6N 2016: Scotland v England, 6 February

First topic message reminder :

    
SCOTLAND v ENGLAND
6 February 2016
KO: 16:50 GMT
Murrayfield, Edinburgh

Live on BBC, RTE, FR2, DMAX / ITV(H)

Referee: John Lacey (Ireland)
Touch judges: [tbc]
Television match official: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

133 Played 133
42 Won 73
18 Drawn 18
73 Lost 42
1,132 Points 1,547

B. Recent Form

14 March 2015
Twickenham, London
25 – 13 to England

8 February 2014
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
0 – 20 to England

2 February 2013
Twickenham, London
38 – 18 to England

4 February 2012
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
6 – 13 to England

1 October 2011
Eden Park, Auckland
16 – 12 to England

C. Teams

SCOTLAND

15. Stuart Hogg
14. Sean Maitland
13. Mark Bennett
12. Matt Scott
11. Tommy Seymour
10. Finn Russell
09. Greig Laidlaw (captain)

01. Alasdair Dickinson
02. Ross Ford
03. Willem Nel
04. Richie Gray
05. Jonny Gray
06. John Barclay
07. John Hardie
08. David Denton

16. Stuart McInally
17. Gordon Reid
18. Zander Fagerson
19. Tim Swinson
20. Blair Cowan
21. Sam Hidalgo-Clyne
22. Duncan Weir
23. Duncan Taylor

ENGLAND

15. Mike Brown
14. Anthony Watson
13. Jonathan Joseph
12. Owen Farrell
11. Jack Nowell
10. George Ford
09. Danny Care

01. Joe Marler
02. Dylan Hartley
03. Dan Cole
04. Joe Launchbury
05. George Kruis
06. Chris Robshaw
07. James Haskell
08. Billy Vunipola

16. Jamie George
17. Mako Vunipola
18. Paul Hill
19. Courtney Lawes
20. Jack Clifford
21. Ben Youngs
22. Alex Goode
23. Ollie Devoto

Looking at Brookes being put back in the squad it appears Jones is wanting to go with the more established players in general rather than blood anyone new. We could possibly be seeing Clifford and maybe Devoto from the bench but everyone else has been around the squad before or a fair few years into their established careers. After Lancaster plenty of people did want to see the immediate future as the be all and end all.

As a Scotland fan I'm fine with Itoje being overlooked, although I don't think England will struggle with Launchbury and Kruis (the combination I suspect Eddie will go for).

The idea that Scotland would be favourites for this is laughable. The very fact that Eddie Jones has wheeled it out as part of least subtle media strategy since the last time Gatland opened his mouth is testimony to that.

The England pack will be hugely physical and likely match us for international experience. Whilst I think we have better players than over the last 5 years, the gulf between the teams on each and every occassion we've met during that period has been clear.

I think a combined team (based on likely starting XVs) would look something like this:

1.M Vunipola 2.Hartley 3.WP Nel 4.J Gray 5.Launchbury 6.Robshaw 7.Hardie 8.B Vunipola 9.B Youngs 10.Ford 11.Seymour 12.Scott 13.Joseph 14.Watson 15.Brown

I managed 5 Scots, although you could argue the toss with Brown vs Hogg (but certainly not on form this season). I suspect a few Exeter fans will probably quibble Seymour over Nowell as well.

Scott only makes it because Jones seems to be lining up Farrell at 12, which I think is a mistake. A fit Tuilagi at 12 would have me really worried, particularly up against Scott.

So, I make England clear favourites for this. What I would say however is that whilst I haven't seen a path to victory for Scotland for a few years, I do think this team has the attacking firepower to cause England problems, particularly if Hardie/Cowan can get turnover ball quickly into the hands of Finn Russell. Laidlaw is also a steady operator with the boot and a shrewd and experienced captain which is worth a lot in these sorts of games.

Sorry Beshocked. Itoje was poor in the first half. Some coaches would have sub'd him at half time. He did look very good in the second half but that overall performance shows there is an element of laziness about him that he will have to shake off very soon. England will not buy only 40 minutes.

First time I've seen Itoje judged as being lazy. I doubt many would have subbed him, quality player.

beshocked wrote:

I keep banging on about Itoje because I think he's an exciting talent that should be introduced asap.

Should have mentioned it mate, I had no idea

Any thoughts on Jamie George?

For me three things could prove crucial for a Scotland win:
1) the weather, for once I want the weather to be reasonable! Even without Dunbar and Bennett a midfield of Scott and Taylor will pose a lot of questions of the English midfield if weather conditions allow us to move the ball quickly.
2) WP Nell needs to get scrum dominance for two reasons: it will produce penalties and the resulting territory from those pens and secondly it will get under Hartley's skin ( leading to who knows what form of indiscretions?) if we get on top in the scrum.
3) Hardie has to show the kind of form he did in the Samoa game: smashing everything in front of him and turning over ball he had no rights to win.
With quick ball and scrum dominance we should be able to get over the line for a first round 6N's match victory for only the second time and get our hands on the old Calculatta cup for the first time since 2008!!!

Bambam Jamie George didn't play on the weekend so I can't comment on him.

Itoje was man of the match though and deservedly so after his 2nd half performance. If you can't mention a player after that then when can you?

englandglory4ever Itoje has been playing well this season, would have been foolish to sub him. Mccall did make a smart tactical change though - took off Rhodes at half time and brought on Brown. Was made to combat Louw who was excellent for Bath.

As no 7 & 1/2 says I've never heard Itoje being described as lazy. Personally I think it shows good character to perform so well after a quiet first half.

Think it's a big mistake to not have him on the bench vs Scotland.

Here's a question .. if we win against Scotland and everyone has a collective stormer, would you guys want to see the same 23 ahead of Italy?

Or would you still want to blood guys like Daly, Itoje etc

Personally, if we get off to a good start, I'd keep the 23 the same barring injury (unless its to drop Goode which I wholeheartedly encourage), and look to put 50 points on Italy, 2 good wins will really give us some momentum ahead of the Wales game

Hard to say without knowing who the team for Scotland is. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw Lawes Launchbury, 10 minutes for Clifford and a win on saturday. I don't think currently think (my mind is constantly being changed though) we'll see Jones seriously blood anyone until the summer tour.

Personally I'd have introduced a few more debuts/additions to a handful of caps against Scotland so yes i'd do it whatever the result for Italy.

What about if it goes wrong...? Do you think Jones will drop players and shuffle the concept...?or is Jones the type of guy to stick to his guns...?

It's funny. The initial squad looked quite brave and bold but when you boil it down Eddie Jones could very well be starting with a very steady and Lancaster-ish pack:

1.M Vunipola 2.Hartley 3.Cole 4.Launchbury 5.Lawes 6.Robshaw 7.Haskell 8.B Vunipola

The media (The Sunday Times) indicated that Jones' squad suggested that Lancaster had got it wrong! By my reckoning he's pretty much repeating the Lancaster XV hook, line and sinker - including the Lancaster/Farrell brainwave of playing Owen Farrell out of position at 12.

What happens on the pitch will clearly be the measure of Jones, but so far he's been pretty conservative.

maestegmafia wrote:What about if it goes wrong...? Do you think Jones will drop players and shuffle the concept...?or is Jones the type of guy to stick to his guns...?

I think the only possible changes might see someone like Itoje come in if the weakness is in the pack, possibly Kvesic/Clifford if Haskell isn't up to the job, and maybe a change at 10/12 if the Ford/Farrell experiment doesn't work

Outside of that, its the side that we would all have picked, tough to see how else it could be improved

Still think you need to blood guys like Daly and Itoje because squads win championships. Injuries happen and preparation has to be there.

We've seen in the AP Quins and Saints losing with key personnel absent. Sarries would have likely lost without Itoje. A team needs to be able to deal with absentees because rugby is about the collective. There is no guarantee England will keep the 23 they play vs Scotland completely fit throughout the 6 nations. Need to use the squad intelligently.

If you can't tinker against Italy then when can you? Some posters say England shouldn't have blooded players in the RWC warm ups, believe players shouldn't be blooded vs Scotland.

When then? Do you want it vs the strongest teams?

Good form should be rewarded too. Daly and Itoje in my opinion deserve to be in that 23 regardless what others say.


FES agree the squad itself was bold. The 23 isn't. Same old sadly.

I'd have had Itoje on the bench as well but I suspect that Jones sees the Kruis vs Lawes competition as more keenly fought than Launchbury vs Itoje, and that a combination of Launchbury/Itoje would lack a lineout man. In other words he's expecting Launchbury to play the 80, and is looking for Lawes/Kruis to share duties.

Daly is on scorching form but again I can't see past Joseph at 13, begging the question as to where Daly would feature. Perhaps he'll get a start against Italy, although I suspect Jones will want to get Tuilagi back into his XV soonish and bed down the Tuilagi/Joseph combination, which is what I would suggest England do. Daly may have to wait until the summer.

FES I am suggesting Itoje on the bench with Lawes missing out. Lawes IMO doesn't deserve to be in the 23 based on form. I know that some England fans think certain players should be handed England caps on a platter but I think some indication of form has to be there.

Oh and I would play Kruis for the full 80 instead, bring on Itoje for Launchbury with 20 to go vs Scotland to bring back the lock combo of Saracens. I believe in combinations.

Then again I am an England fan who wouldn't start Hartley.

Well I wouldn't have Goode on the bench for starters, I wouldn't have Devoto in the 23 either.

Isn't Manu injured again?

I don't think many people would disagree that the team being touted, leaked, bounded about at the moment is a bit of a disappointment to any rugby fans.

A positive England team would have most likely not had both Farrell and Ford, I would say Daly over Joseph on form, Itoje over Robshaw ? Jamie George in the front row, Clifford in the back row.

Having watched these lads play at Prem and Euro level, most people would say they are confident in making the step up, excited by it.

What Jones is most likely doing by not having a major reshuffle is not nailing his colours to the mast.

If, for example, he brought Itoje in, made him captain and it was a bad call, dropping such a young player from glory would be a big knock for him.

If Robshaw, Haskell or a second row look weak, he can bring in Itoje and give the guy confidence.

Maybe he is applying that integrationprinciple across the board...?

If the team touted is picked for Murrayfield, I don't think they will do well. Scotland are a good side with good players. I would say they are favourites for this match, almost because of recent history not despite it.

Should be a cracking game.

The suggested team will surely have too much for Scotland. Pretty confident still.

Some people on here still don't get Eddie and/or have very short and selective memories.

Eddie wants to win this and has selected a squad he feels will do the job. There is no room for benevolent charity or gambling with unknown test entities. New faces will be "tried" when injuries occur.

This is also not the same team that Lancaster would select. Lancaster would most likely start with T.Youngs, Cole, Attwood,Wood, Robshaw (Capt 7), Barritt with Thomas, Wilson, Haskell, Wigglesworth benched. There could be other changes I've overlooked. eg, I hope Care starts instead of Youngs.

This will be a much different side and coached by a completely new set of coaches. Things will be quite different IMO. The result might not be though but I do expect an England win.

Short memories? Ha! It's not me whose forgotten about the RWC.

It's not about charity. It's about picking on merit. That means picking players who are on form. Getting the right balance between form and experience. Experience is good of course but a player can only gain international experience if picked.

If you discount a player because they've never played international rugby then you get stuck with the same old players with no fresh blood.

Lancaster picked not fully fit players like Barritt and Morgan in the RWC - look how that turned out.....

Scotland have a lack of experience themselves but it didn't stop their players in the RWC. Hardie is highly rated in Scotland despite his lack of caps, same with Nel.

Also picking players who are an unknown quantity can also work as an advantage because the opposition might not know how to counter them.

Disagree. Lancaster would have likely started that very team. Haskell was a Lancaster selection, Farrell at 12 a Lancaster selection, Hartley at 2, a Lancaster selection.

Oh great have to rely on injuries to get a breath of fresh air. I don't particularly want to hope that players get injured.

England need to look forward, not backwards.

Lancaster generally showed he was willing to put people in for debuts if he felt they were good enough.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lancaster generally showed he was willing to put people in for debuts if he felt they were good enough.

Most of the time, it was injury that forced him to do so.

Really? Who did he bring through to give a debut to or give more caps to rather than turn to an experienced hand?

M and B Vunipola, Launchbury, T Youngs, Wood, Robshaw, Ford, Watson, Nowell, Joseph. Sure there's a few more. Definitely more he gave a chance to who didn't take it. Not everyone given a chance will take it. I wouldn't describe him as a coach scared to take a risk.

Trying players out in the hope they go well is not a good reason to select them over a good experienced test player. Select new players by all means if the coach thinks they are better than the incumbent but defo not on a 'maybe' which so many seem to advocate.

"If you discount a player because they've never played international rugby then you get stuck with the same old players with no fresh blood."

And what the hell is wrong with that IF they are considered to be the best available. Would you have kicked out Richie McCaw because he was too old? The England 2003 team were called Dad's army but they bought home the trophy. No Eddie wants to win. He will pick what he thinks is the best we have irrespective of how old or how young they are. If he finds someone better than the incumbent then I expect him to get selected. eg, I rate Itoje as an excellent prospect but he didn't do enough over 80 mins on the weekend to say he is the best we have.

no 7 & 1/2

Robshaw had to be picked because Moody retired didn't he?
Joseph got picked at 13 because Manu was injured.
Nowell because of injuries to other wingers.
Ford - only started because of injury to Farrell.
T.Youngs has warmed the bench more often that not. Only starting when Hartley has been absent.
Billy in because of injury to Morgan.
Mako in only when Marler has been injured.

You are right that occasionally Lancaster took risks and some didn't work.

More often or not he gambled and it backfired.

Robshaw and Wood were always going to be given chances, and were. Joseph got his chance early doors and it was injury to himself which kept him from pushing at key times. Nowell was picked above Ashton. Ford was always going to get a chance as obviously was Farrell forgot to mention him. Yougns got his chance no 2 ways about it. Mako and Billy both got chances above the Easters and more experienced loose heads.

Sorry but he did give young and inexperienced players their chance. It's a bit revisionist to suggest otherwise.

englandglory4ever

You might have a point about a settled 23 if England were the best in the world or even top 4.

England are currently world cup failures, 8th in the world, the team that failed to get out of their pool in their own RWC. In those circumstances a change is needed.

Richie Mccaw? Ha! Whose our equivalent?

The England 2003 team were the best side in the world, our current side isn't close at the moment.

It seems to me that you have ridiculously high expectations if you are going to criticise Itoje for not doing more vs Bath. He wasn't perfect, I'll admit that, quiet first 40 but influential 2nd half and picked up the man of the match gong. Plus you can't base it on that one game, he's been excellent this season.

If England to aspire to be better than 6 nations runners up and world cup failures then change has to be made.

Selections that would make Lancaster proud is not that.

beshocked wrote:FES I am suggesting Itoje on the bench with Lawes missing out. Lawes IMO doesn't deserve to be in the 23 based on form. I know that some England fans think certain players should be handed England caps on a platter but I think some indication of form has to be there.

Oh and I would play Kruis for the full 80 instead, bring on Itoje for Launchbury with 20 to go vs Scotland to bring back the lock combo of Saracens. I believe in combinations.

Then again I am an England fan who wouldn't start Hartley.

Well I wouldn't have Goode on the bench for starters, I wouldn't have Devoto in the 23 either.

Isn't Manu injured again?

I think where Jones is coming from is that he sees Launchbury as his main man, and certainly a player with great fitness who can go the full 80 minutes at a high level. I suspect that Kruis will partner him as Launchbury requires a main jumper as his partner (i.e. Launchbury and Itoje wouldn't work as a combination). So it then comes down to who you would want to replace during the game, Launchbury or Kruis. My suspicion is that Eddie Jones thinks he'd take off Kruis, therefore Lawes makes sense on the bench. I'd probably go with your option to be honest. I do think Itoje is ready.

I wouldn't start Hartley either, and I certainly wouldn't have made him captain. I think it's an awful decision.

FES glad someone agrees with me.

I can see that point but I think it's a negative mindset. I hope that both Launchbury and Itoje are encouraged to make more of a role at lineout time. More prominent jumpers never harms a team in my opinion.

I should add that the Saracens lineout wasn't exactly harmed by no George or Kruis on the weekend, think it was 100%. It's important to have the set piece working like clockwork even without key men.

Well it's not long before the game now. Though if I was Scottish I would be feeling quietly optimistic, not the strongest England side, potential weaknesses to be exploited. At home, confident from RWC. Facing some English players not in form.

Good news for Scotland - Mark Bennett has recovered and will take part in training fully this week.

12 Scott
13 Bennett
14 Taylor

Good news for England. Put Taylor in his weakest position. He was fine on the weekend on the wing but lacks pace in that position.

Have a rusty Bennett playing too. Sometimes rushing back an alleged saviour can backfire.

We'll see if he's truly properly ready.

Agreed that it's not ideal to play Taylor on the wing, but currently it is either him or Sean Lamont and Taylor is on red hot form this season for Sarries. And Lamont should be put out to stud.

I agree with your concerns on Bennett but he's played a lot of rugby this season so hopefully get back up to speed quickly.  I just hope he genuinely is fit - would hate for him to play this and get a longer term injury.

I'm less concerned about throwing him back in over Dunbar say, who can barely play 2 games in a row without picking up a new injury just now - he's had hardly any gametime in over a year.

Anyone got any spare tickets for this??

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Anyone got any spare tickets for this??

Potentially. We have 2 spare sitting with us but I've got a bit of a queue of people lined up so far!

Taylor has been playing well for Sarries primarily at centre.

It's similar to the situation Farrell could find himself in, playing well at 10 but forced into the 12 shirt.

I think Taylor can do a job at wing. He did on the weekend but I personally didn't think his performance was as prominent as that at centre.

As for Bennett we'll see. Sometimes players are rushed back before they are ready because of the necessity.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Anyone got any spare tickets for this??

Potentially.  We have 2 spare sitting with us but I've got a bit of a queue of people lined up so far!

Presumably I'll be towards the back of that queue...

This might have been mentioned before but why is Haskell replacing Robshaw at 7? How is that an upgrade?

After the world cup wasn't everyone banging on about playing a natural 7 instead of shoehorning in a 6.5? Why not be bold and play kvesic and develop him

RDW_Scotland wrote:Good news for Scotland - Mark Bennett has recovered and will take part in training fully this week.

12 Scott
13 Bennett
14 Taylor

Is McVisser definitely injured?  Hadn't seen his name on any of the injury reports so thought he might be fit.

Maitland played for London Irish at the weekend, so despite his lack of game-time I'd start him and pop Taylor on the bench.

Beginning to get very excited about this match.

Visser has been ruled out the first two games.

Hamstring injury too so he could do with having a game or two under his belt so he can regain some confidence with it

I'd personally have Seymour/Maitland on the wings. I don't think we need to use Taylor there. I'd rather have Taylor at 13 and give Bennett an extra week to recover.

I forgot that Maitland was back playing at the weekend - I agree that I'd have him instead.

If Bennett genuinely is fit then play him with Scott and have Taylor on the bench.

Taylor would also be quite suited to dealing with "Gatland ball" in the next fixture. Big defensive hitter and also strong over the ball. I really don't want Bennett rushed back into anything and will be furious if the powers that be drag him into this and it results in a longer injury.

RDW_Scotland wrote:Visser has been ruled out the first two games.

Hamstring injury too so he could do with having a game or two under his belt so he can regain some confidence with it

That's a shame, he was in red hot form.

Hogg, Seymour, Bennett, Scott, Maitland, Russell, Laidlaw

Hidalgo-Clyne, Weir, Taylor


We've really missed Dunbar's defensive work, he's outstanding over the ball.

I wouldn't rush Bennett back, Taylor has been playing well and merits his start. Bennett hasn't played for nearly a month.

Taylor must start. Bennett on the bench. We don't have any idea what his match fitness is like.

i see that according to Jim telfer, not much point boring, conservative england bothering to turn up.

lol a link to his troll article would really brighten up my day Tiger!

True Raven wrote:This might have been mentioned before but why is Haskell replacing Robshaw at 7?  How is that an upgrade?

After the world cup wasn't everyone banging on about playing a natural 7 instead of shoehorning in a 6.5?  Why not be bold and play kvesic and develop him

Either Eddie is as cunning as a fox who's just been appointed Professor of Cunning at Oxford.

Or he's Baldrick's dad.

LondonTiger wrote:i see that according to Jim telfer, not much point boring, conservative england bothering to turn up.

This is Jim Telfer's annual media contribution. Pretty sure it's the same article as last year.

True Raven wrote:This might have been mentioned before but why is Haskell replacing Robshaw at 7?  How is that an upgrade?

After the world cup wasn't everyone banging on about playing a natural 7 instead of shoehorning in a 6.5?  Why not be bold and play kvesic and develop him

It's not in most of our minds. Jones is likely coming to Murrayfield with a very pragmatic game plan, he wants to make Scotland play from their half and wait for an error under pressure. Whilst Russell, Scott and Hogg are all capable of excellent attacking play they can also produce brain farts at important moments.

It sounds like Jones just wants his 7 to hit rucks to secure quick ball when in possession and slow some opposition ball down where possible rather than play on the edge of legality at the breakdown in search of turnovers but risking penalties. We will probably see a lot of Scotland running at a well set defensive line with England either waiting for a mistake to pounce on or trying to force Scotland to kick from where the Ford - Farrell axis should allow England to command the aerial ping pong.

I.e. it seems he'd rather sacrifice a turnover or 2 in return for not risking breakdown penalties which give up territory.

The counter argument to this is of course that Haskell can give away some dumb breakdown penalties himself - this is why I'd have started Kvesic. Perhaps Jones thinks he can get the best from Haskell with simple instructions of hit lots of rucks and offer yourself to carry where possible. On his day Haskell can be excellent so perhaps it will come off...

funnyExiledScot wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:i see that according to Jim telfer, not much point boring, conservative england bothering to turn up.

This is Jim Telfer's annual media contribution. Pretty sure it's the same article as last year.

Wheres the article?

king_carlos wrote:

True Raven wrote:This might have been mentioned before but why is Haskell replacing Robshaw at 7?  How is that an upgrade?

After the world cup wasn't everyone banging on about playing a natural 7 instead of shoehorning in a 6.5?  Why not be bold and play kvesic and develop him

It's not in most of our minds. Jones is likely coming to Murrayfield with a very pragmatic game plan, he wants to make Scotland play from their half and wait for an error under pressure. Whilst Russell, Scott and Hogg are all capable of excellent attacking play they can also produce brain farts at important moments.

It sounds like Jones just wants his 7 to hit rucks to secure quick ball when in possession and slow some opposition ball down where possible rather than play on the edge of legality at the breakdown in search of turnovers but risking penalties. We will probably see a lot of Scotland running at a well set defensive line with England either waiting for a mistake to pounce on or trying to force Scotland to kick from where the Ford - Farrell axis should allow England to command the aerial ping pong.

I.e. it seems he'd rather sacrifice a turnover or 2 in return for not risking breakdown penalties which give up territory.

The counter argument to this is of course that Haskell can give away some dumb breakdown penalties himself - this is why I'd have started Kvesic. Perhaps Jones thinks he can get the best from Haskell with simple instructions of hit lots of rucks and offer yourself to carry where possible. On his day Haskell can be excellent so perhaps it will come off...

That's the big aspect.