Scotland 6N post mortem

I think all this talk of winning the next 3 games should be tempered until we win at least one game...

Brian moore is right..our bench is letting us down
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12157068/The-Six-Nations-gets-top-marks-for-effort-but-the-quality-is-sadly-lacking.html

alive555 wrote:Brian moore is right..our bench is letting us down
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12157068/The-Six-Nations-gets-top-marks-for-effort-but-the-quality-is-sadly-lacking.html

Very much stating the obvious!

Vern has to take some of the flak here given he selected Swinson and Cowan - two players who have made very little impact.

There's not much he can do about our back up props though!

RDW_Scotland wrote:

alive555 wrote:Brian moore is right..our bench is letting us down
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12157068/The-Six-Nations-gets-top-marks-for-effort-but-the-quality-is-sadly-lacking.html

Very much stating the obvious!

Vern has to take some of the flak here given he selected Swinson and Cowan - two players who have made very little impact.

There's not much he can do about our back up props though!

I think Reid and McInally are ok from the bench, it's the other three bench forwards that I'd replace. I'd put young Fagerson back into the U20 tournament to pull down some trees and give Moray Low a chance to replicate his impact sub role at Exeter in Scotland colours, and I'd replace Swinson and Cowan with Ben Toolis and Josh Strauss for the Italy game. In fact I'd give close consideration to starting Strauss against Italy. We will need to match Italy's very physical pack in the early stages, and Strauss is ideal for that.

England and Wales have better players than us, and we lost by 6 and 4 points respectively. We have better players than Italy, and I expect us to win. We MUST win.

I would also add that the backs on the bench need replacing as well. I'm fine with SH-C, but Jackson should be the cover at 10 and 15, and I see no need for Sean Lamont to be playing rugby for Scotland anymore. Perhaps we can have Matt Scott come back for Italy and sit on the bench, or perhaps go for a form player like Tom Brown.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

alive555 wrote:Brian moore is right..our bench is letting us down
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12157068/The-Six-Nations-gets-top-marks-for-effort-but-the-quality-is-sadly-lacking.html

Very much stating the obvious!

Vern has to take some of the flak here given he selected Swinson and Cowan - two players who have made very little impact.

There's not much he can do about our back up props though!

I think Reid and McInally are ok from the bench, it's the other three bench forwards that I'd replace. I'd put young Fagerson back into the U20 tournament to pull down some trees and give Moray Low a chance to replicate his impact sub role at Exeter in Scotland colours, and I'd replace Swinson and Cowan with Ben Toolis and Josh Strauss for the Italy game. In fact I'd give close consideration to starting Strauss against Italy. We will need to match Italy's very physical pack in the early stages, and Strauss is ideal for that.

England and Wales have better players than us, and we lost by 6 and 4 points respectively. We have better players than Italy, and I expect us to win. We MUST win.

We have better players, except for Parrise... That I think was one of the key issues for us on Saturday. Like Italy, if we lose a key player, we're stuffed, it all comes down to depth. When Hogg went off I wanted to cry, as per last 6 nations he's been our star back. What's happened to Bennett?? HOWEVER, it did show Jackson can actually replicate club form, I thought he had a pretty decent game, a couple of passes aside.

Looking ahead, because as a Scots fan that's the only thing that gives you a faint flicker of hope... We can and should beat Italy, as everyone here is saying. My fear is the psychological damage is there. If the captain of the winning opposition is saying "It's not fair that they are losing all the time" you know something is wrong with the Scotland psychee. I think they should get some long distance runners in to talk to them or something, in my eyes, at least 40% of these near misses are psychological. Yes our bench is pants, but we lost based on poor defensive lapses, (although that cover tackle from Taylor... he deserves to stay in the team for that alone, phenomenal!) and regardless of how little you add in attack or scrum you should be able to tackle properly.

As my brother said (who doesn't follow rugby) "As a layman, I'd say that Scotland can't do anything basic right", and whilst Scotland have improved, I found myself agreeing with him. Looking at the under 20s, this is a problem that is being fixed, but that goes beyond international coaches and down to the health of the sport.

We're looking better than we have done, if we beat Italy (we have to do it well too) then the team might finally start believing in their abilities, and we'll see less of the silly panicky mistakes.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

alive555 wrote:Brian moore is right..our bench is letting us down
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12157068/The-Six-Nations-gets-top-marks-for-effort-but-the-quality-is-sadly-lacking.html

Very much stating the obvious!

Vern has to take some of the flak here given he selected Swinson and Cowan - two players who have made very little impact.

There's not much he can do about our back up props though!

I think Reid and McInally are ok from the bench, it's the other three bench forwards that I'd replace. I'd put young Fagerson back into the U20 tournament to pull down some trees and give Moray Low a chance to replicate his impact sub role at Exeter in Scotland colours, and I'd replace Swinson and Cowan with Ben Toolis and Josh Strauss for the Italy game. In fact I'd give close consideration to starting Strauss against Italy. We will need to match Italy's very physical pack in the early stages, and Strauss is ideal for that.

England and Wales have better players than us, and we lost by 6 and 4 points respectively. We have better players than Italy, and I expect us to win. We MUST win.

Is Strauss really the answer? He did little of note at the WC, hasn’t been getting into the Glasgow starting XV and I think is still finding his form.

I would be reluctant to start him against Italy if he can’t cement his place in the Glasgow side at the moment. That’s not to say I wouldn’t replace Cowan for him on the bench considering Cowan looked like he took a fair whack to the head against Wales, but I can’t see that Strauss has done anything to justify starting.

In terms of the game against Italy, I’d probably go with the same starting 15, with the exception of Visser in for Lamont. It’s the bench where I think we can actually have more of an impact. I’d drop Swinson, Weir, Lamont and Cowan. In their place, Jackson, B. Toolis, Scott (if fit), Strauss and Maitland if fit (Jackson would just be retaining his place on the bench).

I'm not one to place much emphasis on the whole psychological and mental side of things. There was nothing intangible about the North try. Just a failure of the defensive system and a couple of players (e.g. Blair Cowan) who looked a little bit too eager to be wrong-footed (and thus not having to stop George North in full flight). Same with the Roberts try. That was a straightforward rugby seige and yet we had a perfectly good opportunity to exit our 22, but Laidlaw fluffed his lines. That's a breakdown of skills under pressure, and I don't think a shrink is going to fix that personally.

We were 4 points from beating a better side on their own patch. We had some opportunities which we didn't take, and made some silly errors. Cotter said afterwards that we have things to work on. Hopefully he means tangible things rather than waffling on about games being won and lost in the top two inches. That's just pundit waffle trying to make themselves sound clever and pretending that there's something ethereal to the game. These are the same people that say daft things like the All Blacks have an "aura", and that they "win most games in the changing room before the match". No, they are the most skillful side in the world, and train like hell (from the age of 8) at getting the basics spot on.

EWT Spoons wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

alive555 wrote:Brian moore is right..our bench is letting us down
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12157068/The-Six-Nations-gets-top-marks-for-effort-but-the-quality-is-sadly-lacking.html

Very much stating the obvious!

Vern has to take some of the flak here given he selected Swinson and Cowan - two players who have made very little impact.

There's not much he can do about our back up props though!

I think Reid and McInally are ok from the bench, it's the other three bench forwards that I'd replace. I'd put young Fagerson back into the U20 tournament to pull down some trees and give Moray Low a chance to replicate his impact sub role at Exeter in Scotland colours, and I'd replace Swinson and Cowan with Ben Toolis and Josh Strauss for the Italy game. In fact I'd give close consideration to starting Strauss against Italy. We will need to match Italy's very physical pack in the early stages, and Strauss is ideal for that.

England and Wales have better players than us, and we lost by 6 and 4 points respectively. We have better players than Italy, and I expect us to win. We MUST win.

Is Strauss really the answer?  He did little of note at the WC, hasn’t been getting into the Glasgow starting XV and I think is still finding his form.

I would be reluctant to start him against Italy if he can’t cement his place in the Glasgow side at the moment.  That’s not to say I wouldn’t replace Cowan for him on the bench considering Cowan looked like he took a fair whack to the head against Wales, but I can’t see that Strauss has done anything to justify starting.

In terms of the game against Italy, I’d probably go with the same starting 15, with the exception of Visser in for Lamont.  It’s the bench where I think we can actually have more of an impact.  I’d drop Swinson, Weir, Lamont and Cowan.  In their place, Jackson, B. Toolis, Scott (if fit), Strauss and Maitland if fit (Jackson would just be retaining his place on the bench).

I'm not saying Strauss deserves it. In fact he doesn't. But in terms of bringing the hard physical edge I believe we'll need in order to win the collisions in the first 60 minutes (at which point I'd introduce John Barclay) I don't think we have anyone else. Bob Harley would have been an option but he's only just coming back from injury.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'm not one to place much emphasis on the whole psychological and mental side of things. There was nothing intangible about the North try. Just a failure of the defensive system and a couple of players (e.g. Blair Cowan) who looked a little bit too eager to be wrong-footed (and thus not having to stop George North in full flight). Same with the Roberts try. That was a straightforward rugby seige and yet we had a perfectly good opportunity to exit our 22, but Laidlaw fluffed his lines. That's a breakdown of skills under pressure, and I don't think a shrink is going to fix that personally.

We were 4 points from beating a better side on their own patch. We had some opportunities which we didn't take, and made some silly errors. Cotter said afterwards that we have things to work on. Hopefully he means tangible things rather than waffling on about games being won and lost in the top two inches. That's just pundit waffle trying to make themselves sound clever and pretending that there's something ethereal to the game. These are the same people that say daft things like the All Blacks have an "aura", and that they "win most games in the changing room before the match". No, they are the most skillful side in the world, and train like hell (from the age of 8) at getting the basics spot on.

This.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'm not one to place much emphasis on the whole psychological and mental side of things. There was nothing intangible about the North try. Just a failure of the defensive system and a couple of players (e.g. Blair Cowan) who looked a little bit too eager to be wrong-footed (and thus not having to stop George North in full flight). Same with the Roberts try. That was a straightforward rugby seige and yet we had a perfectly good opportunity to exit our 22, but Laidlaw fluffed his lines. That's a breakdown of skills under pressure, and I don't think a shrink is going to fix that personally.

We were 4 points from beating a better side on their own patch. We had some opportunities which we didn't take, and made some silly errors. Cotter said afterwards that we have things to work on. Hopefully he means tangible things rather than waffling on about games being won and lost in the top two inches. That's just pundit waffle trying to make themselves sound clever and pretending that there's something ethereal to the game. These are the same people that say daft things like the All Blacks have an "aura", and that they "win most games in the changing room before the match". No, they are the most skillful side in the world, and train like hell (from the age of 8) at getting the basics spot on.

This.

I agree that a lot of it is bs, HOWEVER, I think it makes a difference at crunch time. When you're used to winning you find a way to win, when you're used to losing, you more readily accept defeat. Look at Wales, for instance. In the world cup they were on the brink of calling up one man and his dog they were that battered. They still managed to get out of an incredibly difficult pool, which arguably, they should have come third in (whether it was purely down to England's poor showing or not). When we have lost to Wales, how often have we been ahead in the last quarter? They find a way to win rather than finding a way to lose. It's the same in any walk of life. Positive attitude leads to more positive outcomes, negative attitude is when mistakes that shouldn't happen, happen. I have no doubt it comes down to basic skill level ultimately, but when we know they are capable of that it begs the question of how much of an impact their thought processes have.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

EWT Spoons wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

alive555 wrote:Brian moore is right..our bench is letting us down
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12157068/The-Six-Nations-gets-top-marks-for-effort-but-the-quality-is-sadly-lacking.html

Very much stating the obvious!

Vern has to take some of the flak here given he selected Swinson and Cowan - two players who have made very little impact.

There's not much he can do about our back up props though!

I think Reid and McInally are ok from the bench, it's the other three bench forwards that I'd replace. I'd put young Fagerson back into the U20 tournament to pull down some trees and give Moray Low a chance to replicate his impact sub role at Exeter in Scotland colours, and I'd replace Swinson and Cowan with Ben Toolis and Josh Strauss for the Italy game. In fact I'd give close consideration to starting Strauss against Italy. We will need to match Italy's very physical pack in the early stages, and Strauss is ideal for that.

England and Wales have better players than us, and we lost by 6 and 4 points respectively. We have better players than Italy, and I expect us to win. We MUST win.

Is Strauss really the answer?  He did little of note at the WC, hasn’t been getting into the Glasgow starting XV and I think is still finding his form.

I would be reluctant to start him against Italy if he can’t cement his place in the Glasgow side at the moment.  That’s not to say I wouldn’t replace Cowan for him on the bench considering Cowan looked like he took a fair whack to the head against Wales, but I can’t see that Strauss has done anything to justify starting.

In terms of the game against Italy, I’d probably go with the same starting 15, with the exception of Visser in for Lamont.  It’s the bench where I think we can actually have more of an impact.  I’d drop Swinson, Weir, Lamont and Cowan.  In their place, Jackson, B. Toolis, Scott (if fit), Strauss and Maitland if fit (Jackson would just be retaining his place on the bench).

I'm not saying Strauss deserves it. In fact he doesn't. But in terms of bringing the hard physical edge I believe we'll need in order to win the collisions in the first 60 minutes (at which point I'd introduce John Barclay) I don't think we have anyone else. Bob Harley would have been an option but he's only just coming back from injury.

I'm with you on that in theory, I've just not seen Strauss replicate that form at international level. During the world cup he appeared to struggle and that was when he was full of confidence and in form. Now he's coming back from injury and doesn't look up to the same level. I think it would be risk to play him against Italy. With that said if you're looking for a physical back rower who's fit and in form then I've no other suggestions.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'm not one to place much emphasis on the whole psychological and mental side of things. There was nothing intangible about the North try. Just a failure of the defensive system and a couple of players (e.g. Blair Cowan) who looked a little bit too eager to be wrong-footed (and thus not having to stop George North in full flight). Same with the Roberts try. That was a straightforward rugby seige and yet we had a perfectly good opportunity to exit our 22, but Laidlaw fluffed his lines. That's a breakdown of skills under pressure, and I don't think a shrink is going to fix that personally.

We were 4 points from beating a better side on their own patch. We had some opportunities which we didn't take, and made some silly errors. Cotter said afterwards that we have things to work on. Hopefully he means tangible things rather than waffling on about games being won and lost in the top two inches. That's just pundit waffle trying to make themselves sound clever and pretending that there's something ethereal to the game. These are the same people that say daft things like the All Blacks have an "aura", and that they "win most games in the changing room before the match". No, they are the most skillful side in the world, and train like hell (from the age of 8) at getting the basics spot on.

This.

Think I mostly agree with this and without doubt having the skills down and ingrained is going to help far more than anything else, but we literally need all the help we can get. So if someone coming in, holding their hands and telling them it's all going to be all right and to be positive helps, then bring it on.

I think Strauss is worth a game because Denton has offered very little to justify his place currently. The one thing that strikes me about Strauss when I watch him play is he seems to go into contact very upright when carrying the ball which costs him yards,obviously I might be talking rubbish but that's the impression I get of him, looks like he might benefit from some coaching.
It could well be that both Denton and Strauss will fall down the pecking order very when
Du Preez qualifies in a few months and if Bristol get promoted then Mitch Eadie will become an option as well.

Denton wasn't overly noticeable on Saturday, but Strauss hasn't exactly been pulling up trees lately either.

RDW_Scotland wrote:Denton wasn't overly noticeable on Saturday, but Strauss hasn't exactly been pulling up trees lately either.

Exactly, and if you add in Ashe as well ,it's not a great selection of 8s available to us this 6Ns. I think Denton has been very disappointing really, when do you ever see him make a line break let alone score a try off the back of the scrum?

He's never scored a try for Scotland in 34 test!

I'm a big fan and supporter of Denton but something's not right - I don't think the Bath move has been a good one so far.

RDW_Scotland wrote:Denton wasn't overly noticeable on Saturday, but Strauss hasn't exactly been pulling up trees lately either.

Denton I think has been playing well. He's made a lot of yards often through heavy traffic without a huge breakaway to plump his stats. He's been carrying hard and tackling well.

I think Barclay at 6 hasn't been the overwhelming success we thought it would be. He's done well. The breakdown statistics from both matches suggest this to be the case. However I think his return for some posters was perhaps exaggerated. He's played well but hasn't been game changing.

However that's the 2 favourites out of the way. Italy weren't great and France haven't been tested yet. We'll know how they are after taking on Wales. Ireland have mountains of problems to contend with too.

Truth is, from now on the 6N gets easier for Scotland.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Denton wasn't overly noticeable on Saturday, but Strauss hasn't exactly been pulling up trees lately either.

Denton I think has been playing well. He's made a lot of yards often through heavy traffic without a huge breakaway to plump his stats. He's been carrying hard and tackling well.

I think Barclay at 6 hasn't been the overwhelming success we thought it would be. He's done well. The breakdown statistics from both matches suggest this to be the case. However I think his return for some posters was perhaps exaggerated. He's played well but hasn't been game changing.

However that's the 2 favourites out of the way. Italy weren't great and France haven't been tested yet. We'll know how they are after taking on Wales. Ireland have mountains of problems to contend with too.

Truth is, from now on the 6N gets easier for Scotland.

I'd agree, I think Barclay is the most vulnerable of the back row trio. Hardie has probably been the pick of the three, but I wouldn't say Denton has been poor. In fact I thought he put in a pretty useful shift against England, albeit outplayed by the superb Billy Vunipola.

He looks to me like Cotter has got him doing something different. Whereby he used to hang back as a receiver of kicks and get his show pony gallop going, he's now much more heavily involved in the coalface, meaning that he doesn't get the glory carrys that Billy V and Parisse are getting (both hang back as receivers). In short, he's not doing much in the way of flash stuff, but I think he's getting through a bunch of work.

I'd drop Cowan personally, stick Barclay on the bench and give Strauss 60 minutes to show what he can do. He can't have become a bad player in 6 months. Prior to the World Cup the likes of GC were frothing at the prospect of Strauss playing for Scotland.

VC referred to Strauss as if he has been injured recently, he was out for 4 weeks with a concusion and has not really got up to speed since then. He needs a start for Glasgow this friday against Munster and needs to show some form. If he can do what we know he can, then he will be back into the squad and may even start. Cowan looked very groggy when he came off, I would be surprised to see him play for a few weeks.

He also seemed to suggest that GG was not to far away either. i wonder if he will get a run out for Edinburgh this friday as well. Big step up to international rugby with the lack of gametime he has had though.

I'd imagine Gilchrist would need at least 2-3 club games to be ready for the step-up. I thought Ben Toolis was excellent against the Scarlets, so I'd give his Edinburgh jersey to Gilchrist and put Ben Toolis on the bench against Italy.

Swinson can join Lamont back in the Glasgow squad.

I don't think the pack played badly against Wales, certainly the backrow was competitive.

Regarding Barclay, I was one of those who was excited about his return and I think he has been very solid in the last few games, outside of his kickthrough when Hogg was on his shoulder. I'm aware enough to understand that he isn't the huge enforcer at six we would all want, but I do think he is the best of the current crop until Du Preez qualifies.

I didn't mean to diss Barclay. I'd also agree that he's been solid. I just think for Italy we could use a bit more beef, and Strauss is the only one fitting the bill. If he isn't fully fit then I wouldn't bother with him, but I just worry about the way the Italian pack has played the last couple of games. Pretty powerful stuff.

Oh for a young, fit and firing Jason White!

I actually think Barclay has played well. IMO I wouldn't change much about the pack. I just think that a lot of posters on here thought his inclusion would be the snake tonic that Scotland's pack needed to win us games. That has not transpired. I welcome his inclusion and he has played well since returning to the fold he just hasn't had the impact in the grand scheme of things that other posters were predicting/hoping for.

Taylor IMO has done enough to own that 12 shirt. He was magnificent on Saturday and has finally brought that scintilating Sarries form to the Navy Blue of Scotland.

Russell went some way to redeeming himself and I though Bennett and Jackson played well too. Seymour also had a stormer and the fact that Timbo ran out for Quinns, my team to take on Italy :

1. Dickinson
2. Ford
3. Nel
4. Gray
5. Gray
6. Barclay
7. Hardie
8. Denton

9. Laidlaw
10. Russell
11. Visser
12. Taylor
13. Bennett
14. Seymour
15. Hogg

16. McInally
17. Reid
18. Faggerson
19. Toolis
20. Strauss
21. SHC
22. Jackson
23. Maitland

With specific instructions to keep the ball alive as long as possible.

Looks good to me Radge - alas I don't think that's what he'll pick. Mainly on the bench.

I'd probably have Scott over Maitland though - Maitland's fitness has been all over the place recently and I'd like the impact Matt Scott could make off the behcn.

EST wrote:I don't think the pack played badly against Wales, certainly the backrow was competitive.

Regarding Barclay, I was one of those who was excited about his return and I think he has been very solid in the last few games, outside of his kickthrough when Hogg was on his shoulder.  I'm aware enough to understand that he isn't the huge enforcer at six we would all want, but I do think he is the best of the current crop until Du Preez qualifies.

To be fair to Barclay, Hoggy was no where near his shoulder when he decided to kick. Hoggy had read it well and was in the process of changing sides but was still well behind him whent he kick went in and would have been nowhere in his vision. What Barcaly should have done was hang onto to it though and either taken contact and reset or waited for someone to get up to him. Hoggy would have been there in a few more strides and the potential tackler was standing off not wanting to be drawn. That unfortunatley is twice in two games that Hoggy has missed out due to a lack of peripheral vision and awareness, he is going to get one eventually!

funnyExiledScot wrote:I didn't mean to diss Barclay. I'd also agree that he's been solid. I just think for Italy we could use a bit more beef, and Strauss is the only one fitting the bill. If he isn't fully fit then I wouldn't bother with him, but I just worry about the way the Italian pack has played the last couple of games. Pretty powerful stuff.

Oh for a young, fit and firing Jason White!

VC suggested slightly different tactics may be in order for Italy and the way they have played so far, suggests that despite their promise, they are a long way off being an 80 minute team. They have faded badly in the last 20 mins in both of their games so far and it seems unlikely that they will make that step up in physical and mental fitness in the next 2 weeks.

We need a side that will stand up to them and not let them get away in the first half when they come hard out of the blocks, which they will. Playing a dedicated blind side may be the solution here and then bringing on the second open side when the game starts to open up, which it probably will. Strauss if shows any form, or Harley if not I would say. I agree about another big lump to sub for the second row as well.

I would change the LH sub as well. Gordon Reid has not convinced, struggled in the scrum against England and could not hold onto the ball against Wales. This may be the game to bring on Sutherland, he deserves his chance.

RDW_Scotland wrote:Looks good to me Radge - alas I don't think that's what he'll pick. Mainly on the bench.

I'd probably have Scott over Maitland though - Maitland's fitness has been all over the place recently and I'd like the impact Matt Scott could make off the behcn.

Agreed. Maitland is offering very little at the moment, plus Taylor clearly has the gas to move to the wing if needed.

What do we think the issue is with Laidlaw?

He was pretty turgid against England but played very well against Wales. His inconsistency seems to be inexorably linked to Scotland's inconsistency.

I know to some on this forum he will be irrevocably stained by his perceived flaws, but I thought he did very well on Saturday.

BigGee wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I didn't mean to diss Barclay. I'd also agree that he's been solid. I just think for Italy we could use a bit more beef, and Strauss is the only one fitting the bill. If he isn't fully fit then I wouldn't bother with him, but I just worry about the way the Italian pack has played the last couple of games. Pretty powerful stuff.

Oh for a young, fit and firing Jason White!

VC suggested slightly different tactics may be in order for Italy and the way they have played so far, suggests that despite their promise, they are a long way off being an 80 minute team. They have faded badly in the last 20 mins in both of their games so far and it seems unlikely that they will make that step up in physical and mental fitness in the next 2 weeks.

We need a side that will stand up to them and not let them get away in the first half when they come hard out of the blocks, which they will. Playing a dedicated blind side may be the solution here and then bringing on the second open side when the game starts to open up, which it probably will. Strauss if shows any form, or Harley if not I would say. I agree about another big lump to sub for the second row as well.

I would change the LH sub as well. Gordon Reid has not convinced, struggled in the scrum against England and could not hold onto the ball against Wales. This may be the game to bring on Sutherland, he deserves his chance.

Jason White is probably my all time favourite Scotland player, FES - a more natural six you couldnt find. Yeah, It wasn't from some sort of misty eyed sentimentality that I was happy Barclay was picked, more that I was delighted a Scotland coach was rewarding consistent form, as we all know an all too rare occurrence in the last few years. However, Strauss might be more suited to the Italy game. If we are to play Denton and Strauss together, while we increase in physical presence and ball carrying, we lose in work rate and ruck presence. For me, they are both 8's and Strauss doesn't naturally get to as many rucks as somebody like Barclay. It's all comes back to having a balance of skills and that is what we lack without a really natural 6.

I agree on Sutherland for Reid, while I like Gordy he has really struggled in these last few games. I would also drop Fagerson down to the U20's as VC obviously doesn't trust him yet.

BigGee wrote:

EST wrote:I don't think the pack played badly against Wales, certainly the backrow was competitive.

Regarding Barclay, I was one of those who was excited about his return and I think he has been very solid in the last few games, outside of his kickthrough when Hogg was on his shoulder.  I'm aware enough to understand that he isn't the huge enforcer at six we would all want, but I do think he is the best of the current crop until Du Preez qualifies.

To be fair to Barclay, Hoggy was no where near his shoulder when he decided to kick. Hoggy had read it well and was in the process of changing sides but was still well behind him whent he kick went in and would have been nowhere in his vision. What Barcaly should have done was hang onto to it though and either taken contact and reset or waited for someone to get up to him. Hoggy would have been there in a few more strides and the potential tackler was standing off not wanting to be drawn. That unfortunatley is twice in two games that Hoggy has missed out due to a lack of peripheral vision and awareness, he is going to get one eventually!

While I agree to an extent, BeeGee - I would have hoped somebody like Barclay would have been looking around for a supporting player/hearing a call. I mentioned it at the time of his inclusion in the team that his ball playing skills could be realt attribute for Scotland - so it was great to see him kick the ball away! Brings me back to that Rennie pass when clean through that never happened - was that against England?

I really like Reid but he has looked a tad lost in my view. Sutherland has looked tidy for Edinburgh and plays with McInally regularly. Admittedly if McInally is dropped in favour of Brown I would probably stick with Reid though there is little risk of that happening. Concur on Fagerson and Low. Is Welsh likely to be fit for any of the games? I missed what he was injured with.

As for the blindside, Strauss has been poor and I would rather stick with form than change our style of play. We ought to be moving the Italians around the park rather than trying to match up to them. They looked very vulnerable at the breakdown against England. If you want a big lump of a 6 who is in good form, James Eddie is the man for a coal face. Shame he is not quite good enough for international because I do not question his mentality. Depressing in a way with Harley still getting back, Wilson and Strauss out of form, Ashe at the physio, Low fell off a cliff, Brown taken to the glue factory and Du Preez not being named McPreez.

Don't know why there is even talk of Gilchrist. Gilchrist is nowhere near ready. Swinson is not up for it. Ben Toolis will probably get his 3rd club game on Saturday and is ready to go if he gets through that game without injury.

Jackson > Weir. We need centre/wing cover. Scott if you are comfortable sticking Bennett or Taylor on the wing. Maitland if you are happier with Jackson or Hogg in the centres.

Hazel Sapling wrote:I really like Reid but he has looked a tad lost in my view. Sutherland has looked tidy for Edinburgh and plays with McInally regularly. Admittedly if McInally is dropped in favour of Brown I would probably stick with Reid though there is little risk of that happening. Concur on Fagerson and Low. Is Welsh likely to be fit for any of the games? I missed what he was injured with.

As for the blindside, Strauss has been poor and I would rather stick with form than change our style of play. We ought to be moving the Italians around the park rather than trying to match up to them. They looked very vulnerable at the breakdown against England. If you want a big lump of a 6 who is in good form, James Eddie is the man for a coal face. Shame he is not quite good enough for international because I do not question his mentality. Depressing in a way with Harley still getting back, Wilson and Strauss out of form, Ashe at the physio, Low fell off a cliff, Brown taken to the glue factory and Du Preez not being named McPreez.

Don't know why there is even talk of Gilchrist. Gilchrist is nowhere near ready. Swinson is not up for it. Ben Toolis will probably get his 3rd club game on Saturday and is ready to go if he gets through that game without injury.

Jackson > Weir. We need centre/wing cover. Scott if you are comfortable sticking Bennett or Taylor on the wing. Maitland if you are happier with Jackson or Hogg in the centres.

Sutherland doesn't really play that regularly with McInally, given Solly barely rotates the team and McInally is not long back from injury. But get your point and I agree. Sutherland does play fairly regularly with Ford and Nel (Dicko was injured recently). Welsh apparently had surgery on a dislocated toe, not sure how long he would be out for with that.

Agree Gilco is not ready, the only thing working in his favour is Cotter rates him, (highly given he was named captain) so I don't know if that would be enough to get him in the side, but I hope not. I like Gilchrist, but he hasn't played since last year, he needs games at club level first (I realise I'm basically repeating what you said here)

Reid is a very decent club player, who probably won't quite cut it at international level.

VC does need to make a few tweaks to the team, you can't keep losing games, largely through our own fault and not do anything about it as the coach. You get back to the old Scottish way of it being harder to get out of the team than to get into it.

Am not talking about wholesale changes, but there are some other players who are playing well and challenging the incumbants. At some point you have got to give them a chance. VC was probably planning on doing that on the summer tour. I am not sure we can wait that long though!

BigGee wrote:Reid is a very decent club player, who probably won't quite cut it at international level.

VC does need to make a few tweaks to the team, you can't keep losing games, largely through our own fault and not do anything about it as the coach. You get back to the old Scottish way of it being harder to get out of the team than to get into it.

Am not talking about wholesale changes, but there are some other players who are playing well and challenging the incumbants. At some point you have got to give them a chance. VC was probably planning on doing that on the summer tour. I am not sure we can wait that long though!

Sorry but I'm not sure who you could promote to the starting XV ahead of the guys who are already there; the drop between the first XV and the bench is enormous in almost every position and arguably has been the difference in both games in the tournament.

We need to be realistic here, we weren't the favourites for either game, we have a strong side but change for the sake of change is pointless. Wales and England have more experienced players than us, we need a bit of realism, the next three games are winnable. Ireland have been poor and their players are dropping like flies, France haven't been much better and we have them at home, and (I'm going to pull an Eddie Jones) Italy should be a thrashing, there's no two ways about it. Three wins is a very achievable target and would probably be a fair reflection of us as rugby nation as well as a good launching pad; we need to accept that although we have a good team (and I believe potentially a great team) it is very much so in its early days in terms of realising potential, England and Wales are the teams to beat and we have come very close, closer, I believe, than anybody else will in this tournament.

Closer than Ireland came to beating Wales, 123? Like you, I believe that this Scottish side has the makings of being a properly good 'un. However, not only is that contingent on the first XV staying fit, it is all dependent on them being at the peak of their form.

By common consent this year, a lot of the main men have not. Glasgow have shown nowhere near their standard of last year - since the 6N began, Hogg and Seymour have raised their games but otherwise, are the Scots actually playing better than this time last year? Not sure; agreed, the standard across the board is lowish this year, down on last and the year before, which may be typical of a post-WC campaign. The fact is that Scotland have neither the depth nor the leeway to have any of their top-line men operating below optimum capacity. Bennett, R.Gray, Russell, Denton and Ford are examples of those who have been OK during this tournament but who need to be better than that if Scotland are to turn close losses into wins. Laidlaw has also been cold and hot.

That's too many below their best for a team like Scotland to prosper; the capability is clearly there but it needs to be remembered that although the Scots haven't quite fired as they would like so far, neither have their opponents. More needed to bridge a gap that won't disappear of its own account.

123456789 wrote:

BigGee wrote:Reid is a very decent club player, who probably won't quite cut it at international level.

VC does need to make a few tweaks to the team, you can't keep losing games, largely through our own fault and not do anything about it as the coach. You get back to the old Scottish way of it being harder to get out of the team than to get into it.

Am not talking about wholesale changes, but there are some other players who are playing well and challenging the incumbants. At some point you have got to give them a chance. VC was probably planning on doing that on the summer tour. I am not sure we can wait that long though!

Sorry but I'm not sure who you could promote to the starting XV ahead of the guys who are already there; the drop between the first XV and the bench is enormous in almost every position and arguably has been the difference in both games in the tournament.

We need to be realistic here, we weren't the favourites for either game, we have a strong side but change for the sake of change is pointless. Wales and England have more experienced players than us, we need a bit of realism, the next three games are winnable. Ireland have been poor and their players are dropping like flies, France haven't been much better and we have them at home, and (I'm going to pull an Eddie Jones) Italy should be a thrashing, there's no two ways about it. Three wins is a very achievable target and would probably be a fair reflection of us as rugby nation as well as a good launching pad; we need to accept that although we have a good team (and I believe potentially a great team) it is very much so in its early days in terms of realising potential, England and Wales are the teams to beat and we have come very close, closer, I believe, than anybody else will in this tournament.

I agree with you about the starting XV by and large, though there is a decent argument for Visser/Maitland to come in for Lamont and McInally to come in for Ford, who has looked poor in the loose and the set plays. The back row balance could be looked at as well. Fundamentally we do have out our best team of fit players.

When I talk about the team though, I am referring to the whole 23. Give some other players the chance off the bench and they may prove to be worthy of a start. While I accept that injuries have played a part in the selection, we do potentially have a better bench than we have selected so far. Maybe now with players like Strauss (who may be a little off his best just now but we know is a class act), Toolis, Jackson, Scott, Sutherland and Horne putting their hands up, we could be a lot stronger in the last 15 minutes of these games.

Taking a slightly longer term view, because there will always be injuries and loss of form, we do need to get a few more players bloodied and ready for action.

It's all gone quiet...

Think that may be due to the break between fixtures.

So....should Davies' try have been allowed?

Sorry folks, I haven't been on here in a while.

All my waking hours have been spent either working or stripping paint from the woodwork in my hallway. Six door-frames down, one to go!

Mega thread coming up tonight though, on strange patterns in 6 Nations fixture lists... Keep an eye out.

IanBru wrote:Sorry folks, I haven't been on here in a while.

All my waking hours have been spent either working or stripping paint from the woodwork in my hallway. Six door-frames down, one to go!

Mega thread coming up tonight though, on strange patterns in 6 Nations fixture lists... Keep an eye out.

IanBru wrote:Sorry folks, I haven't been on here in a while.

Apology accepted!

RDW_Scotland wrote:So....should Davies' try have been allowed?

And also...

Who's a better 10, Priestland or Biggar?!

Not for Welsh eyes:

IanBru wrote:Sorry folks, I haven't been on here in a while.

All my waking hours have been spent either working or stripping paint from the woodwork in my hallway. Six door-frames down, one to go!

Mega thread coming up tonight though, on strange patterns in 6 Nations fixture lists... Keep an eye out.

Sorry to hear you've been nose to the grindstone recently. I've been rather quiet at work and had lots of free time recently.

highland_scot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:So....should Davies' try have been allowed?

And also...

Who's a better 10, Priestland or Biggar?!

Not for Welsh eyes:

Weeeee're waaaaaatching!

Dammit we've been rumbled!

I love Wales. Can't say a bad thing about the place.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I love Wales. Can't say a bad thing about the place.

I can. Every time I've been, it has rained. Torrentially.

That's a higher rain rate in my experience than Scotland, England or Ireland.

highland_scot wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I love Wales. Can't say a bad thing about the place.

I can. Every time I've been, it has rained. Torrentially.

That's a higher rain rate in my experience than Scotland, England or Ireland.

Working in Wales, I can certainly second that.

But then I also live in Devon so get double the cr@p weather.