Scotland v Samoa, 10 October

First topic message reminder :

   
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.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Cyril wrote:The entire world is hoping Samoa win so Japan go through.

Please make it happen.

Don't count on us to save England's blushes

What blushes? They've only gone & qualified for Japan 2019, with a pool game to spare. Great effort from them

I'd like to see

15.  Maitland
14.  Seymour
13.  Bennett
12.  Horne
11.  Lamont
10.  Russell
9.    Laidlaw
8.    Denton
7.    Hardie
6.    Strauss
5.    Gray
4.    Gray
3.    Nel
2.    Brown
1.    Dickinson

16.  Bryce
17.  Reid
18.  Welsh
19.  Swinson
20.  Cowan
21.  Pyrgos
22.  Weir
23.  Hogg

Scotland should have too much organisation and structure here IMO. The only danger for me occurs if Samoa actually turn up and get a head of steam but the Scots have coped well with this from the USA and Japan so I'm thinking a decent Scottish win as long as they don't go into their shells and stop playing

reallybored

That is a more or less the side I would start with. Maitland at FB from the off is definitely worth looking at. Isn't Bryce injured and out though?

flyhalffactory wrote:reallybored Isn't Bryce injured and out though?

I hope not, and don't recall seeing that.

Are you maybe confusing him with his brother, plays FB for Glasgow, carried off against Army?

demosthenes wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:reallybored Isn't Bryce injured and out though?

I hope not, and don't recall seeing that.

Are you maybe confusing him with his brother, plays FB for Glasgow, carried off against Army?

On that point it's amazing how different two brothers can be - one is a tall skinny fullback and the other is a short chunky hooker!

GLove39 wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Cyril wrote:The entire world is hoping Samoa win so Japan go through.

Please make it happen.

Don't count on us to save England's blushes

What blushes? They've only gone & qualified for Japan 2019, with a pool game to spare. Great effort from them

    Although obviously if you post that on the England-Uruguay thread you will get killed.

In case any non-Scotland fans are wondering why we are worried about playing Peter Horne at 12 and are considering sticking Slamont in there instead, it's because we cannot get this image out of our heads:



It's a fair comment that perhaps we should be focussing more on this:

So what your saying is we go for size rather than creativity. We will not match them on size with any combination. Do what we did to Tonga last year (in Ayrshire too GC!) and run them off their feet. Unfortunately the best combo at 12/13 is not available (Dunbar/Bennett). Russell plays very well with Pete Horne and they will get Tommy Seymour onto the ball on the wing.

I don’t think anyone doubt’s Horne’s attacking abilities (well, for me he is often too lateral), it is the defence I’m worried about if we have a Russell-Horne-Bennett midfield. We’ll also struggle to get over the gainline with first phase ball, which means we in turn struggle to bring our wide players in.

When it comes to collisions generally speaking a good big ‘un always beats a good little ‘un!

Schiz - I probably would start with the cap centurion at 12 - the argument being that (a) with Russell at 10 and Bennett at 13, you don't need as much razzle dazzle at 12 and (b) Tiny Tiny Peter Horne can come on with 25 and start jinking past the tiring midfield.

Makes me laugh to imagine that Peter is as tiny as the current mayor of New York, although I know of course that this is not true.
Nobody is tinier than Mike Bloomberg: http://tinytinymikebloomberg.nyc/

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:So what your saying is we go for size rather than creativity.    We will not match them on size with any combination.   Do what we did to Tonga last year (in Ayrshire too GC!) and run them off their feet.   Unfortunately the best combo at 12/13 is not available (Dunbar/Bennett).    Russell plays very well with Pete Horne and they will get Tommy Seymour onto the ball on the wing.

It has to be said Scott is playing well, I like Dunbar a lot but that is a horrible injury, believe me I know. It takes just as much time to get over that sort of injury psychologically as physically. Take Scott for example, been out for a Season almost and only now getting back to his best.

The fact we are talking about Horne or Lamont at 12 suggest Scott is struggling with concussion protocols?

Nice youtube clips but isn't Tuilagi out of this game?

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:So what your saying is we go for size rather than creativity.    We will not match them on size with any combination.   Do what we did to Tonga last year (in Ayrshire too GC!) and run them off their feet.   Unfortunately the best combo at 12/13 is not available (Dunbar/Bennett).    Russell plays very well with Pete Horne and they will get Tommy Seymour onto the ball on the wing.

It has to be said Scott is playing well, I like Dunbar a lot but that is a horrible injury, believe me I know. It takes just as much time to get over that sort of injury psychologically as physically. Take Scott for example, been out for a Season almost and only now getting back to his best.

The fact we are talking about Horne or Lamont at 12 suggest Scott is struggling with concussion protocols?

He could be fine, but he has shown concussion like symptoms after the SA game apparently and the Scotland medical team are usually more careful with head knocks than other rugby nations (not naming names!).

He could be available of course - we just don't know how bad he's been.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:So what your saying is we go for size rather than creativity.    We will not match them on size with any combination.   Do what we did to Tonga last year (in Ayrshire too GC!) and run them off their feet.   Unfortunately the best combo at 12/13 is not available (Dunbar/Bennett).    Russell plays very well with Pete Horne and they will get Tommy Seymour onto the ball on the wing.

It has to be said Scott is playing well, I like Dunbar a lot but that is a horrible injury, believe me I know. It takes just as much time to get over that sort of injury psychologically as physically. Take Scott for example, been out for a Season almost and only now getting back to his best.

The fact we are talking about Horne or Lamont at 12 suggest Scott is struggling with concussion protocols?

The problem with Scott and Ford is that they were showing active symptoms during a game, which means that they are potentially on the longer side of completing the graduated return to play protocols.

Hardie was never as bad because he felt no symptoms and he did not fail the single test in question until after the game when he did the routine checks.

So it's not that Ford and Scott are definitely out. It's just that its a Known Unknown.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:So what your saying is we go for size rather than creativity.    We will not match them on size with any combination.   Do what we did to Tonga last year (in Ayrshire too GC!) and run them off their feet.   Unfortunately the best combo at 12/13 is not available (Dunbar/Bennett).    Russell plays very well with Pete Horne and they will get Tommy Seymour onto the ball on the wing.

It has to be said Scott is playing well, I like Dunbar a lot but that is a horrible injury, believe me I know. It takes just as much time to get over that sort of injury psychologically as physically. Take Scott for example, been out for a Season almost and only now getting back to his best.

The fact we are talking about Horne or Lamont at 12 suggest Scott is struggling with concussion protocols?

He could be fine, but he has shown concussion like symptoms after the SA game apparently and the Scotland medical team are usually more careful with head knocks than other rugby nations (not naming names!).

He could be available of course - we just don't know how bad he's been.

Well for him, hope he makes it. Scott and Bennett have been a very strong center pairing and I feel we lacked the creativity they bring to unlock the Boks.

George Carlin wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:So what your saying is we go for size rather than creativity.    We will not match them on size with any combination.   Do what we did to Tonga last year (in Ayrshire too GC!) and run them off their feet.   Unfortunately the best combo at 12/13 is not available (Dunbar/Bennett).    Russell plays very well with Pete Horne and they will get Tommy Seymour onto the ball on the wing.

It has to be said Scott is playing well, I like Dunbar a lot but that is a horrible injury, believe me I know. It takes just as much time to get over that sort of injury psychologically as physically. Take Scott for example, been out for a Season almost and only now getting back to his best.

The fact we are talking about Horne or Lamont at 12 suggest Scott is struggling with concussion protocols?

The problem with Scott and Ford is that they were showing active symptoms during a game, which means that they are potentially on the longer side of completing the graduated return to play protocols.

Hardie was never as bad because he felt no symptoms and he did not fail the single test in question until after the game when he did the routine checks.

So it's not that Ford and Scott are definitely out. It's just that its a Known Unknown.

I don't even recall seeing what happened to Scott. Ford on the other hand was on dream street after his collision.

Tuilagi out for Scotland game. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34462192

Can we pick Horne now?

Totalflanker wrote:Tuilagi out for Scotland game. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34462192

Can we pick Horne now?

Not if Scott is fit. Horne for me just isn't an international class 12, the same way Weir isn't an international class 10.

Totalflanker wrote:Tuilagi out for Scotland game. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34462192

Can we pick Horne now?

Unfortunately Tuilagi isn't the only massive Samoan to worry about rampaging through our midfield!

Even if Scotland can't match Samoa with one on one physicality, they can still shore up their defence and hit them with double tacklers

Gang tackle style

South Africa obviously humped them, but that was the same way they humped us, brute power.

Japan showed how to beat them and that's what we should emulate.

Biltong wrote:Even if Scotland can't match Samoa with one on one physicality, they can still shore up their defence and hit them with double tacklers

Gang tackle style

Exactly – in Horne’s defence for that Tuilagi speed bump incident, his 12 really could have helped him out.

Problem with double up tackling though, especially from first phase ball, is that it leaves spaces elsewhere. If you go in for a double tackle and that person is actually running dummy line you’re going to look stupid!

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Biltong wrote:Even if Scotland can't match Samoa with one on one physicality, they can still shore up their defence and hit them with double tacklers

Gang tackle style

Exactly – in Horne’s defence for that Tuilagi speed bump incident, his 12 really could have helped him out.

Problem with double up tackling though, especially from first phase ball, is that it leaves spaces elsewhere.  If you go in for a double tackle and that person is actually running dummy line you’re going to look stupid!

Depends whether you are hitting them behind the advantage line, that is what the Boks did to Scotland, double tackles and never allowing front foot ball

Biltong wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Biltong wrote:Even if Scotland can't match Samoa with one on one physicality, they can still shore up their defence and hit them with double tacklers

Gang tackle style

Exactly – in Horne’s defence for that Tuilagi speed bump incident, his 12 really could have helped him out.

Problem with double up tackling though, especially from first phase ball, is that it leaves spaces elsewhere.  If you go in for a double tackle and that person is actually running dummy line you’re going to look stupid!

Depends whether you are hitting them behind the advantage line, that is what the Boks did to Scotland, double tackles and never allowing front foot ball

And that's because our 10 stood 10m behind the gainline, so your big lads had plenty time to line them up and smash them.

Hopefully with Russell at 10 that won't happen.

To win we need trys, while Samoa are not SA, we saw what uninventive 1 out rugby does for us (really worrying for me as it marked a return to the bad old days of the last 5-7 year - lots of endeavour for very little return)....we just get smashed back in the tackle and the one thing Samoa can do is smash in the tackle. Quick ball running at mismatches and spaces rather than the man is needed.

Russell + Horne + Bennett are a tried and tested unit albeit at Glasgow with understanding of each others games, which for me means better chance of the right running lines. Yes Lamont is Glasgow but he on the wing not a distributor.

If Scott is fit he's in fair enough, if not Horne. The one thing Horne has over every other back including Bennett in my opinion is his understanding of running great support lines when the line is broken - that is what scores tries.

On which note if Hardie is back then he will likely do the tackling for all of the midfield anyway.......

Will Vernon keep his spot? Surely Scotland have better..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UWfEwTCOhw

Hornee furra linnee !

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UWfEwTCOhw

Hornee furra linnee !

Nice try, that was 2 years ago though. Like I said I'm waiting on tenterhooks to see him do something of that ilk for Scotland.

A bit like Weir in "that" Saxons game we could be waiting for some time to see that from Horne when it matters.

Anyone fancy Samoa to pull off a win?

If Scott has a head knock (and I know no one is seriously suggesting that we muck about with this) then it simply has to be Horne at 12, end of story.

We can chew the cud over Lamont at 12, but that is a very clear step back to the bad old days of RWC2011. In any case, I'd start Lamont ahead of Visser.

rodders wrote:Anyone fancy Samoa to pull off a win?

Definitely. In fact, Scotland have such a propensity to self-destruct when the pressure's on that I genuinely think Samoa will beat us.

rodders wrote:Anyone fancy Samoa to pull off a win?

Go the Naughty Step, Rodders. And I mean now.

IanBru wrote:If Scott has a head knock (and I know no one is seriously suggesting that we muck about with this) then it simply has to be Horne at 12, end of story.

We can chew the cud over Lamont at 12, but that is a very clear step back to the bad old days of RWC2011. In any case, I'd start Lamont ahead of Visser.

I would certainly have Horne over Lamont at 12, and unlike yourself Bru I would have Visser instead of Lamont on the wing.

Horne at 12 is the sensible choice but as I said I'm not convinced he can cut the mustard at 12. Dunbar and Taylor are way ahead of him in the pecking order.

I wouldn't expect Laidlaw to be rested but never the less my maverick backline would look like this :

9. SHC
10. Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (Maitland if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

As I said it's a maverick backline. However in such an important clash it's probably more Goose than Maverick.

Sensible head on says :

9. Laidlaw
10 Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (The Samoan Dog Chew if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.  
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

rodders wrote:Anyone fancy Samoa to pull off a win?

I don't think so, they just aren't playing with enough structure, they aren't committing numbers to the breakdown, their attacks seem disjointed.

Frankly they don't look motivated, and then there is always the discipline

Biltong wrote:

rodders wrote:Anyone fancy Samoa to pull off a win?

I don't think so, they just aren't playing with enough structure, they aren't committing numbers to the breakdown, their attacks seem disjointed.

Frankly they don't look motivated, and then there is always the discipline

A win with no injuries is all I really care about. A bonus point is a luxury we can do without.

Cannae see Samoa winning, especially after how dire they were against Japan.

We don't need a BP to qualify - if we're 3 tries up with 20 minutes to go, and have a commanding lead, I hope he brings the bench on and consolidates the win.

Certainly no need to go for broke.

fa0019 wrote:Will Vernon keep his spot? Surely Scotland have better..

I( do feel a bit sorry for Vernon. Decent back rower, gets a few caps, realises with all the good back rowers we have his opportunities are going to be limited, converts to centre as we are short of good centres only for generation of better centres to appear.

Here’s quite a stat for you – Scotland have made more tackles than any other nation in the world cup, averaging 162 per game!

RDW_Scotland wrote:Here’s quite a stat for you – Scotland have made more tackles than any other nation in the world cup, averaging 162 per game!

What does that say, exactly? I'm genuinely not sure.

Well stating the obvious, it means that we have had to do more defending than any other team.

Looking at it in more detail I suspect it means that we are bad at retaining possession, and that we kick the ball away a lot.

Although I suspect most of that tackle count will have been from the Japan game!

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

IanBru wrote:If Scott has a head knock (and I know no one is seriously suggesting that we muck about with this) then it simply has to be Horne at 12, end of story.

We can chew the cud over Lamont at 12, but that is a very clear step back to the bad old days of RWC2011. In any case, I'd start Lamont ahead of Visser.

I would certainly have Horne over Lamont at 12, and unlike yourself Bru I would have Visser instead of Lamont on the wing.

Horne at 12 is the sensible choice but as I said I'm not convinced he can cut the mustard at 12. Dunbar and Taylor are way ahead of him in the pecking order.

I wouldn't expect Laidlaw to be rested but never the less my maverick backline would look like this :

9. SHC
10. Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (Maitland if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.  
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

As I said it's a maverick backline. However in such an important clash it's probably more Goose than Maverick.

Sensible head on says :

9. Laidlaw
10 Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (The Samoan Dog Chew if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.  
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

So if I understand you right Radge, you don't want Horne in your backline due to his size or lack of, but want Visser, a player scared of his own shadow on the wing, in place of Lamont, who would tackle and run through a concrete block.? Some contradiction here !

Tuigali is out for Samoa, incredibly banned for 5 weeks for allowing his knee to hit the Japanese player who tackled him in the first few minutes of this week's match. I thought it was a spoof when I first saw the clip of the incident online.

Definite case of different standards being applied to big team players and the smaller nations, this incident looked far less severe than Faerrel and Hooper shoulder charges and mikes less severe than Woods kick to Welsh Fullbacks head. And despite injuring the opposing players due to foul play Farrell and Woods got away scot free.

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

IanBru wrote:If Scott has a head knock (and I know no one is seriously suggesting that we muck about with this) then it simply has to be Horne at 12, end of story.

We can chew the cud over Lamont at 12, but that is a very clear step back to the bad old days of RWC2011. In any case, I'd start Lamont ahead of Visser.

I would certainly have Horne over Lamont at 12, and unlike yourself Bru I would have Visser instead of Lamont on the wing.

Horne at 12 is the sensible choice but as I said I'm not convinced he can cut the mustard at 12. Dunbar and Taylor are way ahead of him in the pecking order.

I wouldn't expect Laidlaw to be rested but never the less my maverick backline would look like this :

9. SHC
10. Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (Maitland if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.  
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

As I said it's a maverick backline. However in such an important clash it's probably more Goose than Maverick.

Sensible head on says :

9. Laidlaw
10 Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (The Samoan Dog Chew if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.  
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

So if I understand you right Radge, you don't want Horne in your backline due to his size or lack of, but want Visser, a player scared of his own shadow on the wing, in place of Lamont, who would tackle and run through a concrete block.?   Some contradiction here !

Visser 21 caps - 9 tries

Horne 11 caps -1 try
Sean Lamont 99 caps - 14 tries

I'll let you work out the merits of Visser being selected above the others you mentioned for yourself

To Scotland,

Don't do an England. Size isn't everything in the centres. Tuilagi has made bigger and better players than Horne look very silly indeed.

Yours Sincerely,

A concerned England fan

Seagultaf wrote:Tuigali is out for Samoa, incredibly banned for 5 weeks for allowing his knee to hit the Japanese player who tackled him in the first few minutes of this week's match. I thought it was a spoof when I first saw the clip of the incident online.

Definite case of different standards being applied to big team players and the smaller nations, this incident looked far less severe than Faerrel and Hooper shoulder charges and mikes less severe than Woods kick to Welsh Fullbacks head. And despite injuring the opposing players due to foul play Farrell and Woods got away scot free.

I actually remember that, At the time I thought it was cardable, but when they showed the replay I thought it was fine.

It is blatant discrimination against the smaller unions

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

IanBru wrote:If Scott has a head knock (and I know no one is seriously suggesting that we muck about with this) then it simply has to be Horne at 12, end of story.

We can chew the cud over Lamont at 12, but that is a very clear step back to the bad old days of RWC2011. In any case, I'd start Lamont ahead of Visser.

I would certainly have Horne over Lamont at 12, and unlike yourself Bru I would have Visser instead of Lamont on the wing.

Horne at 12 is the sensible choice but as I said I'm not convinced he can cut the mustard at 12. Dunbar and Taylor are way ahead of him in the pecking order.

I wouldn't expect Laidlaw to be rested but never the less my maverick backline would look like this :

9. SHC
10. Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (Maitland if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.  
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

As I said it's a maverick backline. However in such an important clash it's probably more Goose than Maverick.

Sensible head on says :

9. Laidlaw
10 Russell
11. McMisser
12. Scott12 (The Samoan Dog Chew if Scott is still dressing as Napoleon or painting his bottom purple)
13.  
14. Seymore
15. Didier Hoggba

So if I understand you right Radge, you don't want Horne in your backline due to his size or lack of, but want Visser, a player scared of his own shadow on the wing, in place of Lamont, who would tackle and run through a concrete block.?   Some contradiction here !

Visser 21 caps - 9 tries

Horne 11 caps -1 try
Sean Lamont 99 caps - 14 tries

I'll let you work out the merits of Visser being selected above the others you mentioned for yourself  

You failed to include the number of tries conceded due to gently flapping in the wind whilst the runner goes by in that list..

True enough he doesn't get the name McMisser of Tackles for nothing. Sean Lamont has a great reputation for never letting anyone down. Howver as FES mentioned his Spaniel in another thread being loyal and dependable isn't really enough for international rugby.

What to do about Visser is a tricky one and at times he has made some important tackles in this RWC. Maitland might be a better idea however Visser's track record of scoring speaks for itself.

It's just weighing up how many he scores and how many tackles he misses and trying to play the %ages.

There is no easy answer. The guy is a try scoring machine and always runs good supporting lines.

He also is one of the best readers of the game in the world when it comes to defensive positioning. By that I mean he reads the game so well he always positions himself just out of reach of the tackle when a ball carrier runs at him.

My view of Visser is greatly influenced by the NZ game a few years back. He got 2 tries. (I seem to remember at least one of them was a really good one). I also seem to remember that possibly 3 of the NZ tries were partly down to his non tackling...