Scotland v Samoa, 10 October

by **George Carlin** Sun 04 Oct 2015, 9:06 am

First topic message reminder :

Scotland v Samoa, 10 October - Page 7 Scot_f10

Scotland v Samoa, 10 October - Page 7 Samoa_12

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
Scotland v Samoa, 10 October - Page 7 Gordon10

Scotland v Samoa, 10 October - Page 7 Gordon10

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
Scotland v Samoa, 10 October - Page 7 Jerry-10

Scotland v Samoa, 10 October - Page 7 Jerry-10

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.

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 12:21 pm

Guys,

I get that fixture schedule is conjested, but 11 changes were made between USA and SA, now another 7, so 18 changes between games is pretty hefty.

Point is Japan received the respect they got after beating SA, players were mismanaged for that game, then rushed into the USA game, of which SA mustve been in their minds.

It's just so negative to see a team focus their energies on such a low target, not so much pre tournament, but the non reaction to the SA loss. Scotland should and realistically could have ruined Meyers career!

The mismanagement and non reaction aside, Cotter sent a direct message to his squad when he looked at the availability list for SA and said 'stuff it lets add 4 more key players to the stands', he told the world and most importantly his own team they weren't going to be challenging, and then 3/4 key players had to spend the week contradicting media, and proving they weren't a 2nd team side when they clearly beleived they were.

It's almost like coaching by numbers, without reacting to the situations.

by **RDW** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 12:39 pm

https://www.606v2.com/t60850-putting-things-into-perspective#3173502

by funnyExiledScot Fri 09 Oct 2015, 12:45 pm

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

by RubyGuby Fri 09 Oct 2015, 12:46 pm

Nice link RDW and just what was needed as a reminder on this forum

thumbsup

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 12:51 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Finally some ambition!!

It's odd to think that the SRU's remit for the RWC is to win it, and so it should be, however too many folk find that laughable, even though it is merely ambitious. If Japan are capable of turning SA over why should Scotland not, if there was a clear and logical plan in order to to win the group, which there must have been, why was there no contingency for shock results?

It's frustrating to me that the 3 big SH teams will pick up such easy wins against home nations at times from lack of ambition. I'd argue that Wales have been guilty of this also, against all 3.

Player management should have been for sole purpose of building to the boks game, then beat Japan, USA and SA and you've qualified, Samoa is merely winning the group or 2nd spot. But now it's a huge must win game for Scotland, that could provide nervy, tense and problematic.

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:06 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Really ??

name a team that has managed to play full strength in 3 games in 10 days - please do

What did us in on the scheduling was the terrible performance in the first half at the US game. I was there - it was shocking -and the first team DID need to come in the settle the ship -

It was shaping up to one of Scotlands usual poor performance becoming a nervous performance becoming a loss (Tonga a couple of years ago anyone)

The first team DID steady it and we ran out good winners - but anyone saying we did not need to bring them on, obviously was not at the game

THAT meant we have players who were being rested having to come on earlier, meaning they played too much rugby to be realistically ready for the battle against SA

I fully expect that Vern had planned to take it to SA but our poor first halfs put a scupper to that

by cakeordeath Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:07 pm

As a surprise to no one, Samoa have appealed Tuilagi's ban. Hearing is today. My own thoughts are it was worthy of a ban, not 5 weeks though. Although I don't know how good a record he had before.

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:17 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Finally some ambition!!

It's odd to think that the SRU's remit for the RWC is to win it, and so it should be, however too many folk find that laughable, even though it is merely ambitious. If Japan are capable of turning SA over why should Scotland not, if there was a clear and logical plan in order to to win the group, which there must have been, why was there no contingency for shock results?

It's frustrating to me that the 3 big SH teams will pick up such easy wins against home nations at times from lack of ambition. I'd argue that Wales have been guilty of this also, against all 3.

Player management should have been for sole purpose of building to the boks game, then beat Japan, USA and SA and you've qualified, Samoa is merely winning the group or 2nd spot. But now it's a huge must win game for Scotland, that could provide nervy, tense and problematic.

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:23 pm

Riskysports wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Really ??

name a team that has managed to play full strength in 3 games in 10 days - please do

What did us in on the scheduling was the terrible performance in the first half at the US game. I was there - it was shocking -and the first team DID need to come in the settle the ship -

It was shaping up to one of Scotlands usual poor performance becoming a nervous performance becoming a loss (Tonga a couple of years ago anyone)

The first team DID steady it and we ran out good winners - but anyone saying we did not need to bring them on, obviously was not at the game

THAT meant we have players who were being rested having to come on earlier, meaning they played too much rugby to be realistically ready for the battle against SA

I fully expect that Vern had planned to take it to SA but our poor first halfs put a scupper to that

Leave it out mate,

the ODD word in capitols is convincing nobody. Scotland's coaching team panicked during USA, had they allowed 15 mins of the second half to play Scotland wouldve pulled an 8 point lead, and be heading into the last 20 reasonably comfortable.

Tonga a few years ago were twice the team USA are today, what are you trying to say?

Trying to pull rank because you were there means little, analysis teams don't review memory or experience, they review the match tape, which is far more accurate!!

I don't beleive the players are at fault whatsoever in this RWC, they have just been mismanaged, untrusted, and been given too many conflicting signals from the top.

by AirHOrse Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:35 pm

Personally while I would have loved for us to have much more of a go against South Africa I think its ridiculous to say Vern Cotter doesn't have any ambition.

It's clear that his plan is to get us into the quarters in the best shape possible so we can have a proper go at whoever we face and as few worries about fatigue, injury etc. Setting us up for our best possible run at getting into the semis is clear ambition to me.

What would we talk about more after the tournament - beating SA and then going out in the quarters, or making it to the semis?

Answer is obvious for me...

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:42 pm

Fanster wrote:
Riskysports wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Really ??

name a team that has managed to play full strength in 3 games in 10 days - please do

What did us in on the scheduling was the terrible performance in the first half at the US game. I was there - it was shocking -and the first team DID need to come in the settle the ship -

It was shaping up to one of Scotlands usual poor performance becoming a nervous performance becoming a loss (Tonga a couple of years ago anyone)

The first team DID steady it and we ran out good winners - but anyone saying we did not need to bring them on, obviously was not at the game

THAT meant we have players who were being rested having to come on earlier, meaning they played too much rugby to be realistically ready for the battle against SA

I fully expect that Vern had planned to take it to SA but our poor first halfs put a scupper to that

Leave it out mate,

the ODD word in capitols is convincing nobody. Scotland's coaching team panicked during USA, had they allowed 15 mins of the second half to play Scotland wouldve pulled an 8 point lead, and be heading into the last 20 reasonably comfortable.

Tonga a few years ago were twice the team USA are today, what are you trying to say?

Trying to pull rank because you were there means little, analysis teams don't review memory or experience, they review the match tape, which is far more accurate!!

I don't beleive the players are at fault whatsoever in this RWC, they have just been mismanaged, untrusted, and been given too many conflicting signals from the top.

So these same people who analysis the tapes as it is more accurate were the same ones to who make the decisions on who to play and who to sub - as they were more accurate

But as it is against your ides - they then 'mismanaged, untrusted, and been given too many conflicting signals from the top'

Not trying to pull rank - but wanted to put a personal experience of the terror in the crowd and feeling we had that things were going very wrong - while I realise that is only the feeling of me and the people around me - I thought it was worthy of comment

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:45 pm

AirHOrse wrote:Personally while I would have loved for us to have much more of a go against South Africa I think its ridiculous to say Vern Cotter doesn't have any ambition.

It's clear that his plan is to get us into the quarters in the best shape possible so we can have a proper go at whoever we face and as few worries about fatigue, injury etc. Setting us up for our best possible run at getting into the semis is clear ambition to me.

What would we talk about more after the tournament - beating SA and then going out in the quarters, or making it to the semis?

Answer is obvious for me...

You really think a fully fit Scotland team would fare better against this Australia team? or a Scotland with an extra 60 mins each under their belt v an injury strewn Welsh team?

I honestly get where everyone is coming from, between schedules, injuries, a few sub par performances Scotland have had a difficult 2 weeks, however I just feel that every other home nations would have gone for the jugular and tried to put SA out.

I think all the top nations have rotated players superbly, including Wales who had a far more complex situation to deal with, however Scotland's task was simple, pre tournament I said Scotland should fancy turning the boks over, Japans win shouldve complimented that plan, and the chance to put SA out shouldve been too huge to not have a go at, plus it wouldve meant topping the group and giving them their best ever shot at a RWC semi!

Huge opportunity missed IMO, and a far less risky route to the quarters (but ultimately not a semi) was taken.

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:50 pm

Riskysports wrote:
Fanster wrote:
Riskysports wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Really ??

name a team that has managed to play full strength in 3 games in 10 days - please do

What did us in on the scheduling was the terrible performance in the first half at the US game. I was there - it was shocking -and the first team DID need to come in the settle the ship -

It was shaping up to one of Scotlands usual poor performance becoming a nervous performance becoming a loss (Tonga a couple of years ago anyone)

The first team DID steady it and we ran out good winners - but anyone saying we did not need to bring them on, obviously was not at the game

THAT meant we have players who were being rested having to come on earlier, meaning they played too much rugby to be realistically ready for the battle against SA

I fully expect that Vern had planned to take it to SA but our poor first halfs put a scupper to that

Leave it out mate,

the ODD word in capitols is convincing nobody. Scotland's coaching team panicked during USA, had they allowed 15 mins of the second half to play Scotland wouldve pulled an 8 point lead, and be heading into the last 20 reasonably comfortable.

Tonga a few years ago were twice the team USA are today, what are you trying to say?

Trying to pull rank because you were there means little, analysis teams don't review memory or experience, they review the match tape, which is far more accurate!!

I don't beleive the players are at fault whatsoever in this RWC, they have just been mismanaged, untrusted, and been given too many conflicting signals from the top.

So these same people who analysis the tapes as it is more accurate were the same ones to who make the decisions on who to play and who to sub - as they were more accurate

But as it is against your ides - they then 'mismanaged, untrusted, and been given too many conflicting signals from the top'

Not trying to pull rank - but wanted to put a personal experience of the terror in the crowd and feeling we had that things were going very wrong - while I realise that is only the feeling of me and the people around me - I thought it was worthy of comment

Of course the analsis teams make no decisions, they are advisors for the decision makers. They spend their match watching real time info on players, and notifying coaches when players are tiring or falling off the cliff, which ultimately happens 55 - 64 minutes in the case of forwards, which highlights analysis teams importance on sub making don't you think?

Of course the crowd was terrified, that feeling was shuvelled down from Cotter in his match selection, onto the players during the week trying to convince everyone (unsuccesfully) that this was a strong team, and ultimately culminated in a fearfull crowd atmosphere, how could anyone not consider the impact of team selection on match week/day prep, and crowd influence?

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:52 pm

Fanster - I think we have to agree to disagree - our aim is not to knock SA out the cup but to get to the Quarters in the best shape to try and make the semis

My opinion is flogging tired players to win a very tough game was not the right call - even though I would have loved our team to be full strength for every game

Your opinion is we should have gone for it, even with players playing 3 games in 10 days - on the chance of knocking out SA and then taking it easier on the Samoa game

Fair enough

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:54 pm

Fanster wrote:
Riskysports wrote:
Fanster wrote:
Riskysports wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Really ??

name a team that has managed to play full strength in 3 games in 10 days - please do

What did us in on the scheduling was the terrible performance in the first half at the US game. I was there - it was shocking -and the first team DID need to come in the settle the ship -

It was shaping up to one of Scotlands usual poor performance becoming a nervous performance becoming a loss (Tonga a couple of years ago anyone)

The first team DID steady it and we ran out good winners - but anyone saying we did not need to bring them on, obviously was not at the game

THAT meant we have players who were being rested having to come on earlier, meaning they played too much rugby to be realistically ready for the battle against SA

I fully expect that Vern had planned to take it to SA but our poor first halfs put a scupper to that

Leave it out mate,

the ODD word in capitols is convincing nobody. Scotland's coaching team panicked during USA, had they allowed 15 mins of the second half to play Scotland wouldve pulled an 8 point lead, and be heading into the last 20 reasonably comfortable.

Tonga a few years ago were twice the team USA are today, what are you trying to say?

Trying to pull rank because you were there means little, analysis teams don't review memory or experience, they review the match tape, which is far more accurate!!

I don't beleive the players are at fault whatsoever in this RWC, they have just been mismanaged, untrusted, and been given too many conflicting signals from the top.

So these same people who analysis the tapes as it is more accurate were the same ones to who make the decisions on who to play and who to sub - as they were more accurate

But as it is against your ides - they then 'mismanaged, untrusted, and been given too many conflicting signals from the top'

Not trying to pull rank - but wanted to put a personal experience of the terror in the crowd and feeling we had that things were going very wrong - while I realise that is only the feeling of me and the people around me - I thought it was worthy of comment

Of course the analsis teams make no decisions, they are advisors for the decision makers. They spend their match watching real time info on players, and notifying coaches when players are tiring or falling off the cliff, which ultimately happens 55 - 64 minutes in the case of forwards, which highlights analysis teams importance on sub making don't you think?

Of course the crowd was terrified, that feeling was shuvelled down from Cotter in his match selection, onto the players during the week trying to convince everyone (unsuccesfully) that this was a strong team, and ultimately culminated in a fearfull crowd atmosphere, how could anyone not consider the impact of team selection on match week/day prep, and crowd influence?

You have an opinion, and keep taking comments out of context to try to big up your opinion is not big or clever

BORED .com

by AirHOrse Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:55 pm

It remains to be seen how it pans out in Australia vs Wales, but right now my personal thoughts are that both are just as tough a prospect for Scotland. Before England went out I would've said any of the three from that group were just as tough for us(hind sight always tells us a different story though!).

So respectfully, I disagree that throwing everything at SA was a better route for a shot at winning a quarter final. Australia and Wales are both going to have played at a much more intense level than us by this route, and we've got to take every advantage we can get. I would most certainly been a more glorious route to put SA out, but glory and risk go hand in hand!

by **RDW** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:56 pm

Without putting a dampner on things too much, Tom English has reeled out some stats on his BBC column:

The years since 2011 have not been kind to Scotland. In competitive Tests (four Six Nations championships) their record is so abysmal it makes you wince.

They have three wins from 20 matches and three Wooden Spoons in four years. They've also had three coaches - Andy Robinson, Scott Johnson and now Vern Cotter. The fact that a vast army of supporters continued to follow the team through the thick and thicker years was an illustration of the fans' loyalty and desperation.

Lord knows what would happen if Scotland were ever to threaten at the top end of a championship rather than scrapping for survival at the bottom.

This is what I was talking about when I said a battling performance in the QF would represent a good world cup for Scotland - look how bad our preparation for it has been.

by RuggerRadge2611 Fri 09 Oct 2015, 1:58 pm

Fanster wrote:
AirHOrse wrote:Personally while I would have loved for us to have much more of a go against South Africa I think its ridiculous to say Vern Cotter doesn't have any ambition.

It's clear that his plan is to get us into the quarters in the best shape possible so we can have a proper go at whoever we face and as few worries about fatigue, injury etc. Setting us up for our best possible run at getting into the semis is clear ambition to me.

What would we talk about more after the tournament - beating SA and then going out in the quarters, or making it to the semis?

Answer is obvious for me...

You really think a fully fit Scotland team would fare better against this Australia team? or a Scotland with an extra 60 mins each under their belt v an injury strewn Welsh team?

I honestly get where everyone is coming from, between schedules, injuries, a few sub par performances Scotland have had a difficult 2 weeks, however I just feel that every other home nations would have gone for the jugular and tried to put SA out.

I think all the top nations have rotated players superbly, including Wales who had a far more complex situation to deal with, however Scotland's task was simple, pre tournament I said Scotland should fancy turning the boks over, Japans win shouldve complimented that plan, and the chance to put SA out shouldve been too huge to not have a go at, plus it wouldve meant topping the group and giving them their best ever shot at a RWC semi!

Huge opportunity missed IMO, and a far less risky route to the quarters (but ultimately not a semi) was taken.

Again why do we care about putting south africa out. I'm focusing on us not other teams.

by **Biltong** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 2:00 pm

Fanster wrote:

I think all the top nations have rotated players superbly, including
Wales who had a far more complex situation to deal with, however Scotland's task was simple, pre tournament I said Scotland should fancy turning the boks over, Japans win shouldve complimented that plan, and the chance to put SA out shouldve been too huge to not have a go at, plus it wouldve meant topping the group and giving them their best ever shot at a RWC semi!

I think you are making the mistake of manufacturing different scenarios from the actual events that took place.

Firstly, you need to acknowledge the fact that South zafrica was embarressed by Japan, this is the same team that until prior to the November tour last year had only lost a few games to OZ, pushed NZ hard in every match since 2012 (admittedly only winning one)

In other words you are completely ignoring the strength of this bok team and chosing to think that this Bok team is crap.

Just about no team would have beaten South Africa after that Japanese embarressment, go look at the contact in the match against Samoa and Scotland against the aboks.

They were hit consistently behind the advantage line, in other words the Springbok intensity following the japanese loss has upped tenfold.

But, you can believe what you want.

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 2:03 pm

Biltong wrote:
Fanster wrote:

I think all the top nations have rotated players superbly, including
Wales who had a far more complex situation to deal with, however Scotland's task was simple, pre tournament I said Scotland should fancy turning the boks over, Japans win shouldve complimented that plan, and the chance to put SA out shouldve been too huge to not have a go at, plus it wouldve meant topping the group and giving them their best ever shot at a RWC semi!

I think you are making the mistake of manufacturing different scenarios from the actual events that took place.

Firstly, you need to acknowledge the fact that South zafrica was embarressed by Japan, this is the same team that until prior to the November tour last year had only lost a few games to OZ, pushed NZ hard in every match since 2012 (admittedly only winning one)

In other words you are completely ignoring the strength of this bok team and chosing to think that this Bok team is crap.

Just about no team would have beaten South Africa after that Japanese embarressment, go look at the contact in the match against Samoa and Scotland against the aboks.

They were hit consistently behind the advantage line, in other words the Springbok intensity following the japanese loss has upped tenfold.

But, you can believe what you want.

Naaaa SA are rubbish Very Happy

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 3:44 pm

When did I once say SA were rubbish, I merely stated their results and performances over the last 12 months are nigh on embarrassing by their standards...

If I'm wrong that losses to Japan, home humping by Argentina, poor performances against Oz and NZ, losses to IReland and Wales last autumn, and SA's general performance curve are around where SA are, and are expected to be then forgive me, clearly i'm missing something in SA rugby thats pretty happy with the last 12 months of international rugby.

I personally think theyre struggling, and have been struggling for 12 months, with theyre stand out player being a new lock who has exploded onto the scene.

That said I never said Scotland would beat them, I just can't beleive that Scotland didnt fancy a turnover, putting SA out (which you are all focused on for some reason, despite if you wanting to win a RWC you have to eliminate the top sides to do so) and winning the group giving them a quarter final against an injury strewn Wales, of whom they always contend matches when Wales have been at their strongest.

It's pretty simple from my POV...

Would Scotland prefer to play Wales or Australia in the quarters?

Do Scottish fans really beleive this SA team are outside of their performance level so much it's not worth risking a few key players?

I'm ever the optimist, I thought Scotland could shock SA, granted that was made more difficult given the Japan game, of which Biltong I've recognised a number of times, however the Japan game really highlighted the confidence level of SA, when in the heat of the battle, and with a scrappy last 10 mins or so discipline and nerves can be SA's downfall, it has happened a number of times in the last 12 months.

by **Biltong** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 3:58 pm

fanster

If I'm wrong that losses to Japan, home humping by Argentina, poor performances against Oz and NZ, losses to IReland and Wales last autumn, and SA's general performance curve are around where SA are, and are expected to be then forgive me, clearly i'm missing something in SA rugby thats pretty happy with the last 12 months of international rugby.

I just feel that every other home nations would have gone for the jugular and tried to put SA out.

Ok, lets go over the results you are talking about.

Ireland refused to play rugby against SA, they played tricks in the line out, refused to engage the maul like men, but rather wanted to play chess, they milked penalties and kicked their goals, their tries came by opportunist cross kicks etc.

But Kudos they taught us a lesson, adapt to teams who are up to trickery.

Wales, that match SA dd not have their overseas players available, they were at the end of their season, outside the test window, and even though they were pathetic, Wales won by playing as dour as us and scored more penalties.

Australia we had the match, we dominated Australia and poorly timed subs (our entire front row) 5 meters from our line, Hooper disengaged the scrum early and caught Burger in possession which turned possession over and they scored a try from the ensuing scrum. Game over.

Against NZ we again dominated the match, then on 50 minutes with a man in the bin (NZ) we for some inexplicable reason went to uncontested scrums, again the match swung .

Both those games we played brilliant rugby for the majority, you are looking at the results, and completely ignoring the performance.

Argentina surprised a Bok team who underestimated them, same as Japan.

If that was the only explanation then yeah, the Boks are crap.

However, it has come to light that the Bok camp has been split in two, call it the Meyer and Victor Camp vs the rest.

After the Japan match there was a huge fallout, fist fights, mutiny if you will, and the power struggle has now been solved.

From what I have been told Meyer and Victor won. So it is their gameplan and nothing else.

Last report I heard yesterday is that the camp is happy and focused.

You did suggest any of the home nations will go for the ousting of SA, I am saying to you, once the shyte has been sorted, I doubt any of the home nations will succeed.

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:10 pm

Biltong wrote:fanster
If I'm wrong that losses to Japan, home humping by Argentina, poor performances against Oz and NZ, losses to IReland and Wales last autumn, and SA's general performance curve are around where SA are, and are expected to be then forgive me, clearly i'm missing something in SA rugby thats pretty happy with the last 12 months of international rugby.

I just feel that every other home nations would have gone for the jugular and tried to put SA out.

Ok, lets go over the results you are talking about.

Ireland refused to play rugby against SA, they played tricks in the line out, refused to engage the maul like men, but rather wanted to play chess, they milked penalties and kicked their goals, their tries came by opportunist cross kicks etc.

But Kudos they taught us a lesson, adapt to teams who are up to trickery.

Wales, that match SA dd not have their overseas players available, they were at the end of their season, outside the test window, and even though they were pathetic, Wales won by playing as dour as us and scored more penalties.

Australia we had the match, we dominated Australia and poorly timed subs (our entire front row) 5 meters from our line, Hooper disengaged the scrum early and caught Burger in possession which turned possession over and they scored a try from the ensuing scrum. Game over.

Against NZ we again dominated the match, then on 50 minutes with a man in the bin (NZ) we for some inexplicable reason went to uncontested scrums, again the match swung .

Both those games we played brilliant rugby for the majority, you are looking at the results, and completely ignoring the performance.

Argentina surprised a Bok team who underestimated them, same as Japan.

If that was the only explanation then yeah, the Boks are crap.

However, it has come to light that the Bok camp has been split in two, call it the Meyer and Victor Camp vs the rest.

After the Japan match there was a huge fallout, fist fights, mutiny if you will, and the power struggle has now been solved.

From what I have been told Meyer and Victor won. So it is their gameplan and nothing else.

Last report I heard yesterday is that the camp is happy and focused.

You did suggest any of the home nations will go for the ousting of SA, I am saying to you, once the shyte has been sorted, I doubt any of the home nations will succeed.

No offence mate but the firt few paragraphs are laughable delusion...

Ireland are less male for executing a cute gameplan that put you to the sword = whiney loser talk IMO

Wales were dour, and you were missing players = get over it, we all miss players, play off a long season etc.

You hardly dominated either Aus or NZ, you were competitive for the majority, and had the better in patches, but ultimately weren't capable of beating either, although the last score in the Aus game couldve gone either way I have to agree! You were not brilliant at any point in those 2 games.

Argentina shocked you, then Japan shocked you? How many more times can you be shocked before taking responsibility for the performance or results, it's not like Argentina stole the win at the death, or Japan got lucky with refs objectivenesss in certain phacets of play, you guys were outplayed in one, and matched in another.

The good play coming out of the SA camp is all very individual, theres not a huge amount of unity, and wether all is resolved or not the last 12 months results are either:

A) better than SA expect

B) around where SA think they are, or

C) Well below par.

I've never said they were bad, but you have to be realistic and see that SA are not in a great place, they may well go on to win the group, beat Wales/Aus in the quarters, maybe even reach the final, but do you honestly believe they have that in the locker, that they, as in previous years were too much of a match for all home nations? Theyve been beaten by anyone in touch in the last 20 mins over the last 12 months, worryingly for you and SA fans I get, but lets at least be honest about it.

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:14 pm

I feel I must apologise for the last post, the language used was probably too strong and context if difficult in text.

by **Biltong** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:15 pm

Fanster wrote:
Biltong wrote:fanster
If I'm wrong that losses to Japan, home humping by Argentina, poor performances against Oz and NZ, losses to IReland and Wales last autumn, and SA's general performance curve are around where SA are, and are expected to be then forgive me, clearly i'm missing something in SA rugby thats pretty happy with the last 12 months of international rugby.

I just feel that every other home nations would have gone for the jugular and tried to put SA out.

Ok, lets go over the results you are talking about.

Ireland refused to play rugby against SA, they played tricks in the line out, refused to engage the maul like men, but rather wanted to play chess, they milked penalties and kicked their goals, their tries came by opportunist cross kicks etc.

But Kudos they taught us a lesson, adapt to teams who are up to trickery.

Wales, that match SA dd not have their overseas players available, they were at the end of their season, outside the test window, and even though they were pathetic, Wales won by playing as dour as us and scored more penalties.

Australia we had the match, we dominated Australia and poorly timed subs (our entire front row) 5 meters from our line, Hooper disengaged the scrum early and caught Burger in possession which turned possession over and they scored a try from the ensuing scrum. Game over.

Against NZ we again dominated the match, then on 50 minutes with a man in the bin (NZ) we for some inexplicable reason went to uncontested scrums, again the match swung .

Both those games we played brilliant rugby for the majority, you are looking at the results, and completely ignoring the performance.

Argentina surprised a Bok team who underestimated them, same as Japan.

If that was the only explanation then yeah, the Boks are crap.

However, it has come to light that the Bok camp has been split in two, call it the Meyer and Victor Camp vs the rest.

After the Japan match there was a huge fallout, fist fights, mutiny if you will, and the power struggle has now been solved.

From what I have been told Meyer and Victor won. So it is their gameplan and nothing else.

Last report I heard yesterday is that the camp is happy and focused.

You did suggest any of the home nations will go for the ousting of SA, I am saying to you, once the shyte has been sorted, I doubt any of the home nations will succeed.

No offence mate but the firt few paragraphs are laughable delusion...

Ireland are less male for executing a cute gameplan that put you to the sword = whiney loser talk IMO

Wales were dour, and you were missing players = get over it, we all miss players, play off a long season etc.

You hardly dominated either Aus or NZ, you were competitive for the majority, and had the better in patches, but ultimately weren't capable of beating either, although the last score in the Aus game couldve gone either way I have to agree! You were not brilliant at any point in those 2 games.

Argentina shocked you, then Japan shocked you? How many more times can you be shocked before taking responsibility for the performance or results, it's not like Argentina stole the win at the death, or Japan got lucky with refs objectivenesss in certain phacets of play, you guys were outplayed in one, and matched in another.

The good play coming out of the SA camp is all very individual, theres not a huge amount of unity, and wether all is resolved or not the last 12 months results are either:

A) better than SA expect

B) around where SA think they are, or

C) Well below par.

I've never said they were bad, but you have to be realistic and see that SA are not in a great place, they may well go on to win the group, beat Wales/Aus in the quarters, maybe even reach the final, but do you honestly believe they have that in the locker, that they, as in previous years were too much of a match for all home nations? Theyve been beaten by anyone in touch in the last 20 mins over the last 12 months, worryingly for you and SA fans I get, but lets at least be honest about it.

I suppose I should bow down to your superior attitude, the go to response is always "whining loser" or "excuses" or "get over it"

You made statements, I countered, you dismissed them with a superior attitude, Fine, let's leave it at that, you know better.

by **RDW** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:15 pm

So, I hear there's a game on tomorrow? Rolling Eyes

by **Biltong** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:19 pm

By the way Fanster, my last comment on this, I have said from the start SA wll not win this world cup, We won't be able to beat Australia or New Zealand.

But deluded I am not.

by **Biltong** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:19 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:So, I hear there's a game on tomorrow?

A few actually, looking forward to this one.

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:21 pm

No need to get antsy, my attitude is from a place of huge respect for SA rugby, and in particular the style SA rugby employ. To be dissapointed in the last 12 months results is hardly superior, if you weren't dissapointed I would be amazed!

However as I said my language may have been a bit harsh and I see how that could upset, so I did and do apologise prefusely for that.

Also sorry to the Scottish guys, the thread seems to have taken a turn, it would hardly be the first lol

As everyone does I hope for a hugely competitive and exciting knockout phase, a touch easier for Wales if possible, meaning SA going out wouldve been a big boost, but ultimately I hope we all would like to see 4 intense and exciting quarter finals, 2 great semi finals, and a final that promote the game worldwide! Ale

by **RDW** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:28 pm

Fanster wrote:

Also sorry to the Scottish guys, the thread seems to have taken a turn, it would hardly be the first lol

Touché!

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:31 pm

Fanster wrote:No need to get antsy, my attitude is from a place of huge respect for SA rugby, and in particular the style SA rugby employ. To be dissapointed in the last 12 months results is hardly superior, if you weren't dissapointed I would be amazed!

However as I said my language may have been a bit harsh and I see how that could upset, so I did and do apologise prefusely for that.

Also sorry to the Scottish guys, the thread seems to have taken a turn, it would hardly be the first lol

As everyone does I hope for a hugely competitive and exciting knockout phase, a touch easier for Wales if possible, meaning SA going out wouldve been a big boost, but ultimately I hope we all would like to see 4 intense and exciting quarter finals, 2 great semi finals, and a final that promote the game worldwide!

Sorry Fanster - but I am going to have to DISAGREE again

I am hoping we stuff them easily and they are not at all competitive - it is a lot less stressfull laughing

by Fanster Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:32 pm

Riskysports wrote:
Fanster wrote:No need to get antsy, my attitude is from a place of huge respect for SA rugby, and in particular the style SA rugby employ. To be dissapointed in the last 12 months results is hardly superior, if you weren't dissapointed I would be amazed!

However as I said my language may have been a bit harsh and I see how that could upset, so I did and do apologise prefusely for that.

Also sorry to the Scottish guys, the thread seems to have taken a turn, it would hardly be the first lol

As everyone does I hope for a hugely competitive and exciting knockout phase, a touch easier for Wales if possible, meaning SA going out wouldve been a big boost, but ultimately I hope we all would like to see 4 intense and exciting quarter finals, 2 great semi finals, and a final that promote the game worldwide!

Sorry Fanster - but I am going to have to DISAGREE again

I am hoping we stuff them easily and they are not at all competitive - it is a lot less stressfull

You mean IF you make it there? censored

by GLove39 Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:35 pm

We have an exclusive preview with @Scotlandteam ahead of the Samoa game tonight at 6.30 on STV Edinburgh

also on STV Glasgow, but Frak people in the North.

Seriously what's the point of STV if they don't broadcast this sort of thing nationally?

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:39 pm

Fanster wrote:
Riskysports wrote:
Fanster wrote:No need to get antsy, my attitude is from a place of huge respect for SA rugby, and in particular the style SA rugby employ. To be dissapointed in the last 12 months results is hardly superior, if you weren't dissapointed I would be amazed!

However as I said my language may have been a bit harsh and I see how that could upset, so I did and do apologise prefusely for that.

Also sorry to the Scottish guys, the thread seems to have taken a turn, it would hardly be the first lol

As everyone does I hope for a hugely competitive and exciting knockout phase, a touch easier for Wales if possible, meaning SA going out wouldve been a big boost, but ultimately I hope we all would like to see 4 intense and exciting quarter finals, 2 great semi finals, and a final that promote the game worldwide!

Sorry Fanster - but I am going to have to DISAGREE again

I am hoping we stuff them easily and they are not at all competitive - it is a lot less stressfull

You mean IF you make it there?

the NEXT game IS knock out for us :-)

by **RDW** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:43 pm

GLove39 wrote:
We have an exclusive preview with @Scotlandteam ahead of the Samoa game tonight at 6.30 on STV Edinburgh
also on STV Glasgow, but Frak people in the North.

Seriously what's the point of the North? ~~STV if they don't broadcast this sort of thing nationally?~~

by GLove39 Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:48 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:
GLove39 wrote:
We have an exclusive preview with @Scotlandteam ahead of the Samoa game tonight at 6.30 on STV Edinburgh
also on STV Glasgow, but Frak people in the North.

Seriously what's the point of the North? ~~STV if they don't broadcast this sort of thing nationally?~~

Well given the decline of the oil industry that's actually a fair question!

by **RDW** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 4:49 pm

GLove39 wrote:
RDW_Scotland wrote:
GLove39 wrote:
We have an exclusive preview with @Scotlandteam ahead of the Samoa game tonight at 6.30 on STV Edinburgh
also on STV Glasgow, but Frak people in the North.

Seriously what's the point of the North? ~~STV if they don't broadcast this sort of thing nationally?~~

Well given the decline of the oil industry that's actually a fair question!

There's an opportunity for you Glove - time to get the Lego animation industry booming!

by R!skysports Fri 09 Oct 2015, 5:04 pm

So what is everyone's prediction for the match tomorrow

I think we will be 10 up at half time and 21 up at full time

by funnyExiledScot Fri 09 Oct 2015, 5:09 pm

Riskysports wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:
RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What would have happened if we played players like Ford / Russell et al who were perhaps a bit injured and very jaded from playing a lot of rugby already in this torunament and we lost key players? I don't think we had the ability to contain that Boks side at full strength anyway.

So why risk guys we know won't make a difference against an angry and wounded South Africa side who after their complacency against Japan went out to crush all who stood before them?

That match was a lost cause and Vern probably knew that. It's a canny move to keep your powder dry for the match that determines our fate rather than focus on "dumping out" South Africa as you put it.

Cotter's job is to get us through, not "dump out" the Boks and IMO he has done enough to ensure that is the case.

Well we'll never know will we?

If we are prepared to admit that it's a "lost cause" trying to beat the Boks and our first choice players who were omitted "won't make a difference", why should they bother playing us at all when we go begging cap in hand for Summer and AI fixtures?

We can mither over the fixture list all we want, but that's what the minnows traditionally do. We knew the schedule and it was perfectly possible to play full strength in three of the group games, aiming to peak for the SA game. We chose not to.

Really ??

name a team that has managed to play full strength in 3 games in 10 days - please do

That isn't what I said or suggested though is it.

My proposal was to rotate for the USA game, rather than for South Africa. I genuinely believe our second string would have defeated USA over 80 minutes, particularly with our actual second string on the pitch, rather than the likes of Strokosch and Wilson.

Sounds like you all think I'm being too optimistic. Perhaps you're right. We should just accept that we are second tier and the Boks et al will defeat us as a formality, and we need to now be at full strength to beat USA. I think we are better than that, and I don't see us breaking out of this cycle of defeat until we start believing that too. Just look at the job Gatland has done with Wales, and tell me that you don't want some of that. He continuously sends Wales to play the ABs and never ever shirks from the challenge against the top sides. You have to start somewhere.

Hey ho. If we win tomorrow most of us will no doubt hail this tournie a success, regardless of whether Wales or Australia wipe the floor with us, and Cotter will be hailed as "shrewd" for navigating us to the knock-out games.

by AirHOrse Fri 09 Oct 2015, 5:10 pm

I reckon we won't be up by too much by the end of the first half, maybe only 3-6. But I think we will win by a comfortable 20 points or so in the end!

by funnyExiledScot Fri 09 Oct 2015, 5:12 pm

Riskysports wrote:So what is everyone's prediction for the match tomorrow

I think we will be 10 up at half time and 21 up at full time

Agree - I've got us down to win by 20 points. I suspect the first 20 will be close, possibly seeing us behind, but we'll steady the ship before half time and pull away in the second half, particularly when Strauss comes on for Wilson to restore us to 8 proper forwards.

by GLove39 Fri 09 Oct 2015, 5:13 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:
GLove39 wrote:
RDW_Scotland wrote:
GLove39 wrote:
We have an exclusive preview with @Scotlandteam ahead of the Samoa game tonight at 6.30 on STV Edinburgh
also on STV Glasgow, but Frak people in the North.

Seriously what's the point of the North? ~~STV if they don't broadcast this sort of thing nationally?~~

Well given the decline of the oil industry that's actually a fair question!

There's an opportunity for you Glove - time to get the Lego animation industry booming!

I don't want rivals...

by GLove39 Fri 09 Oct 2015, 5:24 pm

As for tomorrow, tight first half. Samoan sense of injustice to fire them up and eventually over the edge. Couple of cards, we pull away. Big Sean comes on & gets a try on cap 100 to round things off thumbsup

by GLove39 Fri 09 Oct 2015, 6:51 pm

Also anyone able to recommend any good watering holes in Nooocastle?

by jimbopip Fri 09 Oct 2015, 8:10 pm

Glove, straight to the naughty step. Did His Bruness not provide a four page dissertation on Noocassel watering holes?
The Bridge Inn down the bottom of Gray Street is good. Otherwise we drank in the Fanzone but I can't Tonga's 14 supporters creating as much atmosphere as thirty thousand bellowing Bokkies.

by Guest Fri 09 Oct 2015, 8:29 pm

Just read this whole thing through and tbh I agree with fanster and fes 100%.

Anyway no need to keep talking about it. Onward.

Scotland behind by 4 at half time and to win by 7. Unconvincing.

by **RDW** Fri 09 Oct 2015, 8:49 pm

St James's Park turf being ripped to shreds tonight - it's going to be a right state by tomorrow.

by 21st Century Schizoid Man Fri 09 Oct 2015, 9:03 pm

jimbopip wrote:Glove, straight to the naughty step. Did His Bruness not provide a four page dissertation on Noocassel watering holes?
The Bridge Inn down the bottom of Gray Street is good. Otherwise we drank in the Fanzone but I can't Tonga's 14 supporters creating as much atmosphere as thirty thousand bellowing Bokkies.

Jimbo, are you aware we are playing Samoa tomorrow or am I missing something here? Erm

by GLove39 Fri 09 Oct 2015, 10:00 pm

jimbopip wrote:Glove, straight to the naughty step. Did His Bruness not provide a four page dissertation on Noocassel watering holes?
The Bridge Inn down the bottom of Gray Street is good. Otherwise we drank in the Fanzone but I can't Tonga's 14 supporters creating as much atmosphere as thirty thousand bellowing Bokkies.

Didn't bookmark it Sad

by jimbopip Fri 09 Oct 2015, 10:23 pm

Schiz,well spotted.I was thinking about tonight's match and typing about tomorrow's. Can't feccin multitask.

Samoa have been almost as disappointing as a Greg Laidlaw box kick. They'll try to batter us for ten minutes then get bored and start looking for family in the stands.

by Sponsored content