yanked early if we have the game in the bag.

Some standout stats from yesterday-

R Gray - 21 tackles
Cowan - 20 tackles

Huge effort from them.

What yesterday showed, is we can not and should not EVER try to play a power game against a power team

It has never, and never will work

We need to be smart, play the off loading game, move them around, play creative players with ball carriers

Yesterday was a jump back to the 'good' old days of Robinson and Johnson (Not the whimsical 80 detective series you hope)


And finally Weir is not professional class, let alone international class

RDW_Scotland wrote:Some standout stats from yesterday-

R Gray - 21 tackles
Cowan - 20 tackles

Huge effort from them.

Has been revised now to 21 each. Neither missed one either.

While I didn't see the Samoa game, from what I have read, we should, repeat should, beat them easily enough. Given it is their last game and looking at how disappointing they have been, I reckon they will have their eyes on the journey home.
If we are disciplined, we should have too much for them assuming we bring back the front-line players and banish Weir to the stands

Squad update - lots of concerns

The Scotland squad issued the following medical bulletin after yesterday’s (3 October) 34-16 loss to South Africa in the Rugby World Cup at St James’ Park.

Hooker Ross Ford failed an in-game HIA (head injury assessment) meaning he will now follow the graduated return-to-play protocol, as will centre Matt Scott, who reported delayed onset concussion symptoms post match.

Full-back Stuart Hogg left the field of play in the 63rd minute of yesterday’s Test match having suffered cramp to his legs and lower back however he is not considered an immediate concern.

Further knocks include a dead leg for lock Jonny Gray and a mild knee strain for centre Richie Vernon. Both players will continue to be monitored and rehabilitated by the Scotland medical team.

Further update:

Back-row John Hardie continues in the graduated return-to-play protocol, having sustained a head knock in Scotland’s round one win over Japan on Wednesday 23 September.

Stand-off Finn Russell continues to make good progress with the Scotland medical team having sustained an inversion injury to his ankle in the national team’s round two win over USA (Saturday 27 September).

A number of other players will require the ongoing care of the national medical team.

So basically Scotland are short Ford and Scott. Ford is easily replaced with Brown for this match. Scott is a lot more tricky. Vernon played well at 12 for Glasgow (think it was against Munster?) in the one chance he got. Do not fancy Horne at 12 for Samoa with Bennett at 13. The combined weight of the 10, 12 and 13 would be the same as Alessana Tuilagi!

Of course Vernon at 12 and Lamont at 13 would be a crash ball answer!

Well no matter what happens on Saturday we'll always have this

Hazel Sapling wrote:So basically Scotland are short Ford and Scott. Ford is easily replaced with Brown for this match. Scott is a lot more tricky. Vernon played well at 12 for Glasgow (think it was against Munster?) in the one chance he got. Do not fancy Horne at 12 for Samoa with Bennett at 13. The combined weight of the 10, 12 and 13 would be the same as Alessana Tuilagi!

Of course Vernon at 12 and Lamont at 13 would be a crash ball answer!

Horne, Bennett and Vernon have actually all played together in various combinations for a year now. I would go with Vernon and Bennett, with Horne coming on with 30 to go.

Forgetting Hogg's shocking dive and our fly on the pane of glass impression against that impenetrable Springboks defence we should now look forward to crushing Samoa. They were very in disciplined and pretty much devoid of inspiration against Japan.

Defeating them with our full strength side shouldn't be hard. We so now face the spectre of a playing the red hot ozzies in the next round.

Going by form Samoa have looked poor but of course Scotland should put out the best team for the job and get it done well! 4 points, 5 points, who cares just win.

Yesterday I felt I was watching a very dominant team play a scrappy less accurate team. Far too many mistakes for this level from Scotland. As always, need to cut out the errors and work on the usual problems. Lineout, restarts, etc.

It's a shame Laidlaw felt the need to make that tackle yesterday, it killed the momentum that Scotland had worked so hard to create through a good defensive effort. You could see SA were a bit rattled, Scotland could of kept the pressure on and maybe scored another try. As much as I love intercept try's (Weir, take a bow!) Scotland need to construct more tries through their own ball in hand. I wonder how many intercept tries Scotland have scored under BVC? We are definitely the intercept kings!

It's hard to see whos been the worst team so far England, Samoa or Tonga. Either way I think Scotland will coast this game now. I was amazed Samoa were so poor and disinterested against Japan.

I was out in the car when the game started yesterday and the Radio Scotland commentator (Bill Johnston I think) said he had seen Finn Russell bounding up the stairs in the stadium which sounds like he could have played yesterday if it had been a "must won" game

Anyone know what happened to John Hardie by the way? It must have been a bad 'un for him to be out for so long already and to still be recovering

InjuredYetAgain wrote:Anyone know what happened to John Hardie by the way? It must have been a bad 'un for him to be out for so long already and to still be recovering

McCaw is hobbling and he's hoping for a call-up.

Scotland??? favorites, in a must win game against a team that haven't quite jelled yet???

We are Doomed!

Given Scotland's stance on concussion is usually one of over caution (and rightfully so) I'd be very surprised to see Ford and Scott play this weekend.

Ford isn't such a big deal because Brown has been doing well - not convinced by Bryce on the bench though - but Scott will cause us a few problems.

I've said all along that the thought of Horne at 12 v Samoa (paired with Bennett) frightens me, and the Samoans will be licking their lips at the prospect.

So the only real options are Vernon or Lamont at 12 - neither of which are overly satisfying either.

There may be mass outcry at this, but I'd put Lamont at 12. Hear me out!

Yes he's about as creative as a deaf-blind hamster but he doesn't have to be - he'll have Russell and Bennett either side of him. Let's not forget that Lamont's previous games at 12 for Scotland involved Parks and De Luca either side of him.

Russell is clever enough to use him when he has to and miss him out when it's on. Lamont would give real solidity in defence too.

This certainly isn't a long term solution but for this one off must-win game I think it is the best option.

I would be happy to give the randy old love monkey his 100th cap, but I really think that we'd be much more likely to win with Horne-Bennett. I appreciate PH got tossed around like confetti last time, but I am working on the basis that we will get more than our fair share of ball this time.

The Hootsmon also mentioned that Russell and Hardie should probably be back for this game, which is good news. If only I'd known as a kid that every time I went over on my ankle I could have asked for time off school for 'an inversion injury'.

I would be tempted to go with Lamont at 12, he is playing well at the moment, he will clearly be even more passionate than normal(if that's possible) since it will be his 100th cap and I really don't fancy going into this game with horne at 12.
I wouldn't be overly keen with Vernon at 12 either. Yes he is an ex back rower and is tall but he still isn't powerful. The samoans would be lining him up!

There's just been a new tranche of tickets released for the game. I couldn't bring myself to pay £115 to watch Scotland but £75 is almost acceptable.

I was actually planning on picking a couple up just after kick off in an effort to beat the touts but I'm not sure my father in law thought it was a very good idea.

I'm slightly concerned by this game. Samoa can't qualify for the next round, but I believe they can still finish 3rd in the group, unless Japan win the following day. 3rd place I think guarantees them qualification for the WC next time out. So from a Samoan perspective, it's all to play for.

We're favourites for this game, which never sits well with the team, and are wafer thin in squad depth, an injury to one or two key players would really screw us.

I still think we should win, but there is a wee part of me that is nervous, especially as I'm going to this game.

Unless Samoa beat us with a 4 try BP and Japan lose to USA without a bp (very unlikely), Samoa will not finish 3rd.

I still share your concerns though!

Aye don't get me wrong, the likelihood of those events all occurring are slim, but the Samoan players will (hopefully from their perspective) be going out with the assumption that they need to get a BP win.

If they’ve accepted they’re not finishing 3rd already then we could have a very comfortable, or painful (depending on how much they don’t care and just want to hurt someone) afternoon.

Just realised there were a lot of negatives in that post....I'm sure you don't not know what I didn't not mean!

I was with you until that last post, now I have no idea what you mean.

If you mean my post was negative then apologies it wasn't my intention, if you mean your post was negative then I didn't notice.

Right, I'm now thorougly confused so going to move on. Anyone got any idea when the team will be announced. Guessing Wednesday, although might be later if we're waiting on Ford/Scott

I think put Cowan on the blindside and Hardie on the open with Denton at 8. I'd be interested to see how that combination works. Strauss hasn't been setting the beard alight in these matches thusfar and I'd rather see him make a case for himself from the bench.

As for backline, whilst I agree Weir isn't as good as Russell, I feel people on here are being perhaps a little harsh! He played the tactics that Scotland had obviously discussed before, and it unsurprisingly didn't pay off. I would rather have seen Jackson play as second choice but it is what it is.

Backline picks itself with the exception of inside centre. I think with either Vernon or Lamont you'll have a solid inside centre and we're not seeking a BP, just a win will do. I'm a big fan of Peter Horne, but he hasn't been the best player this tournament so far, and certainly wouldn't be in my starting squad.

I'm relieved over Russell. I think it was a blessing in disguise that he had a tweak, as I still don't think we would have won against a pumped-up SA side, and it wouldn't have been worth him getting knocked for the sake of a losing BP. Best just to do the business, put Samoa away with smart rugby then regroup and figure out a way to beat a very formidable Australia side...

I meant my post - I probably could have written it better. Grammar speak I good.

Team will be announced on Thursday I suspect, in line with previous team announcements.

RDW_Scotland wrote:I meant my post - I probably could have written it better.  Grammar speak I good.

Team will be announced on Thursday I suspect, in line with previous team announcements.

No worries, I hadn't noticed.

Cheers, for some reason I thought it was Wendesday the team was announced last time, but I suspect you're right.

With regards to your point Nelly, I think Cowan, Dents, Hardie combo could be decent. I've no real idea how good a ball carrier Hardie is as he's only had one game for us at WC, but he can certainly tackle, and seems to have a bit of pace about him.

I'd advocate that back row against Aus too if we make it to the QF - we can't have Hooper and Pocock having a free meal at the breakdown like England gave them.

Is anyone else just finding out now that the media-friendly and apparently freely publishable epithet for that particular loose forward duo is "Pooper"? 

RDW_Scotland wrote:Just realised there were a lot of negatives in that post....I'm sure you don't not know what I didn't not mean!

Just you stick to drawing things son, and leave the words to the professionals.

NeilyBroon wrote:I think put Cowan on the blindside and Hardie on the open with Denton at 8. I'd be interested to see how that combination works. Strauss hasn't been setting the beard alight in these matches thusfar and I'd rather see him make a case for himself from the bench.

As for backline, whilst I agree Weir isn't as good as Russell, I feel people on here are being perhaps a little harsh! He played the tactics that Scotland had obviously discussed before, and it unsurprisingly didn't pay off. I would rather have seen Jackson play as second choice but it is what it is.

Backline picks itself with the exception of inside centre. I think with either Vernon or Lamont you'll have a solid inside centre and we're not seeking a BP, just a win will do. I'm a big fan of Peter Horne, but he hasn't been the best player this tournament so far, and certainly wouldn't be in my starting squad.

I'm relieved over Russell. I think it was a blessing in disguise that he had a tweak, as I still don't think we would have won against a pumped-up SA side, and it wouldn't have been worth him getting knocked for the sake of a losing BP. Best just to do the business, put Samoa away with smart rugby then regroup and figure out a way to beat a very formidable Australia side...

What kick aimlessly, miss touch, stand 1000 yards behind the game line and give the ball back to opposition on a regular basis

If so, he excelled

RDW_Scotland wrote:Given Scotland's stance on concussion is usually one of over caution (and rightfully so) I'd be very surprised to see Ford and Scott play this weekend.

Ford isn't such a big deal because Brown has been doing well - not convinced by Bryce on the bench though - but Scott will cause us a few problems.

I've said all along that the thought of Horne at 12 v Samoa (paired with Bennett) frightens me, and the Samoans will be licking their lips at the prospect.

So the only real options are Vernon or Lamont at 12 - neither of which are overly satisfying either.

There may be mass outcry at this, but I'd put Lamont at 12. Hear me out!

Yes he's about as creative as a deaf-blind hamster but he doesn't have to be - he'll have Russell and Bennett either side of him. Let's not forget that Lamont's previous games at 12 for Scotland involved Parks and De Luca either side of him.

Russell is clever enough to use him when he has to and miss him out when it's on. Lamont would give real solidity in defence too.

This certainly isn't a long term solution but for this one off must-win game I think it is the best option.

So lets me see if I understand your rationale;
You want a young fast innovative quick-thinking sharp flyhalf and a young fast innovative sharp-thinking quick outside centre and in-between you want an older big hard hitting and unfortunately slower inside centre.... to what aim? You want Lamont to keep that sharp attacking movement, to create space and opportunities for Bennett or do you think he will slow the play down and the only thing the   will receive will the heavenly big hits?.

This is the issue we have had with the Russell-Scott-Bennett axis against top tier sides. Matty was even worse than Vernon (at least Vernon had the excuse of no international experience at 13), even Weir looked too sharp for Scott on the weekend. Unless we can play a diamond midfield format with maybe someone like Denton supporting the slower inside centre (in your case Lamont) taking out the Samoan outside centre and Russell looping to create the second centre thus creating a secondary Russell-Bennett axis then its not going to work.

We don't need an inside centre to slow the attacking line we need the opposite either a fast naturally big 6, 4" 17-18 stone hard 12 like Roberts, Burgess or SBW or a clever aware fast centre like a Gitaeu, Fofana, Henshaw or even the young Damian de Allende who did a number on Scott.

Our ideal axis would have been Russell-Bennett-Dunbar against top tier sides, and that's how I would want our midfield to play against Samoa... a fast 10-12 axis with a barnstorming 13. So if we are to play Lamont in midfield get him ready to run angles in a diamond format with Denton or maybe Hardie following through

Despite everything I've posted previously on the subject, with Scott out I agree with those calling for Lamont at 12. A horses for courses selection, and Russell/Horne/Bennett is just too lightweight for this assignment. Russell has the skill to bypass Lamont if we need more width, and to bring him onto the ball if we need to take contact and consolidate. Vernon shouldn't be considered at 12. He's isn't as powerful as Lamont, and not as skillful as Horne. He's a nothing choice.

Horne can sit on the bench and come on if the game needs opening up.

We shouldn't be too hard on ourselves. We have Dunbar, Scott and Taylor all missing. Most teams would struggle with so many injuries in the one position.

Riskysports wrote:

NeilyBroon wrote:I think put Cowan on the blindside and Hardie on the open with Denton at 8. I'd be interested to see how that combination works. Strauss hasn't been setting the beard alight in these matches thusfar and I'd rather see him make a case for himself from the bench.

As for backline, whilst I agree Weir isn't as good as Russell, I feel people on here are being perhaps a little harsh! He played the tactics that Scotland had obviously discussed before, and it unsurprisingly didn't pay off. I would rather have seen Jackson play as second choice but it is what it is.

Backline picks itself with the exception of inside centre. I think with either Vernon or Lamont you'll have a solid inside centre and we're not seeking a BP, just a win will do. I'm a big fan of Peter Horne, but he hasn't been the best player this tournament so far, and certainly wouldn't be in my starting squad.

I'm relieved over Russell. I think it was a blessing in disguise that he had a tweak, as I still don't think we would have won against a pumped-up SA side, and it wouldn't have been worth him getting knocked for the sake of a losing BP. Best just to do the business, put Samoa away with smart rugby then regroup and figure out a way to beat a very formidable Australia side...

What kick aimlessly, miss touch,  stand 1000 yards behind the game line and give the ball back to opposition on a regular basis

If so, he excelled

It's the aimless punts that really cost us. Someone somewhere has told Weir that he's an excellent kicker of the ball, and it's gone to his head.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Just realised there were a lot of negatives in that post....I'm sure you don't not know what I didn't not mean!

Just you stick to drawing things son, and leave the words to the professionals.

Drawing things? That's waaay below my station!

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Riskysports wrote:

NeilyBroon wrote:I think put Cowan on the blindside and Hardie on the open with Denton at 8. I'd be interested to see how that combination works. Strauss hasn't been setting the beard alight in these matches thusfar and I'd rather see him make a case for himself from the bench.

As for backline, whilst I agree Weir isn't as good as Russell, I feel people on here are being perhaps a little harsh! He played the tactics that Scotland had obviously discussed before, and it unsurprisingly didn't pay off. I would rather have seen Jackson play as second choice but it is what it is.

Backline picks itself with the exception of inside centre. I think with either Vernon or Lamont you'll have a solid inside centre and we're not seeking a BP, just a win will do. I'm a big fan of Peter Horne, but he hasn't been the best player this tournament so far, and certainly wouldn't be in my starting squad.

I'm relieved over Russell. I think it was a blessing in disguise that he had a tweak, as I still don't think we would have won against a pumped-up SA side, and it wouldn't have been worth him getting knocked for the sake of a losing BP. Best just to do the business, put Samoa away with smart rugby then regroup and figure out a way to beat a very formidable Australia side...

What kick aimlessly, miss touch,  stand 1000 yards behind the game line and give the ball back to opposition on a regular basis

If so, he excelled

It's the aimless punts that really cost us. Someone somewhere has told Weir that he's an excellent kicker of the ball, and it's gone to his head.

To be fair, it doesn't have to travel too far to do that.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Riskysports wrote:

NeilyBroon wrote:I think put Cowan on the blindside and Hardie on the open with Denton at 8. I'd be interested to see how that combination works. Strauss hasn't been setting the beard alight in these matches thusfar and I'd rather see him make a case for himself from the bench.

As for backline, whilst I agree Weir isn't as good as Russell, I feel people on here are being perhaps a little harsh! He played the tactics that Scotland had obviously discussed before, and it unsurprisingly didn't pay off. I would rather have seen Jackson play as second choice but it is what it is.

Backline picks itself with the exception of inside centre. I think with either Vernon or Lamont you'll have a solid inside centre and we're not seeking a BP, just a win will do. I'm a big fan of Peter Horne, but he hasn't been the best player this tournament so far, and certainly wouldn't be in my starting squad.

I'm relieved over Russell. I think it was a blessing in disguise that he had a tweak, as I still don't think we would have won against a pumped-up SA side, and it wouldn't have been worth him getting knocked for the sake of a losing BP. Best just to do the business, put Samoa away with smart rugby then regroup and figure out a way to beat a very formidable Australia side...

What kick aimlessly, miss touch,  stand 1000 yards behind the game line and give the ball back to opposition on a regular basis

If so, he excelled

It's the aimless punts that really cost us. Someone somewhere has told Weir that he's an excellent kicker of the ball, and it's gone to his head.

I'm so glad you two have said this, I thought I was going mad, or watching a different game.  He keeps getting praise, which i can't understand.  Aside from the intercept (and credit where it's due) he just cost us possession, that was his role.  

If that was a tactical choice by Vern then we're screwed as it made no sense.  We struggled to get the ball back from them and when we eventually wrestled it off them, we gave it back again with an aimless kick right down their throat.  If it had gone into space to allow a bit of a chase and pressure, or into touch then braw, but it didn't.  They went right to a South African player for them to get back to almost exactly where the gainline had been, but with the difference being they had the ball this time.  It would have saved a lot of time and energy had Weir just handed them the ball rather than kicking it away.

I think he (Weir) was under instructions regarding the down their throat kicking, apart from that he made more tackles, beat more defenders, made more breaks and run more metres close to 100m (Hogg 69m, Seymour 36m, and our line-breaker Scott on 9m!).

He didn't have a bad game and he didn't change his kicking game which suggests he was under instructions

Anyone else see the ludicrous /10 ratings in the Sunday Times. I can only take it Mark Palmer was on some sort of hallucinatory industrial strength chemicals when he was watching the match on Saturday judging by the scores allocated e.g, Laidlaw 7/10, Denton 7/10, Scott 6/10, Visser 6/10 ffs - just 4 out of many dilllusional ratings. The totals for Scotland were 95 and SA 105 Utterly laughable.

Mark, I would struggle to give Laidlaw 2/10 after that dumbass yc. Visser I would give 3/10 but only for the pass to Tommy S for the try otherwise 1/10. Scott and Denton 4 and 5/10 respectively.

flyhalffactory wrote:I think he (Weir) was under instructions regarding the down their throat kicking, apart from that he made more tackles, beat more defenders, made more breaks and run more metres close to 100m (Hogg 69m, Seymour 36m, and our line-breaker Scott on 9m!).

He didn't have a bad game and he didn't change his kicking game which suggests he was under instructions

Sorry I would disagree about not having a bad game. It’s great he put a defensive shift in, but if he actually kept hold of the ball for a bit rather than giving it back to South Africa, the team might not have needed to tackle quite so much. Also it’s not massively surprising that Hogg, Seymour and Scott didn’t run a lot of metres as they rarely got the ball (see previous point about kicking away possession). In terms of metres made, again he stands so far back that he has all that space to benefit from before he’s back up with play, over the course of 80 mins that’s going to add up. Plus as I said in my other post, he made the interception, which was well read and he showed some good footwork to beat a couple of players.

Now I’ve never played at flyhalf (and guessing by your username you have) so you’ll probably have a better understanding of his game than I do, but from my viewpoint, he had a poor game at 10. If we played Lamont there (extreme example, but stay with me) he would tackle like mad, he would run with the ball and might beat one or two players, but he would offer no control over the game, which is effectively the same as Weir.

If that was a tactical call by Vern, then he needs to question his decisions as that was a poor choice, and obviously not doing whatever he hoped it would achieve…at least I hope it didn’t achieve what he wanted, if it did then someone needs to be taking a sample from Vern or checking his cap isn’t on too tight.

I think you are being unduly harsh on Weir - scotland kicked a smaller % of their possession than SA and some of his kicks were return kicks after catching a SA kick - and he gained territory thru those kicks. He also passed well most of the time - his best game for a while. He made no glaring errors in my memory - I might watch the game again and specifically focus on what he did

EWT Spoons wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:I think he (Weir) was under instructions regarding the down their throat kicking, apart from that he made more tackles, beat more defenders, made more breaks and run more metres close to 100m (Hogg 69m, Seymour 36m, and our line-breaker Scott on 9m!).

He didn't have a bad game and he didn't change his kicking game which suggests he was under instructions

Sorry I would disagree about not having a bad game.  It’s great he put a defensive shift in, but if he actually kept hold of the ball for a bit rather than giving it back to South Africa, the team might not have needed to tackle quite so much.  Also it’s not massively surprising that Hogg, Seymour and Scott didn’t run a lot of metres as they rarely got the ball (see previous point about kicking away possession).   In terms of metres made, again he stands so far back  that he has all that space to benefit from before he’s back up with play, over the course of 80 mins that’s going to add up.  Plus as I said in my other post, he made the interception, which was well read and he showed some good footwork to beat a couple of players.

Now I’ve never played at flyhalf (and guessing by your username you have) so you’ll probably have a better understanding of his game than I do, but from my viewpoint, he had a poor game at 10.   If we played Lamont there (extreme example, but stay with me) he would tackle like mad, he would run with the ball and might beat one or two players, but he would offer no control over the game, which is effectively the same as Weir.

If that was a tactical call by Vern, then he needs to question his decisions as that was a poor choice, and obviously not doing whatever he hoped it would achieve…at least I hope it didn’t achieve what he wanted, if it did then someone needs to be taking a sample from Vern or checking his cap isn’t on too tight.

At 6' 5" and 17 stone I never twinkled behind the scrum but did the grunt behind the backsides of the props and at times (if I was lucky) the flanks.

I agree with you he didn't provide ball for Matt/Vernon but on saying that he made more passes, more clean breaks, beat more defenders, even made more tackles than him so at some time during the match he must have done more than just kick.

Another Cotter Crap Call.... Weir should never have been selected, Rhubarb should have been in the squad from the start, along with Ashe, and Barclay.

flyhalffactory wrote:I think he (Weir) was under instructions regarding the down their throat kicking, apart from that he made more tackles, beat more defenders, made more breaks and run more metres close to 100m (Hogg 69m, Seymour 36m, and our line-breaker Scott on 9m!).

He didn't have a bad game and he didn't change his kicking game which suggests he was under instructions

most of that was in the interception and break - which we all credit him with

the rest was him running back to the line of play from the front row of the stand were he normally waits for the ball


He was TERRIBLE -

According to ESPN 14 kicks 20 passes for weir which is a high % of kicks but match stats show
scot SA
29 Kicks From Hand 41
121 Passes 156
101 Runs 131