6N 2017: England vs Scotland

First topic message reminder :

     
ENGLAND v SCOTLAND
Saturday 10th March
16:00 GMT
Twickenham Stadium

Live on ITV, RTE, FR2, DMAX

Referee - Matthieu Raynal
AR1 - Romain Poite
AR2 - Marius Mitrea
TMO - Ben Skeen

A. Head to Head

134 Played 134
74 Won 42
18 Drawn 18
42 Lost 74
1,562 Points 1,141

B. Recent Form

6 February 2016
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
9 – 15 to England

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

C. Teams

ENGLAND


Starting XV:

15. Mike Brown (vice captain, Harlequins, 58 caps), 14. Jack Nowell  (Exeter Chiefs, 21 caps), 13. Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 31 caps), 12. Owen Farrell (vice captain, Saracens, 50 caps), 11. Elliot Daly (Wasps, 11 caps), 10. George Ford (Bath Rugby, 33 caps), 9. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 68 caps), 1. Joe Marler (Harlequins, 49 caps), 2. Dylan Hartley (captain, Northampton Saints, 82 caps), 3. Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 72 caps), 4. Joe Launchbury (Wasps, 40 caps) , 5. Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 56 caps), 6. Maro Itoje (Saracens, 10 caps), 7. James Haskell (Wasps, 73 caps) , 8. Nathan Hughes (Wasps, 6 caps).

Finishers

16. Jamie George (Saracens, 15 caps), 17. Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 40 caps), 18. Kyle Sinckler (Harlequins, 6 caps), 19. Tom Wood (Northampton Saints, 48 caps), 20. Billy Vunipola (vice captain, Saracens 32 caps), 21. Danny Care (Harlequins, 69 caps), 22. Ben Te’o (Worcester Warriors, 6 caps), 23. Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 24 caps).

SCOTLAND


Starting XV

15. Stuart Hogg (Glasgow Warriors) – 51 caps; 16 tries, 3 pens, 89 points
14. Tommy Seymour (Glasgow Warriors) – 34 caps; 15 tries, 75 points
13. Huw Jones (Stormers) – 6 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
12. Alex Dunbar (Glasgow Warriors) – 22 caps; 6 tries, 30 points
11. Tim Visser (Harlequins) – 29 caps; 12 tries, 60 points
10. Finn Russell (Glasgow Warriors) – 25 caps; 2 tries, 5 cons, 8 pens, 44 points
9. Ali Price (Glasgow Warriors) – 3 caps

1. Gordon Reid (Glasgow Warriors) – 22 caps
2. Fraser Brown (Glasgow Warriors) – 23 caps
3. Zander Fagerson (Glasgow Warriors) – 7 caps
4. Richie Gray (Toulouse) – 63 caps; 3 tries, 15 points
5. Jonny Gray (Glasgow Warriors) – 31 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
6. John Barclay CAPTAIN (Scarlets) – 58 caps; 4 tries, 20 points
7. Hamish Watson (Edinburgh Rugby) – 8 caps; 1 try, 5 points
8. Ryan Wilson (Glasgow Warriors) – 25 caps

Substitutes:
16. Ross Ford (Edinburgh Rugby) – 105 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
17. Allan Dell (Edinburgh Rugby) – 6 caps
18. Simon Berghan (Edinburgh Rugby) – 1 cap
19. Tim Swinson (Glasgow Warriors) – 27 caps; 1 try, 5 points
20. Cornell Du Preez (Edinburgh Rugby) – uncapped
21. Henry Pyrgos (Glasgow Warriors) – 19 caps; 4 tries, 3 pens, 29 points
22. Duncan Weir (Edinburgh Rugby) – 25 caps; 2 tries, 7 cons, 10 pens, 1 drop, 57 points
23. Mark Bennett (Glasgow Warriors) – 19 caps; 6 tries, 30 points

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage.

Well yeah but every team loses. We haven't tried to be behind on the scoreboard with 10 minutes to go.

IanBru wrote:Surely there's a difference between V Vunipola when he's on form and V Vunipola when he's half-fit and struggling for lack of game time.

I'll be honest, he was impressive in the first 20 minutes at KP yesterday, but I didn't see anything after that to make me need new trousers. The question for Scotland is a tactical one - should our backrow replacement be Harley to nullify the English attacking momentum, or a CDP to punch holes. I honestly don't see the point in basing our strategy around stopping Viliami.

Not sure about the backrow replacement but I think there's a very strong case for Toolis replacing Swinson for this game, his greater physicality could be crucial if either Gray has to be subbed.

I think the sum of all this is (IMO)

Physicality - England
Mobility - Scotland
Scrum - England
Lion out - England (just)
Breakdown - evens
9 - evens
10 - evens (with a chance for both to really outshine, or really c ck up)
Backs attacking - Scotland (just)
Backs defending - England  (just)
High Ball - Even
Broken field running -Scotland
Structured Play - England
Bench - England
Home advantage - England
Coaches tactical nouce - Scotland (just)
Coaches Mouth - England


Favorites - England (by quite a bit)

MacKnocked-on wrote:

IanBru wrote:Surely there's a difference between V Vunipola when he's on form and V Vunipola when he's half-fit and struggling for lack of game time.

I'll be honest, he was impressive in the first 20 minutes at KP yesterday, but I didn't see anything after that to make me need new trousers. The question for Scotland is a tactical one - should our backrow replacement be Harley to nullify the English attacking momentum, or a CDP to punch holes. I honestly don't see the point in basing our strategy around stopping Viliami.

Not sure about the backrow replacement but I think there's a very strong case for Toolis replacing Swinson for this game, his greater physicality could be crucial if either Gray has to be subbed.  

I can't see that happening. Swinson played well again for Glasgow on Saturday and he is more experienced and versatile than Toolis. He carries, passes and off loads better and as the Grays are only likely to get pulled off if injured (both have the engines to play for 80 mins and more) he is more likely to come on in the back row, where the attrition rate is likely to be higher.

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage. This weekend may or may not be the time but I would imagine that any coach in the world would rather be defending a lead in the last 10 mins rather than trying to chase one down. Luck is going to run out at some stage, Wales were only one poor kick away from winning their game and Wales are not a great side at the moment.

Scotland will play for 80 mins, they have done in every game so far, including coming back from being behind against the Irish, a game that we finished the stronger side. We are actually getting quite good at closing out games now, not historically our strong point.

We may not have as strong a bench as England, but we will have players who can play for 80 mins. If we are in the lead as the match comes to its conclusion, I would fancy us to close it out. We just need to stay in the game to give ourselves that chance.

I don't think it's a deliberate tactic by Jones to use the bench in that way. In Jones' tenure, we've only trailed 3 times going into the last quarter, only once before this tournament started and never by more than a score. So more often than not our starting team are good enough to get us ahead, and then the bench are strong enough to finish it off.

England have started the tournament relatively slowly, and therefore the starting team hasn't hit those heights and got us ahead, but I don't think that's a deliberate tactic. And I don't think swapping the bench players into the starting line-up would necessarily address that. They'd have to work harder against fresh players, and then the new bench players would benefit from their hard work.

The relative strength of England's bench should mean that we don't need to panic if we're 5 points down after 60 minutes. However, given our starting line-up I'd be a little disappointed if we were, regardless of whether we turned it around or not.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage. This weekend may or may not be the time but I would imagine that any coach in the world would rather be defending a lead in the last 10 mins rather than trying to chase one down. Luck is going to run out at some stage, Wales were only one poor kick away from winning their game and Wales are not a great side at the moment.

Scotland will play for 80 mins, they have done in every game so far, including coming back from being behind against the Irish, a game that we finished the stronger side. We are actually getting quite good at closing out games now, not historically our strong point.

We may not have as strong a bench as England, but we will have players who can play for 80 mins. If we are in the lead as the match comes to its conclusion, I would fancy us to close it out. We just need to stay in the game to give ourselves that chance.

It has nothing to do with luck and JD2's kick wasn't the last play of the game so you can't actually that was the difference, people forget we should have had penalty in the build up to that.

Scotland have played for two 40 minutes so far, you were abject against Wales for the first 40 minutes and should have been out of it entirely and the last 30 against Ireland was equally poor.

A left-footer kicking from that position who hit touch would have given us a line-out on the 22 with 5 minutes to go, 2 points behind and all the momentum. Would have been a different game, but one we could have probably won without the error by Davies.

Agreed. Whilst often a critic of Tiny Tim he's bang on form right now and covers lock and 6.

As for the back row cover, I'd take a leap of faith and select Du Preez, but only because there's no-one else making a particularly compelling case.

Ianbru yes but it was Billy's first game back from injury. You have to take that into account. The game time will have helped. 70 minutes is good going.

I want Scotland to fixate on Billy V because it will give the other guys like Mako,George and Sinckler more space. When you only have to stop one player it becomes much easier but 3 or 4? Not so easy.

If England are punching holes it will allow fresh English backs from the bench to make inroads.

Risksports I think that's fair.


I'll be reasonably satisfied if England are only 5-7 points down with 20 minutes to go because I know they can overhaul that as long as they keep 15 men on the pitch.

It will be a bonus if England are leading.

Neither side has put in a complete 80 minute performance in this tournament.

If Scotland does this weekend and England doesn't then it's going to be very close.

I am obviously worried about the English bench which befits their WR ranking.

I don't have concerns about our fitness.

Our front row is a glaring weakness, but that is old news and we have done very well to stay away from scrums in our games against Ireland and Wales. Let's not talk about the France match.

BigGee wrote:

MacKnocked-on wrote:

IanBru wrote:Surely there's a difference between V Vunipola when he's on form and V Vunipola when he's half-fit and struggling for lack of game time.

I'll be honest, he was impressive in the first 20 minutes at KP yesterday, but I didn't see anything after that to make me need new trousers. The question for Scotland is a tactical one - should our backrow replacement be Harley to nullify the English attacking momentum, or a CDP to punch holes. I honestly don't see the point in basing our strategy around stopping Viliami.

Not sure about the backrow replacement but I think there's a very strong case for Toolis replacing Swinson for this game, his greater physicality could be crucial if either Gray has to be subbed.  

I can't see that happening. Swinson played well again for Glasgow on Saturday and he is more experienced and versatile than Toolis. He carries, passes and off loads better and as the Grays are only likely to get pulled off if injured (both have the engines to play for 80 mins and more) he is more likely to come on in the back row, where the attrition rate is likely to be higher.

Unfortunately Richie played 80 minutes for Toulouse on Saturday - he is an incredible athlete but we could have done without that.

England fans seem quiet on here. Is this the day for ordering the hamper, putting the Range Rover into service and waxing the Barbour jacket?

funnyExiledScot wrote:England fans seem quiet on here. Is this the day for ordering the hamper, putting the Range Rover into service and waxing the Barbour jacket?

Not everyone spends their Monday's the same way as you FES!

funnyExiledScot wrote:England fans seem quiet on here. Is this the day for ordering the hamper, putting the Range Rover into service and waxing the Barbour jacket?

I think the bags of this are in the trolley at Waitrose, while the bags of that are being dry cleaned - the weekend's shoot was a tad boggy underfoot.

IanBru wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:England fans seem quiet on here. Is this the day for ordering the hamper, putting the Range Rover into service and waxing the Barbour jacket?

I think the bags of this are in the trolley at Waitrose, while the bags of that are being dry cleaned - the weekend's shoot was a tad boggy underfoot.

Don't worry they'll be there with their said bags of this and that demanding to know why they are playing these plebs in navy blue

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

IanBru wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:England fans seem quiet on here. Is this the day for ordering the hamper, putting the Range Rover into service and waxing the Barbour jacket?

I think the bags of this are in the trolley at Waitrose, while the bags of that are being dry cleaned - the weekend's shoot was a tad boggy underfoot.

Don't worry they'll be there with their said bags of this and that demanding to know why they are playing these plebs in navy blue

I was in 'that London' (as my Geordie boss calls it) over Christmas, and was delighted to overhear a mother chastise her two children: "Maximus! MAXIMUS!! Stop hitting Cosmo with your wand. It's very fragile!"

George Carlin wrote:Neither side has put in a complete 80 minute performance in this tournament.

If Scotland does this weekend and England doesn't then it's going to be very close.

I am obviously worried about the English bench which befits their WR ranking.

I don't have concerns about our fitness.

Our front row is a glaring weakness, but that is old news and we have done very well to stay away from scrums in our games against Ireland and Wales. Let's not talk about the France match.

Russell is IMO the key back for Scotland, I'd say even more so than Hogg because part of his job to get Hogg involved. Hogg hogged the glory vs Ireland but without Russell pulling the strings in the first 40, Scotland wouldn't have been such a nice lead at half time. His influence in Scotland's 2 wins should not be underestimated.

Russell also as a 10 inevitably gets his hands on the ball more and as he's become Scotland kicker the responsibility is greater.

It's important for Scotland's chances that Russell keeps his error count low even if he does have the capability for creating opportunities.

Of course the Scottish pack must give him the platform too. If Russell is put under too much pressure, I think he could inevitably fold like a pack of cards.

beshocked wrote:

George Carlin wrote:Neither side has put in a complete 80 minute performance in this tournament.

If Scotland does this weekend and England doesn't then it's going to be very close.

I am obviously worried about the English bench which befits their WR ranking.

I don't have concerns about our fitness.

Our front row is a glaring weakness, but that is old news and we have done very well to stay away from scrums in our games against Ireland and Wales. Let's not talk about the France match.

Russell is IMO the key back for Scotland, I'd say even more so than Hogg because part of his job to get Hogg involved. Hogg hogged the glory vs Ireland but without Russell pulling the strings in the first 40, Scotland wouldn't have been such a nice lead at half time. His influence in Scotland's 2 wins should not be underestimated.

Russell also as a 10 inevitably gets his hands on the ball more and as he's become Scotland kicker the responsibility is greater.

It's important for Scotland's chances that Russell keeps his error count low even if he does have the capability for creating opportunities.

Of course the Scottish pack must give him the platform too. If Russell is put under too much pressure, I think he could inevitably fold like a pack of cards.

I slightly agree with this, however it's not often pressure that gets to Russell, it's unforced errors. He normally plays better in high pressure games. Ireland in this year's 6N, Wales in the 6N, Glasgow's ERC games particularly against Carter at Racing.

It's when he starts making mistakes that he "folds" as you describe it, mostly if he has made errors and then he loses his cool a bit.

I guess the intention would be for England to try and force him into making mistakes, but what Scotland have done well recently is giving Russell so many options. Hogg comes in at first receiver sometimes to take the pressure off as does Huw Jones, it's happened in every game so far. In addition the Grays, Barclay, Watson and Wilson also give him options inside and out.

As you pointed out Beshocked, Hogg gets so much time and space on the ball because of Russell's distribution skills and of he plays well Scotland play well.

How did Maitland get on against the geordies? I personally would give Visser the nod to start against England regardless of how well Maitland played yesterday. I think he's earned it.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage. This weekend may or may not be the time but I would imagine that any coach in the world would rather be defending a lead in the last 10 mins rather than trying to chase one down. Luck is going to run out at some stage, Wales were only one poor kick away from winning their game and Wales are not a great side at the moment.

Scotland will play for 80 mins, they have done in every game so far, including coming back from being behind against the Irish, a game that we finished the stronger side. We are actually getting quite good at closing out games now, not historically our strong point.

We may not have as strong a bench as England, but we will have players who can play for 80 mins. If we are in the lead as the match comes to its conclusion, I would fancy us to close it out. We just need to stay in the game to give ourselves that chance.

It has nothing to do with luck and JD2's kick wasn't the last play of the game so you can't actually that was the difference, people forget we should have had penalty in the build up to that.

Scotland have played for two 40 minutes so far, you were abject against Wales for the first 40 minutes and should have been out of it entirely and the last 30 against Ireland was equally poor.

Great post.

And again, as has been said many times, under Eddie Jones England are nearly always ahead going into the last 20. So quite where this notion that England are basing a strategy on their bench has come from is baffling to me.

The importance of Russell to Scotland is no secret. Not only is he the chief playmaker, he's also the best 10 we have by a street (we have no depth behind him). The absence of Laidlaw makes him even more important.

Still, with Price at 9 and Dunbar at 12 he is surrounded by the familiar, and Hogg is no stranger to coming in a first receiver in secondary phases.

The reason I'm particularly nervous about this weekend is that we have a chance. Usually I write off Scotland at Twickenham (with statistically good cause), but so far they've been workmanlike rather than inspired, and the Ford/Farrell axis hasn't really clicked. The England pack makes me nervous, particularly the scrum, and the England bench is light years ahead of ours, but we are still in with a shout here.

ruggerradge2611 well I thought Russell buckled a bit in the 2nd half vs Ireland and suffered a bit in the 2nd half vs France - a mix of sublime skill and some utter rubbish. Not many players could make the assist he did vs France but then again not many players would miss in front of the posts.

I thought your fortunes vs France, rested a lot with the Scottish pack's inability to get Russell involved enough and his performance suffered as a result. Same with Ireland in the 2nd half as Ireland got on top.


don't know how Maitland but as an England fan I think Visser doesn't help make for a strong defensive Scottish backline. Good in attack though.

Maitland has managed to dig Scotland out of some bad positions, I did hear Maitland made a try saving tackle in the Newcastle game, making a habit of that.

It's the old age question - do you pick a superior finisher or someone more defensively reliable? Visser is better going forward but will Scotland give him enough to work with?

cascough under Jones in this year's 6 nations, it's been the bench which has made the biggest impact. You can talk about last year if you want though.

Probably why Jones is picking certain players - still stuck in 2016.....

beshocked wrote:ruggerradge2611 well I thought Russell buckled a bit in the 2nd half vs Ireland and suffered a bit in the 2nd half vs France - a mix of sublime skill and some utter rubbish. Not many players could make the assist he did vs France but then again not many players would miss in front of the posts.

I thought your fortunes vs France, rested a lot with the Scottish pack's inability to get Russell involved enough and his performance suffered as a result. Same with Ireland in the 2nd half as Ireland got on top.


don't know how Maitland but as an England fan I think Visser doesn't help make for a strong defensive Scottish backline.

Maitland has managed to dig Scotland out of some bad positions, I did hear Maitland made a try saving tackle in the Newcastle game, making a habit of that.

It's the old age question - do you pick a superior finisher or someone more defensively reliable? Visser is better going forward but will Scotland give him enough to work with?

cascough under Jones in this year's 6 nations, it's been the bench which has made the biggest impact. You can talk about last year if you want though.

Probably why Jones is picking certain players - still stuck in 2016.....

Well as I said in our Scottish club ongoing banter thread (the place us Scottish posters go to moan about you guys behind your back) I'd stick with Visser due to his height advantage over the English back 3. He was winning arial battles against North and bundling him into touch with a startling efficiency so it makes it hard to drop him. I'd expect him to do equally well in the arial battles on Saturday.

Maitland can make more sense since he has familiarity with a lot of the players in that Saracen heavy England team, but Visser also has familiarity with that horrible English Fullback.

As I said i'd find it hard to drop Visser, he's in the form of his life and has demonstrably worked very hard on his deficiencies and scored a try against Wales and scored again for Quinns at the weekend.

It'll be a headache for Vern, but unlike the front row it's a nice headache to have.

Would George starting have made that big of a difference this 6Ns? He's a very good player but he's getting good game time anyway and perhaps his carrying game currently suits the hame opening up while his and Hartley set piece work isn't vastly different?

ruggerradge 2611 well I hope England don't resort to too many aerial battles. Get the ball off the pitch and target that Scottish lineout.

Advantage to Visser going forward but if he's spending too much on defensive duty...

no 7 & 1/2 guess you have to ask the question would have England had beaten Wales without Itoje's MOTM performance vs Wales last year? Maybe but unlikely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLdk2jVrJsc

Leaving out a good player can be a mistake.

England might still be winning now but I think Ireland away is the biggest challenge.

Well we won't know but I do think he'd raise the starting performance of the team yes.

George has been superior in all facets - lineout he's 100%, scrum he comes on and improves it. Makes more tackles, try assists, carries etc.

You cant compare an appearance from the bench to a starter.

He's a good player as I said but not sure if starting him would mean that we'd be thrashing teams tbh. Rugby more than any other game imo is about the team as a whole. It's not like we're comparing a rubbish player to a great one or one who's making stack loads of mistakes. I honestly think there's more reasons to consider starting Sinckler over Cole than George over Hartley.

Any chance you guys could just start a Leicester Tigers XV against us?

Thanks in advance,

All of Scotland xx

Yes of course throwing in the lineout is different in the last 20 minutes....

Well actually you can. Especially when the starter is so lethargic.

Of course we also have to ignore all of George's starts where's he played better than Hartley at club level.

No 7 & 1/2 putting a player who is superior in all facets is obvious to me. I agree it's about the team as a whole and if you add someone whose better scrummager, outperforming at lineout time and does more around the field it should improve the overall team performance.

Hartley has been in poor form in the 6 nations (most people agree except for you).

Sinckler is a good player but he's not as experienced as George and hasn't been outplaying Cole for 2 years.

Personally I would have started Sinckler vs Italy but that opportunity came and went.

Hartley's so called leadership skills haven't really been on offer in the 6 nations so far either.

I think you need some new material Beshocked, we all get it you love Jamie George and think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's a good player as I said but not sure if starting him would mean that we'd be thrashing teams tbh. Rugby more than any other game imo is about the team as a whole. It's not like we're comparing a rubbish player to a great one or one who's making stack loads of mistakes. I honestly think there's more reasons to consider starting Sinckler over Cole than George over Hartley.

I was all set to say something to support you over kingE as he does seem to spend a lot of time replying to his own posts. But this message - you know exactly what this will lead to - especially as we have read the exact same arguments many many times before.

Thanks to the foe button I can maintain sanity

I may well be in a minority who doesn't believe Hartley has been poor but it doesnt really bother me. Currently there's nowt much between them in the setpiece. I believe george is a better player overall based on he's part of this new breed of English forwards who handle like backs and it's that and he strong carrying from wider which I believe is a big selling point in introducing him from the bench. Like I said the other day I suspect he'll be starting the AI s and possibly the impressively Taylor on the bench. At the moment though with him and Hartley overall.I think the team benefits from the bigger running impact from the bench.

Sinckler lacks experience but I'd like t see him come on earlier in the game as we've seen regularly with George.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I think you need some new material Beshocked, we all get it you love Jamie George and think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Who can blame him?

True lost true.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I think you need some new material Beshocked, we all get it you love Jamie George and think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Who can blame him?

He's just so dreamy.

In Vissers defence ...he did actually make a Try saving tackle in the last round. And did a Try of his own.

cascough wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage. This weekend may or may not be the time but I would imagine that any coach in the world would rather be defending a lead in the last 10 mins rather than trying to chase one down. Luck is going to run out at some stage, Wales were only one poor kick away from winning their game and Wales are not a great side at the moment.

Scotland will play for 80 mins, they have done in every game so far, including coming back from being behind against the Irish, a game that we finished the stronger side. We are actually getting quite good at closing out games now, not historically our strong point.

We may not have as strong a bench as England, but we will have players who can play for 80 mins. If we are in the lead as the match comes to its conclusion, I would fancy us to close it out. We just need to stay in the game to give ourselves that chance.

It has nothing to do with luck and JD2's kick wasn't the last play of the game so you can't actually that was the difference, people forget we should have had penalty in the build up to that.

Scotland have played for two 40 minutes so far, you were abject against Wales for the first 40 minutes and should have been out of it entirely and the last 30 against Ireland was equally poor.

Great post.

And again, as has been said many times, under Eddie Jones England are nearly always ahead going into the last 20. So quite where this notion that England are basing a strategy on their bench has come from is baffling to me.

Well actually there has been quite a lot of talk on this thread about the strength of England's bench and what they can do to a team in the last 20 mins. Even EJ builds that up by referring to them as his 'finishers'

England are a good front running team, at least they were up to this 6N. If they get away from Scotland, they will win and probably comfortably. We really do need to stay in the game. If we do though, I don't see this Scotland team chocking as others have done before, there is a different mindset now, we have won close games against good teams and confidence now exists. I think if we get our chance, we will take it.

England have lived dangerously a couple of times already in this tournament. You can't keep going to the well, one time the bucket will come up dry.

BigGee wrote:

cascough wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage. This weekend may or may not be the time but I would imagine that any coach in the world would rather be defending a lead in the last 10 mins rather than trying to chase one down. Luck is going to run out at some stage, Wales were only one poor kick away from winning their game and Wales are not a great side at the moment.

Scotland will play for 80 mins, they have done in every game so far, including coming back from being behind against the Irish, a game that we finished the stronger side. We are actually getting quite good at closing out games now, not historically our strong point.

We may not have as strong a bench as England, but we will have players who can play for 80 mins. If we are in the lead as the match comes to its conclusion, I would fancy us to close it out. We just need to stay in the game to give ourselves that chance.

It has nothing to do with luck and JD2's kick wasn't the last play of the game so you can't actually that was the difference, people forget we should have had penalty in the build up to that.

Scotland have played for two 40 minutes so far, you were abject against Wales for the first 40 minutes and should have been out of it entirely and the last 30 against Ireland was equally poor.

Great post.

And again, as has been said many times, under Eddie Jones England are nearly always ahead going into the last 20. So quite where this notion that England are basing a strategy on their bench has come from is baffling to me.

Well actually there has been quite a lot of talk on this thread about the strength of England's bench and what they can do to a team in the last 20 mins. Even EJ builds that up by referring to them as his 'finishers'

England are a good front running team, at least they were up to this 6N. If they get away from Scotland, they will win and probably comfortably. We really do need to stay in the game. If we do though, I don't see this Scotland team chocking as others have done before, there is a different mindset now, we have won close games against good teams and confidence now exists. I think if we get our chance, we will take it.

England have lived dangerously a couple of times already in this tournament. You can't keep going to the well, one time the bucket will come up dry.

Scotland could win. I just don't think they will. As for the choking - if it does happen it will be as much down to the pressure we put on as any response from the Scots. It will be an interesting game

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

George Carlin wrote:Neither side has put in a complete 80 minute performance in this tournament.

If Scotland does this weekend and England doesn't then it's going to be very close.

I am obviously worried about the English bench which befits their WR ranking.

I don't have concerns about our fitness.

Our front row is a glaring weakness, but that is old news and we have done very well to stay away from scrums in our games against Ireland and Wales. Let's not talk about the France match.

Russell is IMO the key back for Scotland, I'd say even more so than Hogg because part of his job to get Hogg involved. Hogg hogged the glory vs Ireland but without Russell pulling the strings in the first 40, Scotland wouldn't have been such a nice lead at half time. His influence in Scotland's 2 wins should not be underestimated.

Russell also as a 10 inevitably gets his hands on the ball more and as he's become Scotland kicker the responsibility is greater.

It's important for Scotland's chances that Russell keeps his error count low even if he does have the capability for creating opportunities.

Of course the Scottish pack must give him the platform too. If Russell is put under too much pressure, I think he could inevitably fold like a pack of cards.

I slightly agree with this, however it's not often pressure that gets to Russell, it's unforced errors. He normally plays better in high pressure games. Ireland in this year's 6N, Wales in the 6N, Glasgow's ERC games particularly against Carter at Racing.

It's when he starts making mistakes that he "folds" as you describe it, mostly if he has made errors and then he loses his cool a bit.

I guess the intention would be for England to try and force him into making mistakes, but what Scotland have done well recently is giving Russell so many options. Hogg comes in at first receiver sometimes to take the pressure off as does Huw Jones, it's happened in every game so far. In addition the Grays, Barclay, Watson and Wilson also give him options inside and out.

As you pointed out Beshocked, Hogg gets so much time and space on the ball because of Russell's distribution skills and of he plays well Scotland play well.

How did Maitland get on against the geordies? I personally would give Visser the nod to start against England regardless of how well Maitland played yesterday. I think he's earned it.

Few stood out yesterday RR, certainly not a game to judge form on. It was a complete wet blanket of a game...even the crowd were flat from the onset. Not sure why.
Either side could have won it...Sarries just edged it in the end.

How did Billy Vunipola play? I saw that he lasted 70-odd minutes.

Billy was fine. He didn't do much high impact crash ball stuff at all. Mostly passed the ball on.

He made one big carry that I can remember, but was swamped by Falcons immediately.

Like I said though...It was a bit of a flat game...not much high intensity or pace...so I wouldn't say it was a taxing game for him.

Mako was good though. Put one hell of a kick in...a peach of a touchline finder. A fly half would have been proud of it! The whole stadium applauded it!

BigGee wrote:

cascough wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage. This weekend may or may not be the time but I would imagine that any coach in the world would rather be defending a lead in the last 10 mins rather than trying to chase one down. Luck is going to run out at some stage, Wales were only one poor kick away from winning their game and Wales are not a great side at the moment.

Scotland will play for 80 mins, they have done in every game so far, including coming back from being behind against the Irish, a game that we finished the stronger side. We are actually getting quite good at closing out games now, not historically our strong point.

We may not have as strong a bench as England, but we will have players who can play for 80 mins. If we are in the lead as the match comes to its conclusion, I would fancy us to close it out. We just need to stay in the game to give ourselves that chance.

It has nothing to do with luck and JD2's kick wasn't the last play of the game so you can't actually that was the difference, people forget we should have had penalty in the build up to that.

Scotland have played for two 40 minutes so far, you were abject against Wales for the first 40 minutes and should have been out of it entirely and the last 30 against Ireland was equally poor.

Great post.

And again, as has been said many times, under Eddie Jones England are nearly always ahead going into the last 20. So quite where this notion that England are basing a strategy on their bench has come from is baffling to me.

Well actually there has been quite a lot of talk on this thread about the strength of England's bench and what they can do to a team in the last 20 mins. Even EJ builds that up by referring to them as his 'finishers'

England are a good front running team, at least they were up to this 6N. If they get away from Scotland, they will win and probably comfortably. We really do need to stay in the game. If we do though, I don't see this Scotland team chocking as others have done before, there is a different mindset now, we have won close games against good teams and confidence now exists. I think if we get our chance, we will take it.

England have lived dangerously a couple of times already in this tournament. You can't keep going to the well, one time the bucket will come up dry.

to be fair - so have we - and I would argue to a greater extend.

I think Scotland will win in an absolute belter.

The danger with comparing starters and finishers is that they are different roles. A finisher knows they have a shorter time to play and so can put more into it. Likewise, Itoje has a huge workrate for a lock, and is bringing a lot of that playing (mostly) 6, but there's clearly still something missing in the back row.

One thing we don't yet know about George and Sinckler in particular is whether they can sustain the intensity they offer for 20-30 minutes over 50-60. One way or another, we're likely to find out this summer but, barring injury, not before.

To BigGee's point, yes, England have lived dangerously during this tournament. It's obviously not intentional, but going into a tournament of this intensity having lost half of the 8+5 core group of forwards is a huge disruption to cope with. That's potentially down to 2 (Kruis and Robshaw) if Billy rejoins the team for Scotland, which might start to make a difference.

R!skysports wrote:

BigGee wrote:

cascough wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

BigGee wrote:If England keep basing their strategy on their strong bench and their ability to chase down a lead in the last 10 mins of a game, then they are going to come unstuck at some stage. This weekend may or may not be the time but I would imagine that any coach in the world would rather be defending a lead in the last 10 mins rather than trying to chase one down. Luck is going to run out at some stage, Wales were only one poor kick away from winning their game and Wales are not a great side at the moment.

Scotland will play for 80 mins, they have done in every game so far, including coming back from being behind against the Irish, a game that we finished the stronger side. We are actually getting quite good at closing out games now, not historically our strong point.

We may not have as strong a bench as England, but we will have players who can play for 80 mins. If we are in the lead as the match comes to its conclusion, I would fancy us to close it out. We just need to stay in the game to give ourselves that chance.

It has nothing to do with luck and JD2's kick wasn't the last play of the game so you can't actually that was the difference, people forget we should have had penalty in the build up to that.

Scotland have played for two 40 minutes so far, you were abject against Wales for the first 40 minutes and should have been out of it entirely and the last 30 against Ireland was equally poor.

Great post.

And again, as has been said many times, under Eddie Jones England are nearly always ahead going into the last 20. So quite where this notion that England are basing a strategy on their bench has come from is baffling to me.

Well actually there has been quite a lot of talk on this thread about the strength of England's bench and what they can do to a team in the last 20 mins. Even EJ builds that up by referring to them as his 'finishers'

England are a good front running team, at least they were up to this 6N. If they get away from Scotland, they will win and probably comfortably. We really do need to stay in the game. If we do though, I don't see this Scotland team chocking as others have done before, there is a different mindset now, we have won close games against good teams and confidence now exists. I think if we get our chance, we will take it.

England have lived dangerously a couple of times already in this tournament. You can't keep going to the well, one time the bucket will come up dry.

to be fair - so have we - and I would argue to a greater extend.

A fair point. Against both Ireland and Wales we certainly rode our luck at times!

In all fairness England have rode their luck against Wales and France too and werent very impressive v Italy to say the least. Both teams have but I can see this game being a cracker.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:In all fairness England have rode their luck against Wales and France too and werent very impressive v Italy to say the least. Both teams have but I can see this game being a cracker.

Well that is a kiss of death

Boring 6-9 slug fest now expected

Yes, England might be honestly misfiring.  It might even last into the Scottish game.  We (Irish) have to try to get past Wales so thinking too much about that final game is a little bit premature.  But I will say that if I were Joe Schmidt, or Vern Cotter - I'd be very cautious about any continuing signs of England's 'staleness' and presumed inability to get a rhythm going.

Jones is a crafty old coot and we only have to look at the 'off-colour' shenanigans the ABs can get up to in WC pool games - then the explosion of precision and pace in the play-off rounds just when everybody else is thinking they have a chance.  
I don't think Jones is above trying out such a ploy of wounded fragility.  They looked pretty damn sharp in those final minutes against Italy, a gameplan I feel they never had to delay for so long.  The Italian trick could always have been easily blown off the pitch by this England side had they just stopped messing around earlier in the game.
 
Both Scotland and Ireland should prepare to meet an England in absolute top form and then at least not be caught out mentally by any lulled complacency.

SecretFly wrote:
 
Both Scotland and Ireland should prepare to meet an England in absolute top form and then at least not be caught out mentally by any lulled complacency.

I can't imagine that any teams coached by either Cotter or Schmidt would ever be guilty of complacency. I don't imagine they know what the word means.

SecretFly wrote:Yes, England might be honestly misfiring.  It might even last into the Scottish game.  We (Irish) have to try to get past Wales so thinking too much about that final game is a little bit premature.  But I will say that if I were Joe Schmidt, or Vern Cotter - I'd be very cautious about any continuing signs of England's 'staleness' and presumed inability to get a rhythm going.

Jones is a crafty old coot and we only have to look at the 'off-colour' shenanigans the ABs can get up to in WC pool games - then the explosion of precision and pace in the play-off rounds just when everybody else is thinking they have a chance.  
I don't think Jones is above trying out such a ploy of wounded fragility.  They looked pretty damn sharp in those final minutes against Italy, a gameplan I feel they never had to delay for so long.  The Italian trick could always have been easily blown off the pitch by this England side had they just stopped messing around earlier in the game.
 
Both Scotland and Ireland should prepare to meet an England in absolute top form and then at least not be caught out mentally by any lulled complacency.

I's be staggered if Cotter and Schmidt go into these games thinking anything else. England IMO are the most dangerous team in the 6N, even more than Ireland (from a Scottish POV). Ireland were and are very dangerous but we were fortunate to have that Murrayfield ambush ready and waiting.

Facing England, at Twickenham after their frustrating match against Italy is a worry. They'll have 240 minutes of footage to get a good idea of what we are about whereas Scotland won't get much video analysis stuff from the Italy game because of that bizzare encounter last weekend.

I seriously doubt that England side have been playing possum in the first few games. I don't think Jones would risk such a r!sky tactic and I don't think the English players would go along with making such errors on purpose, even more with Mr Gatland watching on.

Their inaccuracies have been just that, inaccuracies. England have not played as well as they can in this tournament yet and I do worry that they may decide to do so this weekend. Mind you Scotland have left some points on the pitch over the last few weeks, and that is despite being very clinical with the possession we have had.

Fun quote from Lawes in the grauniad

Lawes also says he is happy to keep packing down in the back row to allow Itoje to take a key scrummaging role behind the England tighthead Dan Cole. “Maro’s stronger than me, there’s no getting around it. It’s not that I’m not a big strong boy but he’s a freak. One of the things he’s better at than me is scrummaging so why not put him in the second row? As long as it doesn’t cost me a place in the team I’m happy to do that. I don’t feel like I’ve lost my spot. I prefer to play six anyway.”

BigGee wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
 
Both Scotland and Ireland should prepare to meet an England in absolute top form and then at least not be caught out mentally by any lulled complacency.

I can't imagine that any teams coached by either Cotter or Schmidt would ever be guilty of complacency. I don't imagine they know what the word means.

Oh I think our team has often been guilty of coming with a bit of a coaster attitude and finding they have to pull up their socks to get the job done..............

It can happen. England have to be treated from the first minute like the 2nd best side in the world - i.e., a side on par with the ABs themselves.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

I seriously doubt that England side have been playing possum in the first few games. I don't think Jones would risk such a r!sky tactic and I don't think the English players would go along with making such errors on purpose, even more with Mr Gatland watching on.

Their inaccuracies have been just that, inaccuracies. England have not played as well as they can in this tournament yet and I do worry that they may decide to do so this weekend. Mind you Scotland have left some points on the pitch over the last few weeks, and that is despite being very clinical with the possession we have had.

I'm cautious. I've seen the ABs do it too often and it can be a ploy. I'm not saying all mistakes are gimmicks, I'm saying the supposed struggles with rhythm, etc. I'm just saying that's the difference in attitudes that you are proving. I'm cautious about the 'misfiring' angle and you feel it's genuine. I'd prefer going into a game being cautious of any wounded duck ploys that could potentially drag the coaches to concentrate on supposed weak areas.