Lions 2017

by 123456789 Sun 20 Mar - 23:52

First topic message reminder :

I understand and respect all the arguments against this kind of post 18 months before but the proper journalists are all having a so we might as well. It happens after every tournament.

For what it's worth I'd pick:

1. Marler
2. Hartley
3. Nel
4. J. Gray
5. AW Jones
6. Faletau
7. Warburton
8. Vunipola
9. Webb
10. Sexton
11. North
12. Henshaw
13. Joseph
14. Watson
15. Hogg

16. McGrath
17. MacInally
18. Lee
19. Itoje
20. Stander
21. Youngs
22. Biggar
23. Halfpenny

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 9:44

Do you have a link for it then? I only remember them falling sick after Cardiff, but getting over it just in time for the England game.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 9:46

fa0019 wrote:
Fanster wrote:
Tattie Scones RRN wrote:The only fact I'll acknowledge is that Scotland won those games.

That's what's in the record books, so I'm comfortable with that.

Along with records such as an U18's team in Scotland has never seen a Scotland team score a try against England at Murrayfield? Do you feel this accurately reflects the strength of Scottish rugby?

Or that in the last 6 seasons Scotland are only 1 win ahead of Italy in 6N results logger? Or that going into this years 6N they were one win behind?

Record books reflect outcomes, not circumstances, such as the England demolishing of NZ...

single games sure.... multiple games over years if the pattern is the same... its pretty stark. You can't have excuses for all of them

During Gatlands tenure vs. SANZAR win rates and games won

Ireland 22%. 4 wins in 18.
Scotland 20%. 3 wins in 15.
England 19%. 5 wins in 27.
France 17%. 4 wins in 23.
Wales 7%. 2 wins in 30.

Wales have had more bites at the cherry and the least wins. In addition all 4 outside of Wales have achieved victory away from home as well as at home whereas Wales' 2 victories have come only in the MS.

Scotland has inferior players to Wales, maybe SANZAR rests players for Scotland but its proved to be a naive tactic, just like when Meyer rested 2/3 of his team for the loss to Wales in that outside window test match in 2014. In any case I'd rather have a bunch of players who out play their potential than those who fail to reach it even above trophies. That's all you can ever ask of players.

Certainly skewed it by playing so many games, but I guess that makes money. No team has a good win record there so I don't see what's to brag about.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 9:46

No, I don't have a link on hand so it'll be as easy for you to use google as me.

by Fanster Thu 7 Apr - 9:46

fa0019 wrote:
Fanster wrote:
Tattie Scones RRN wrote:The only fact I'll acknowledge is that Scotland won those games.

That's what's in the record books, so I'm comfortable with that.

Along with records such as an U18's team in Scotland has never seen a Scotland team score a try against England at Murrayfield? Do you feel this accurately reflects the strength of Scottish rugby?

Or that in the last 6 seasons Scotland are only 1 win ahead of Italy in 6N results logger? Or that going into this years 6N they were one win behind?

Record books reflect outcomes, not circumstances, such as the England demolishing of NZ...

single games sure.... multiple games over years if the pattern is the same... its pretty stark. You can't have excuses for all of them

During Gatlands tenure vs. SANZAR win rates and games won

Ireland 22%. 4 wins in 18.
Scotland 20%. 3 wins in 15.
England 19%. 5 wins in 27.
France 17%. 4 wins in 23.
Wales 7%. 2 wins in 30.

Wales have had more bites at the cherry and the least wins. In addition all 4 outside of Wales have achieved victory away from home as well as at home whereas Wales' 2 victories have come only in the MS.

Scotland has inferior players to Wales, maybe SANZAR rests players for Scotland but its proved to be a naive tactic, just like when Meyer rested 2/3 of his team for the loss to Wales in that outside window test match in 2014. In any case I'd rather have a bunch of players who out play their potential than those who fail to reach it even above trophies. That's all you can ever ask of players.

Whereas I agree on paper, you can't really claim Scotlands record as 'over years' when discussing 3 wins, of which 2 were direct results of circumstances, whereas also claiming Scotland play above themselves with lesser players, thats hardly true due to the amount of wood of the spoon shape they have added over the last 5/6 seasons.

Fact is, Wales have tried to profit from playing the SANZAR teams as much as humanly possible over the last few years, they have gone from being humped by 30+ more often than not, to being regularly competitive and missing out in the dying seconds of games too regularly (at least 5/6 times, mostly away from home).

Meyer had to rotate an aging team, and manage them as they were clearly hanging off the edge of a cliff, Ireland dispatched them handily, as too should've England, Wales made it hard work, as they did every game that Autumn (arguably every autumn).

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 9:48

To be fair the scotland wins were muggings in poor weather conditions. Built on great defense and not a lot else with the weather acting as a leveler and with Scotland having more hunger for the win. However this still counts - a win is a win

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 9:49

mikey_dragon wrote:
Certainly skewed it by playing so many games, but I guess that makes money. No team has a good win record there so I don't see what's to brag about.

No one was bragging - merely correcting you on incorrect assertions

by Fanster Thu 7 Apr - 9:50

I think this is what he meant Mikey...

It began late on the night of Tuesday, November 27, and continued until 6am the following morning.

At least 20 players had been taken ill and confined to their rooms — three days before the England match.

‘The first I knew about it was when one of the players came knocking on my door at 10pm. I got another knock on the door at 10.30. I thought it was the same player, but it was a different one.

‘Shortly after that a third player complained of the same symptoms. I knew then we were in trouble. I was up that night treating players until 6am, giving them medication to stop the vomiting and a lot of fluids.’

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 9:52

TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
Certainly skewed it by playing so many games, but I guess that makes money. No team has a good win record there so I don't see what's to brag about.

No one was bragging - merely correcting you on incorrect assertions

Again I'll ask, where was I incorrect? I said all teams had poor win rates against the SH, if anything that proved me to be correct. Try following the whole discussion rather than cherry-picking so you can try and pretend you're right all the time.

by Fanster Thu 7 Apr - 9:53

TJ wrote:To be fair the scotland wins were muggings in poor weather conditions. Built on great defense and not a lot else with the weather acting as a leveler and with Scotland having more hunger for the win. However this still counts - a win is a win

Noones taking the win away, I was merely mentioning circumstances are important to explaining record books. I wouldn't call them muggings btw, they were managing the conditions better.

2015 RWC however, that was a mugging, and one the history books will show as in the loss column unfairly.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 9:53

No 7&1/2 wrote:No, I don't have a link on hand so it'll be as easy for you to use google as me.

So you lied again then.

by fa0019 Thu 7 Apr - 9:54

mikey_dragon wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Fanster wrote:
Tattie Scones RRN wrote:The only fact I'll acknowledge is that Scotland won those games.

That's what's in the record books, so I'm comfortable with that.

Along with records such as an U18's team in Scotland has never seen a Scotland team score a try against England at Murrayfield? Do you feel this accurately reflects the strength of Scottish rugby?

Or that in the last 6 seasons Scotland are only 1 win ahead of Italy in 6N results logger? Or that going into this years 6N they were one win behind?

Record books reflect outcomes, not circumstances, such as the England demolishing of NZ...

single games sure.... multiple games over years if the pattern is the same... its pretty stark. You can't have excuses for all of them

During Gatlands tenure vs. SANZAR win rates and games won

Ireland 22%. 4 wins in 18.
Scotland 20%. 3 wins in 15.
England 19%. 5 wins in 27.
France 17%. 4 wins in 23.
Wales 7%. 2 wins in 30.

Wales have had more bites at the cherry and the least wins. In addition all 4 outside of Wales have achieved victory away from home as well as at home whereas Wales' 2 victories have come only in the MS.

Scotland has inferior players to Wales, maybe SANZAR rests players for Scotland but its proved to be a naive tactic, just like when Meyer rested 2/3 of his team for the loss to Wales in that outside window test match in 2014. In any case I'd rather have a bunch of players who out play their potential than those who fail to reach it even above trophies. That's all you can ever ask of players.

Certainly skewed it by playing so many games, but I guess that makes money. No team has a good win record there so I don't see what's to brag about.

Well you can put it in

No. of wins. Bottom.
Win rate. Bottom
Away wins. Bottom

if you like.

Lets be frank here. Wales during this era have pretty much been the top of the tree. 3 6N titles, 2 GS. 4th in RWC, QF in the other. Dominated 09 and 13 Lions tours numbers.... and that and against the best they tend to do the worst. Its not the players either, they have been blessed with very talented individuals throughout.

Its not because SANZAR respect Wales more than the rest. The other nations you would say their record vs. SANZAR is a fair reflection. Wales should really have had a handful more of wins to be fair... and that's one of the main questions why people still question Gatland's near certain coronation as 2017 coach.

They've been unlucky in some matches, so have the others. The tactics, the strategy is one of Gatlands weaknesses. Its predictable and against NZ its almost certainly toothless. Maybe he'll surprise us come this summer. Can't see it though.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 9:55

Fine,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/newzealand/9710968/England-v-New-Zealand-All-Blacks-laid-low-by-Norovirus-but-coach-Steve-Hansen-anticipates-no-withdrawals.html

Which first struck before Wales. Sorry happy for you to use norovirus as an excuse against England if it makes you feel better but then Wales must have been so so poor.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 9:56

mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:No, I don't have a link on hand so it'll be as easy for you to use google as me.

So you lied again then.

And you can withdraw that, as you have got it wrong...again.

by beshocked Thu 7 Apr - 9:58

Fanster wrote:
Tattie Scones RRN wrote:
beshocked wrote:Why which nation are you missing out? Perhaps Gatland wouldn't pick Scottish players but he should if they warrant selection.

Absolutely he should. But he won't.

As it stands, and bearing in mind that there are probably 7-8 Scots that should definitely tour, Gatland would pick English and Welsh players with a smattering of Irish. Perhaps a token Scot (Hogg).

That is one biased view...

Hogg would be a certainty to tour at present, probably with 6/7 other players from around the home nations, however there are no definates!

Right now leading Scottish tourists would be Nel, Gray, Barclay, Taylor, Hogg, however there may possibly be more or less than the 5 highlighted come next year.

With regards to the yawn, they're facts, dismiss them if you may, it doesn't change them.

Barclay really? Backrow is highly competitive, wouldn't pick any Scottish backrower personally.

Personally think Nel is a bit overhyped but with the current lack of depth of quality THs, he has a chance.

Hardie is another overhyped "Scotsman". Backrow - very competitive.

Gray and Taylor are maybes but then again two very competitive areas.

Hogg - agree by far the most likely Scot to feature.

Sometimes it's hard to be impartial. Especially when you see players more than others. Everyone has players they rate and don't rate.

Despite being an England fan I would not fill the Lions predominantly with England players as I don't think England have outstanding individuals.

It's been about units, players who gel together.

I would rather see combinations.

Like at 9-10 - Care and Farrell or Murray-Sexton, Webb-Biggar. Would rather not see a mix and match of nationalities there.

2,4 and 5 at the moment I would be tempted by 3 English players.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 10:06

No 7&1/2 wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:No, I don't have a link on hand so it'll be as easy for you to use google as me.

So you lied again then.

And you can withdraw that, as you have got it wrong...again.

I don't accept that sorry - just like you wouldn't accept Jones had a big gob, alluded to by BOD and many others also during the 6N Smile

.

by Fanster Thu 7 Apr - 10:06

beshocked

I think our reasoning are similar, I really rate Barclay, Gray and Taylor, and think they'll come on over the next season to tour, Nel due to a lack of standout, but also Hogg is in a group with potentially lots of quality.

I don't see 2,4,5 as English though, Hartley has offered little without that edge of his, Itoje made a huge impact but he has to back that up in the summer and Autumn, Kruis is the front runner there though.

I also disagree about 9,10, I'd like to see Webb with Sexton, they'd be a good combination.

I think 2017 will be less about combinations and more about ethos, if we go down there and look to be defencively sound with a kicking game we can expect 3-0, if however we look to play, attack and give it everything who knows.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 10:10

mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:No, I don't have a link on hand so it'll be as easy for you to use google as me.

So you lied again then.

And you can withdraw that, as you have got it wrong...again.

I don't accept that sorry - just like you wouldn't accept Jones had a big gob, alluded to by BOD and many others also during the 6N .

You don't accept proof? And where you are now trying to twist previous threads, the conversation wasn't that Jones was outspoken, but feel free to bring that set of comments back up to the top and we'll see if you can back anything up yet.

by Fanster Thu 7 Apr - 10:13

No 7&1/2 wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:No, I don't have a link on hand so it'll be as easy for you to use google as me.

So you lied again then.

And you can withdraw that, as you have got it wrong...again.

I don't accept that sorry - just like you wouldn't accept Jones had a big gob, alluded to by BOD and many others also during the 6N .

You don't accept proof? And where you are now trying to twist previous threads, the conversation wasn't that Jones was outspoken, but feel free to bring that set of comments back up to the top and we'll see if you can back anything up yet.

Will you 2 get a room already, numerous threads, same bickering.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 10:16

It's a discussion forum fanster.

by Fanster Thu 7 Apr - 10:17

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's a discussion forum fanster.

by Tattie Scones RRN Thu 7 Apr - 10:22

Fanster wrote:
Tattie Scones RRN wrote:The only fact I'll acknowledge is that Scotland won those games.

That's what's in the record books, so I'm comfortable with that.

Along with records such as an U18's team in Scotland has never seen a Scotland team score a try against England at Murrayfield? Do you feel this accurately reflects the strength of Scottish rugby?

Or that in the last 6 seasons Scotland are only 1 win ahead of Italy in 6N results logger? Or that going into this years 6N they were one win behind?

Record books reflect outcomes, not circumstances, such as the England demolishing of NZ...

I acknowledge those records too yes and to be honest, I think it does reflect Scottish Rugby over the last 15-20 years - which makes it all the more remarkable that we can perform better against the SH sides and win more than Wales.

I really don't understand this pathetic Welsh desire to belittle everything/everyone else. Please - you're more than welcome to scrap for every tiny little excuse for losing, or other team's winning, but results stand.

"Scotland can't have won against Australia - it was raining"
" Ah yes fair point - Quite unfair, so we'll reverse the result"

Feic me picard

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 10:22

And that's what's happening. 2 separate discussions, one from your initial wum and then a incorrect statement and the other on what constitutes unprofessional behaviour on a pitch and the line to which punishment should occur.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 10:33

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:
I acknowledge those records too yes and to be honest, I think it does reflect Scottish Rugby over the last 15-20 years - which makes it all the more remarkable that we can perform better against the SH sides and win more than Wales.

I really don't understand this pathetic Welsh desire to belittle everything/everyone else. Please - you're more than welcome to scrap for every tiny little excuse for losing, or other team's winning, but results stand.

I would say yes, it was remarkable that Scotland got those wins given their position in world rugby at the time. It's to be commended. The "we can perform better against the SH sides than Wales" though I subjective IMO. You've got more wins no doubt, but performance wise I think Scotland concede more and score less than Wales. I remember back in the day when 50-60 points was a given when the SH played Wales - those days are gone. Looking at some results in recent years you cannot say the same for Scotland. I'll reiterate here that I'm not trying to take anything away from Scotland winning those games, I congratulated them on deserved wins.

Strange comments, you seem to get bitter and froth at the mouth over anything Wales related. There's nothing Welsh about this, and I don't see how and where we as a collective people belittle everything? Can you imagine if World rugby was reading this and you were a pro player? In fact it's always Wales that are belittled. Their record against the SH is used as a stick by fans of NH teams that can't beat Wales - if you can't see that you're either blind or biased - I'd say it's the latter given how angry you get when someone dares mention Wales or AWJ.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 10:38

No 7&1/2 wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:No, I don't have a link on hand so it'll be as easy for you to use google as me.

So you lied again then.

And you can withdraw that, as you have got it wrong...again.

I don't accept that sorry - just like you wouldn't accept Jones had a big gob, alluded to by BOD and many others also during the 6N .

You don't accept proof? And where you are now trying to twist previous threads, the conversation wasn't that Jones was outspoken, but feel free to bring that set of comments back up to the top and we'll see if you can back anything up yet.

Hansen didn't once say it struck before Wales, the ENGLISH newspaper said so. Hansen was talking about the week in training and that it had been difficult, that's the week in between having played Wales and about to play England. There's no need. I proved my point. Legends like BOD also agreed with me thumbsup

.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 10:40

You have real issues with the truth mikey.

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 10:41

Mickey - once again your apparent paranoia about anyone criticising wales shows thru. The number of SH wins wales has is not used as a stick to beat welsh fans with or to denigrate wales - in this thread it was mentioned as you made an incorrect assertion, usually its used as a reality check when welsh fans make over exaggerated claims and to point out the limitations of Gatlandball

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 10:47

TJ wrote:Mickey - once again your apparent paranoia about anyone criticising wales shows thru. The number of SH wins wales has is not used as a stick to beat welsh fans with or to denigrate wales - in this thread it was mentioned as you made an incorrect assertion, usually its used as a reality check when welsh fans make over exaggerated claims and to point out the limitations of Gatlandball

Firstly it's Mikey, no C. Secondly it quite often is though, I read it often across multiple forums. It's not coming from SH people either.

Love how I'm the paranoid one and Tattie isn't? I guess it's okay to level these accusations at Welsh people though, it's what we've come to expect. Still waiting to hear where I was wrong in some assertions btw.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 10:48

No 7&1/2 wrote:You have real issues with the truth mikey.

Me, Hansen and BOD all seem to be on the same level. It's you who can't understand thumbsup

.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 11:01

Jesus who the hell complained about that comment, was it to the mods or world rugby? Feicing grow a pair for feic sake!

by beshocked Thu 7 Apr - 11:06

Fanster not sure I agree with FB, I thought the FBs in the 6 nations were a bit mediocre except for Hogg who was IMO a class apart in that position.

As for Barclay, I personally feel he's got a lot to do to be considered, you are welcome to disagree.

2,4 and 5 should be very competitive but I think in the 6 nations - England had the edge in those positions, noticeably disrupting the Irish and Welsh lineouts, strong lineout figures bar vs Italy where they had a wobble.

I criticised Hartley even during the tournament but on reflection he was a safe pair of hands generally. Set piece wise I thought he was generally solid. It's not easy for me to give credit as I went on a long rant about his discipline before the tournament. I've had to back track.

Webb-Sexton might work but we don't know. Sexton might not even be first choice 10, Farrell or Biggar might leapfrog ahead.

I am not say go there with a 3-0 mentality but the Lions need a strong foundation based on good basics and good decision making.

The Lions need to find the right blend between being pragmatic and a bit of spark. Go for style over substance and the Lions will struggle.

mikey dragon the poor SH record for Gatland is a valid criticism, just as England struggling to beat SA is something that England have to address, just as England's inability to win a GS since 2003 had to be addressed - a win now in 2016 goes some way to putting this right.

It's nothing personal against Wales, every national side has things they can work on.

Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

It's been shown for England that a superior management can make a difference with similar players.

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 11:10

mikey_dragon wrote:................. Here's a fact for you, Andy Robinson's record with Scotland was dreadful, not only against the SH .......................

this assertion is simply wrong Played 6 won 3 is not a dreadful return compared to the rest of the NH over that period

by fa0019 Thu 7 Apr - 11:12

TJ wrote:Mickey - once again your apparent paranoia about anyone criticising wales shows thru. The number of SH wins wales has is not used as a stick to beat welsh fans with or to denigrate wales - in this thread it was mentioned as you made an incorrect assertion, usually its used as a reality check when welsh fans make over exaggerated claims and to point out the limitations of Gatlandball

This is the very essence of the discussion.

Maybe 15 years ago you could dominate NZ upfront.... but not now. They learnt, hired coaches with European experience and put steel in their pack. This is why any strategy which relies fully on front foot ball and forwards dominance is flawed if you try and apply it to NZ.
You can get a nudge perhaps in the 5, maybe even control lineouts with a agile operator like Itoje but you can't dominate.

Therefore something else is required.

Forget how Europe plays, the 6N sides and Lions have won only 3 tests (1 ENG, 2 FRA) in 66 attempts vs. NZ in this period (2004-Present).

NZ have been top of the tree since 2004 with a minor blip of SA dominance in 2009. SA on the other hand have 9 in 28 (32% win rate) and AUS 6 in 36 (17%) win rate.

Its not fullproof but seeing how others play is important to developing a winning strategy. The boks are probably the one side that can dominate upfront whilst still have a dangerous backline with skillful offloads which can hurt NZ. Forget about them, they're unique. See how AUS have competed for years with inferior packs or parity at best.
People think they out McCaw McCaw.... thats not true. Yes have got some sucess in playing 2 opensides but you don't see Hooper and Pocock doing a billy whizz all over the breakdown. They're smart operators. They set up teams, don't use their flankers as first time tacklers but rather keep them in the centre of the park for opportunistic steals. They also have a good territory game with smart kickers, the boks themselves when they did have success used this to the fullest.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 11:15

While I have no doubt a good set of coaches can make a big difference lets not pretend the England team are much different as yet.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 11:19

TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:................. Here's a fact for you, Andy Robinson's record with Scotland was dreadful, not only against the SH .......................

this assertion is simply wrong Played 6 won 3 is not a dreadful return compared to the rest of the NH over that period

I've been told that 50% is poor, but I guess it's okay - however if you factor in results against NZ, as they're a SH team, then the record is quite poor. When speaking about the SH we've all forgotten about the fourth RC team...

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 11:20

beshocked wrote:
Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

If you were Welsh person saying that they would want you executed...

by fa0019 Thu 7 Apr - 11:21

No 7&1/2 wrote:While I have no doubt a good set of coaches can make a big difference lets not pretend the England team are much different as yet.

The coaching staff won the 97 tour for sure. The players stood up yes but 9 times out of 10 they should have lost and in fact even then they were beaten black and blue for most of the test series.

In the 2nd test they scored zero tries to 3. Still won. That never happens. I think its only ever happened one other time in 20 years of tier 1 tests (from memory). Half due to SA being brainless and having no kicker. Half due to the strategy that Telfer and McGeechan employed both in selection and strategy.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 7 Apr - 11:23

TBH, before my time as a rugby fan fa. Tries don't win by themselves though.

by fa0019 Thu 7 Apr - 11:24

mikey_dragon wrote:
TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:................. Here's a fact for you, Andy Robinson's record with Scotland was dreadful, not only against the SH .......................

this assertion is simply wrong Played 6 won 3 is not a dreadful return compared to the rest of the NH over that period

I've been told that 50% is poor, but I guess it's okay - however if you factor in results against NZ, as they're a SH team, then the record is quite poor. When speaking about the SH we've all forgotten about the fourth RC team...

Argentina are a project and rarely play good sides in their summer tours pre RC.... mainly because they don't have rights to their top players in Europe (at least in the past). All 5N sides have winning records over them since the 07 world cup. Only Italy is the exception.

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 11:40

beshocked wrote:Fanster not sure I agree with FB, I thought the FBs in the 6 nations were a bit mediocre except for Hogg who was IMO a class apart in that position.

I agree and his recent form for Glasgow is getting better and better.

beshocked wrote:As for Barclay, I personally feel he's got a lot to do to be considered, you are welcome to disagree.

again - I agree especially given the number of quality players but he would be pushing for a squad place

beshocked wrote:2,4 and 5 should be very competitive but I think in the 6 nations - England had the edge in those positions, noticeably disrupting the Irish and Welsh lineouts, strong lineout figures bar vs Italy where they had a wobble.

sorry but Jonny Gray was the standout - involved in all aspects of the game - doesn't show on the stats for lineout steals 'cos thats not his role but otherwise for his general involvement in the game and his leadership and his fantastic tackling record he must go and should be in the team. ONe of those guys the ball follows rather than following the ball and is constantly involved with a fantastic engine for such a big guy. Of course like with any other position combinations are key and he would need the right guys around him but that is true for any player - but he is one of the very few scots world class players

beshocked wrote:I criticised Hartley even during the tournament but on reflection he was a safe pair of hands generally. Set piece wise I thought he was generally solid. It's not easy for me to give credit as I went on a long rant about his discipline before the tournament. I've had to back track.

I didn't see any hookers as standouts and Hartley certainly went a long way towards rebuilding his reputation - sseems not unreasonable to have him in the team

beshocked wrote:Webb-Sexton might work but we don't know. Sexton might not even be first choice 10, Farrell or Biggar might leapfrog ahead.

Farrell is not in the same league as Biggar and Sexton. Those two bring different attributes - Biggars kick chase is unique and a real weapon. Would the lions take 2 or 3 10s? If its 3 then Farrell might get the 3rd spot but others would be in contention as well again no real standout 9s in this 6N. Peronally I like mavericks / mercurial players like Russell - his ability to unlock defenses is right up there with the best but his error rate might be too high for some.

beshocked wrote:Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are.

I think you are wrong about the quality of these guys - but I can see that to those who don't see them week in week out and are going on the 6N evidence its still to be proved. One thing that is certain - its the best group of scots players for a generation - lets see if they can really prove their class over the next year or two. To be getting close if not matching longstanding professionals and fans favourites in their second(ish) year as internationals shows some real class

beshocked wrote:I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.It's been shown for England that a superior management can make a difference with similar players.

- its more like now they are benefiting from a competent coach compared to the muppets the last ten years but yes - a decent coach makes all the difference. Remember this is only the second year of internationals for many of them. If we continue in the same vein next year as last then yo may change your mind
I would say Hogg, Nel and Gray should be in the team. Seymour, Dunbar, Bennett( if he finds his mojo again) Taylor, Laidlaw ( leadership and steady pair of hands) Hardie are pushing for a squad place.

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 11:41

mikey_dragon wrote:
beshocked wrote:
Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

If you were Welsh person saying that they would want you executed...

More paranoid twaddle - he gets the same answer from the scots fans as you would. We are not precious and paranoid - we know who we are

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 11:46

mikey_dragon wrote:
TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:................. Here's a fact for you, Andy Robinson's record with Scotland was dreadful, not only against the SH .......................

this assertion is simply wrong Played 6 won 3 is not a dreadful return compared to the rest of the NH over that period

I've been told that 50% is poor, but I guess it's okay - however if you factor in results against NZ, as they're a SH team, then the record is quite poor. When speaking about the SH we've all forgotten about the fourth RC team...

its poor yes - but far better than wales so if Scotland have a dreadful record what do wales have - inexorable?

this is the bare truth. During Gatlands tenure vs. SANZAR win rates and games won

Ireland 22%. 4 wins in 18.
Scotland 20%. 3 wins in 15.
England 19%. 5 wins in 27.
France 17%. 4 wins in 23.
Wales 7%. 2 wins in 30.

So scotland with three wins at a 20% rate is dreadful - then what is wales with less wins in twice the games?

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 11:57

Yeah pretty much, but it's a shame for you that having a slightly less worse record than Wales doesn't get you to the top of world rugby - especially when said team loses a lot more games to various teams in said period. And in said period you lost to Italy, Tonga, Samoa and continued your losing streak against Wales and England. Dreadful.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 11:59

TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
beshocked wrote:
Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

If you were Welsh person saying that they would want you executed...

More paranoid twaddle - he gets the same answer from the scots fans as you would. We are not precious and paranoid - we know who we are

So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees. That's the truth.

by TJ Thu 7 Apr - 12:09

mikey_dragon wrote:
TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
beshocked wrote:
Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

If you were Welsh person saying that they would want you executed...

More paranoid twaddle - he gets the same answer from the scots fans as you would. We are not precious and paranoid - we know who we are

So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees. That's the truth.

Well find me a scots poster who has done these things? we don't. Its paranoid twaddle I am afraid - jeepers if we called foul on every time some called the scots rubbish we would never post anything else ;-) come on - quote a post where a scots fan has made those accusations. Just one post please. Put up or shut up.

by mikey_dragon Thu 7 Apr - 12:11

I've already quoted Tattie saying it. His comment was out of order, yet it was my comment that got complained about for calling him out on talking rubbish about the Welsh yet again.

by LordDowlais Thu 7 Apr - 12:14

I will eat my hat if any Scottish players start a test fot the Lions next summer, there might be one on the bench, Hogg, but that is it, there are far suppirior players from England,Ireland and Wales in every position.

Even Hogg would not be a cert.

by fa0019 Thu 7 Apr - 12:16

LordDowlais wrote:I will eat my hat if any Scottish players start a test fot the Lions next summer, there might be one on the bench, Hogg, but that is it, there are far suppirior players from England,Ireland and Wales in every position.

Even Hogg would not be a cert.

In certain positions its easy to look good when you have other players around you giving you an armchair. Some feed off scraps and still shine, maybe not as much as those with the best around them but that doesn't necessarily mean they are better players.

by LordDowlais Thu 7 Apr - 12:17

TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
TJ wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
beshocked wrote:
Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

If you were Welsh person saying that they would want you executed...

More paranoid twaddle - he gets the same answer from the scots fans as you would. We are not precious and paranoid - we know who we are

So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees. That's the truth.

Well find me a scots poster who has done these things? we don't. Its paranoid twaddle I am afraid - jeepers if we called foul on every time some called the scots rubbish we would never post anything else ;-) come on - quote a post where a scots fan has made those accusations. Just one post please. Put up or shut up.

Go on the recent Glasgow V Ulster thread, there are plenty of Scottish members moaning about the ref on that thread.

by fa0019 Thu 7 Apr - 12:18

LordDowlais wrote:I will eat my hat if any Scottish players start a test fot the Lions next summer, there might be one on the bench, Hogg, but that is it, there are far suppirior players from England,Ireland and Wales in every position.

Even Hogg would not be a cert.

At the moment can you say the followng?

Any better 3 than Nel?
Any better openside than Hardie?
Any better 15 than Hogg?

by LordDowlais Thu 7 Apr - 12:19

fa0019 wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:I will eat my hat if any Scottish players start a test fot the Lions next summer, there might be one on the bench, Hogg, but that is it, there are far suppirior players from England,Ireland and Wales in every position.

Even Hogg would not be a cert.

In certain positions its easy to look good when you have other players around you giving you an armchair. Some feed off scraps and still shine, maybe not as much as those with the best around them but that doesn't necessarily mean they are better players.

WTF. Look, when Scotland start winning more than one or two games in the 6N on a regular basis then we can start considering them for the Lions.

by Sponsored content