6N 2017: England vs Scotland

funnyExiledScot wrote:

jimbopip wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Without sounding like a I can't help but think we need a more physical back than Mark Bennett coming off the bench to counteract Ben Teo. Teo has been a real driving force for England off the bench and Benentt isn't going to stop his momentum.

I'm not quite sure who though....

Duncan Taylor would have been the obvious choice but he's out. Matt Scott is a powerful runner but isn't actually a big hitter in defence. Our best defender at centre is Alex Dunbar, so you could just line him up opposite Teo.

The left field pick is, of course, Sean Lamont. But that's "left field" in the Corbyn sense, in other words a generally terrible idea.

That is true but he is more physical than Bennett mainly because he is bigger!

Bennett is an X-factor player but is a bit of a luxury against England IMO.

See? He's getting into the Luvvies' mindset already.

I'm just disturbed by the X-Factor reference. I thought RDW was better than that.

I actually think Bennett will be fine. I've never thought of him as a poor defender, and I'm yet to be convinced that Teo is the business, despite some strong cameos whilst England are in control. I'd be far more concerned about their more slippery options at centre, Joseph and Daly.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:I think the best tactic for Scotland, similar to the Italy game is lots of box kicks, touch finders and Garryowens.

Get the England fatties huffing and puffing and move them around as much as possible while putting lots of pressure on their back three.

jimbopip wrote:If you think Bennet is lightweight just now, wait till he's had a season of starvation rations!

kingelderfield wrote:Great expectations indeed?

So the question is how does everyone maintain their focus and keep grounded?

Everyone can see that this english squad has the potential to be very good and to maybe achieve the highest honours, however their last performance was awful and for me definitely contained a sense of over confidence from the starting 15.

Right now everyone is excited for the upcoming game and perhaps by the unrealistic expectation of Billy Vunipola's return. Realistically we need to see a performance against a very good scottish team, however what if we don't and it's another struggle where we've not been able to deliver to our potential?

There is scope for a number of changes.

kingelderfield wrote:Great expectations indeed?

So the question is how does everyone maintain their focus and keep grounded?

Everyone can see that this english squad has the potential to be very good and to maybe achieve the highest honours, however their last performance was awful and for me definitely contained a sense of over confidence from the starting 15.

Right now everyone is excited for the upcoming game and perhaps by the unrealistic expectation of Billy Vunipola's return. Realistically we need to see a performance against a very good scottish team, however what if we don't and it's another struggle where we've not been able to deliver to our potential?

There is scope for a number of changes.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

kingelderfield wrote:Great expectations indeed?

So the question is how does everyone maintain their focus and keep grounded?

Everyone can see that this english squad has the potential to be very good and to maybe achieve the highest honours, however their last performance was awful and for me definitely contained a sense of over confidence from the starting 15.

Right now everyone is excited for the upcoming game and perhaps by the unrealistic expectation of Billy Vunipola's return. Realistically we need to see a performance against a very good scottish team, however what if we don't and it's another struggle where we've not been able to deliver to our potential?

There is scope for a number of changes.

If both teams play 100%, England will win. It will be a struggle though. All the teams we have played this year have struggled to break us down. I can't see why England will be any different.

All the hype about Billy is reaching hysterical levels. The rugby press are getting far too over excited as if his return will cure all of the perceived problems the national side are experiencing. He'll make a difference I'm sure but IMO it's the wrong loose forward who has come back. Robshaw IMO would shore up a lot of the England deficiencies.

I'm going to stick my neck out and say I think Scotland will win this game. I think we have a far more potent attacking threat and I also think we have the advantage at the lineout and at the breakdown. England will dominate the scrum but apart from the France game Scotland have been so crisp in their handling of the ball that we have avoided scrums pretty well. The forecast for Saturday is sunny and bright, IMO advantage Scotland, especially with the weight of that winning streak England are on.

There you got, I've talked myself into saying it!!!

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I've got a strange feeling about this game.

Scotland are playing really well, as well as I've seen for a long long time. But, I just don't think they've got the game to really threaten us(famous last words). I watched them against France and they struggled against the power the French have, I think this could be a similar story.

I was more worried before the Welsh game, I just don't have that feeling this time. We've got some big players back in the Vuinipolas and must have had a kick up the hoop after Italy.

England 29-19 Scotland

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I've got a strange feeling about this game.

Scotland are playing really well, as well as I've seen for a long long time. But, I just don't think they've got the game to really threaten us(famous last words). I watched them against France and they struggled against the power the French have, I think this could be a similar story.

I was more worried before the Welsh game, I just don't have that feeling this time. We've got some big players back in the Vuinipolas and must have had a kick up the hoop after Italy.

England 29-19 Scotland

I'm with you on this one (unfortunately, given that I'm going to the game) and have predicted the same points difference on the week 4 competition.

I hope I'm wrong but that France game has shown we struggle against hugely physical teams and England will be just as physical as the French, if not more.

doctor_grey wrote:During this winning streak England have not been blowing teams away.  They have been winning tough and grinding out most of their wins.  Consequently, I see no reason to expect England to go on a scoring tear against Scotland, who are very good.  Another tight match, win or lose.

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

Gooseberry wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:During this winning streak England have not been blowing teams away.  They have been winning tough and grinding out most of their wins.  Consequently, I see no reason to expect England to go on a scoring tear against Scotland, who are very good.  Another tight match, win or lose.

All but 5 of the wins have been by 10 points or more. They took Aus twice and SA by 16.
So I guess it depends on your definition of blowing teams away. Their previous big run streak ( 2002/3) they had more hug victories ( 20+ margins) but as many close games, with the ones against quality opponents being really tight. Comnpared to New Zelands streak though yeah the dominance just hasnt been there, and they have looked like dead men walking a few times. That said there does seem to be a perception issue around games like the Italy one and to some extent Wales..as well as amnesia about how strong they were in the AI's.  


(Neither run streak is much compared to Cypruses 28 tests victories in a row more than half of which were 30+ ... even more impressive that they didnt get to face soft oppsition like Wales. )


All that aside I dont think a tightly contested match and a try fest ( or "scoring tear")  are mutually exclusive. England are a better attacking team and play to score than they are a defensive one. Scotland too are in a rare space where their best play comes from the backs and they are on a hiding to nothing tryiong to make it a physical contest in the forwards with England. Its hard to see Scortland turning up looking to spoil the game and slow it like Italy did. Sure they will scavenge and contest the ball, but the traditional approach of kicking for territory and looking for penalties just isnt on the table. England should get dominance in the set piece so should have a decent amount of ball even if they cant smash scotland off theirs.
As both teams are likley to be looking to play fast and loose it could very easily be a try fest. That doesnt mean it cant be close, but I really fail to see how Scotland will stop England scoring multiple tries. Theres been "dark horse" scotland teams turn up to Twickers a number of times in recnet years, many of them with better tacklers than Visser on the wing, and theyve almost universally leaked points. This one may be better placed to score them, but i dont see it as better placed to stop them and this is the strongest attacking England team since the last one that was stronger.
Current weather forecast supports attacking play too; theres no real excuse for similar failings in basic skill execution as we saw in the Italy game. Bonus points galore.

kingelderfield wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

He's still good and obviously has the benefit of being a natural full back with good position, communication and organisational skills, however his form is dipping and his inability to link in attack outweighs his tackle breaking exuberance. Brown is not Francis Pilatau.

Basically the back line needs to improve and the full back position has the most potential.

My current preference is for Daly to replace Brown. He is not a natural fb like Brown but has the ability (pace, boot and attacking experience) plus the potential to exploit the space.

Nowell is I think the more natural fb but doesn't have the same pace and right now is better placed on the wing (until Wade takes over). I am impressed by Nowell's rugby brain and natural ability to link the play. He certainly could play fb if needed.

Watson is still a possibility but really needs to focus on fb or wing and needs to show consistent form to prove his inclusion.

The other serious option is Slade who has the footballing ability and sufficient pace to link with the line, however I wouldn't include him in the current configuration if both Ford and Farrell are starting.

kingelderfield wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

He's still good and obviously has the benefit of being a natural full back with good position, communication and organisational skills, however his form is dipping and his inability to link in attack outweighs his tackle breaking exuberance. Brown is not Francis Pilatau.

Basically the back line needs to improve and the full back position has the most potential.

My current preference is for Daly to replace Brown. He is not a natural fb like Brown but has the ability (pace, boot and attacking experience) plus the potential to exploit the space.

Nowell is I think the more natural fb but doesn't have the same pace and right now is better placed on the wing (until Wade takes over). I am impressed by Nowell's rugby brain and natural ability to link the play. He certainly could play fb if needed.

Watson is still a possibility but really needs to focus on fb or wing and needs to show consistent form to prove his inclusion.

The other serious option is Slade who has the footballing ability and sufficient pace to link with the line, however I wouldn't include him in the current configuration if both Ford and Farrell are starting.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Not true, I predicted a 21-17 Scotland win against Ireland so did plenty of Irish people.

Rodders also predicted a Scotland win:

https://www.606v2.com/t65062-six-nations-competition-week-4

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:During this winning streak England have not been blowing teams away.  They have been winning tough and grinding out most of their wins.  Consequently, I see no reason to expect England to go on a scoring tear against Scotland, who are very good.  Another tight match, win or lose.

All but 5 of the wins have been by 10 points or more. They took Aus twice and SA by 16.
So I guess it depends on your definition of blowing teams away. Their previous big run streak ( 2002/3) they had more hug victories ( 20+ margins) but as many close games, with the ones against quality opponents being really tight. Comnpared to New Zelands streak though yeah the dominance just hasnt been there, and they have looked like dead men walking a few times. That said there does seem to be a perception issue around games like the Italy one and to some extent Wales..as well as amnesia about how strong they were in the AI's.  


(Neither run streak is much compared to Cypruses 28 tests victories in a row more than half of which were 30+ ... even more impressive that they didnt get to face soft oppsition like Wales. )


All that aside I dont think a tightly contested match and a try fest ( or "scoring tear")  are mutually exclusive. England are a better attacking team and play to score than they are a defensive one. Scotland too are in a rare space where their best play comes from the backs and they are on a hiding to nothing tryiong to make it a physical contest in the forwards with England. Its hard to see Scortland turning up looking to spoil the game and slow it like Italy did. Sure they will scavenge and contest the ball, but the traditional approach of kicking for territory and looking for penalties just isnt on the table. England should get dominance in the set piece so should have a decent amount of ball even if they cant smash scotland off theirs.
As both teams are likley to be looking to play fast and loose it could very easily be a try fest. That doesnt mean it cant be close, but I really fail to see how Scotland will stop England scoring multiple tries. Theres been "dark horse" scotland teams turn up to Twickers a number of times in recnet years, many of them with better tacklers than Visser on the wing, and theyve almost universally leaked points. This one may be better placed to score them, but i dont see it as better placed to stop them and this is the strongest attacking England team since the last one that was stronger.
Current weather forecast supports attacking play too; theres no real excuse for similar failings in basic skill execution as we saw in the Italy game. Bonus points galore.

England should get dominance in the scrum. We have yet to lose a line out on our own ball in the tournament and we have come up against some renowned lineout jumpers. It helps when you have 2 sky scrapers in form of the Gray bros.

I do think the Scrums will be a bit more even though since the front row of Reid, Brown and Fagerson all regularly pack down for Glasgow. They are not a force to be feared in the scrum but rarely embarrass themselves.

TightHEAD wrote:I wonder whether Scotland will do an Italy within the first 10mins just to mock them?

cascough wrote:

kingelderfield wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

He's still good and obviously has the benefit of being a natural full back with good position, communication and organisational skills, however his form is dipping and his inability to link in attack outweighs his tackle breaking exuberance. Brown is not Francis Pilatau.

Basically the back line needs to improve and the full back position has the most potential.

My current preference is for Daly to replace Brown. He is not a natural fb like Brown but has the ability (pace, boot and attacking experience) plus the potential to exploit the space.

Nowell is I think the more natural fb but doesn't have the same pace and right now is better placed on the wing (until Wade takes over). I am impressed by Nowell's rugby brain and natural ability to link the play. He certainly could play fb if needed.

Watson is still a possibility but really needs to focus on fb or wing and needs to show consistent form to prove his inclusion.

The other serious option is Slade who has the footballing ability and sufficient pace to link with the line, however I wouldn't include him in the current configuration if both Ford and Farrell are starting.

Finding this post a bit all over the place if I'm honest.

Daly broke through at full back for Wasps and has played a lot there. He also played there and scored against England for the Baa-Baas. He was excellent in that game. I don't think he lacks the experience of the position at all, plus, he's had good exposure to test rugby now.

Daly has had limited fb experience but like I say has the ability to exploit the position and so improve the teams's overall potential.

I'm not sure Nowell is a natural fullback. He doesn't really have a kicking game and hasn't played much there in his career. There are some similarities to Brown though, in so much as he is good in contact. As for Wade taking over, you're saying when not if!? Can't see Wade's strengths getting much better (not a slight, they are awesome) so unless his weaknesses are going to drastically improve then I can't see him getting any more involvement than he is now. Would be interested to hear why you think this will change?

Nowell's rugby ability is what makes him capable as a fb, hence I did not include May as an option.

As to Wade on the wing. Realistically only his form for Wasps, particularly in europe, or possible for the Lion's will persuade Jones. As thing's stand he isn't going to be selected - not that will stop me arguing for his inclusion.

As for Watson focusing on one position, I'm not sure about that. Large parts of the positions skill set are interchangeable and there has been a long history of players being able to interchange. Actually it's a real plus and really opens up options for the makeup of your 23. I agree he needs to show consistent form, but then I'd also argue that for England he has. He's been injured (which he can't do much about) and Bath are struggling for a bit of continuity over the last 18 months. That will always make things tough for a back 3 player.

Watson is not a natural rugby player. He is a fantastic athlete whose skills are comparatively limited and so realistically has to focus on the needs of one position only. If that is wing or fb.......my hunch is wing.

Also not sure how Slade is entering a serious discussion for full back, especially as a criticism of Daly was "not a natural FB"?

TightHEAD wrote:I wonder whether Scotland will do an Italy within the first 10mins just to mock them?

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:I wonder whether Scotland will do an Italy within the first 10mins just to mock them?

I'd be surprised if we do. Our strengths are in the breakdown and counter rucking. To execute that Volpe tactic would be anathema to all the strengths in our backrow.

If we do it will purely be to troll Eddie Jones.

cascough wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

Interesting. I'm still seeing him breaking tackles and making hard yards, which has proved crucial to our game IMO.

kingelderfield wrote:
The fh and fb positions have clear overlap. Slade is a wonderfully talented rugby player who would work very well at fb especially if we were to revert to Farrell only less Ford.

TightHEAD wrote:I wonder whether Scotland will do an Italy within the first 10mins just to mock them?

kingelderfield wrote:

cascough wrote:

kingelderfield wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

He's still good and obviously has the benefit of being a natural full back with good position, communication and organisational skills, however his form is dipping and his inability to link in attack outweighs his tackle breaking exuberance. Brown is not Francis Pilatau.

Basically the back line needs to improve and the full back position has the most potential.

My current preference is for Daly to replace Brown. He is not a natural fb like Brown but has the ability (pace, boot and attacking experience) plus the potential to exploit the space.

Nowell is I think the more natural fb but doesn't have the same pace and right now is better placed on the wing (until Wade takes over). I am impressed by Nowell's rugby brain and natural ability to link the play. He certainly could play fb if needed.

Watson is still a possibility but really needs to focus on fb or wing and needs to show consistent form to prove his inclusion.

The other serious option is Slade who has the footballing ability and sufficient pace to link with the line, however I wouldn't include him in the current configuration if both Ford and Farrell are starting.

Finding this post a bit all over the place if I'm honest.

Daly broke through at full back for Wasps and has played a lot there. He also played there and scored against England for the Baa-Baas. He was excellent in that game. I don't think he lacks the experience of the position at all, plus, he's had good exposure to test rugby now.

Daly has had limited fb experience but like I say has the ability to exploit the position and so improve the teams's overall potential.

I'm not sure Nowell is a natural fullback. He doesn't really have a kicking game and hasn't played much there in his career. There are some similarities to Brown though, in so much as he is good in contact. As for Wade taking over, you're saying when not if!? Can't see Wade's strengths getting much better (not a slight, they are awesome) so unless his weaknesses are going to drastically improve then I can't see him getting any more involvement than he is now. Would be interested to hear why you think this will change?

Nowell's rugby ability is what makes him capable as a fb, hence I did not include May as an option.

As to Wade on the wing. Realistically only his form for Wasps, particularly in europe, or possible for the Lion's will persuade Jones. As thing's stand he isn't going to be selected - not that will stop me arguing for his inclusion.

As for Watson focusing on one position, I'm not sure about that. Large parts of the positions skill set are interchangeable and there has been a long history of players being able to interchange. Actually it's a real plus and really opens up options for the makeup of your 23. I agree he needs to show consistent form, but then I'd also argue that for England he has. He's been injured (which he can't do much about) and Bath are struggling for a bit of continuity over the last 18 months. That will always make things tough for a back 3 player.

Watson is not a natural rugby player. He is a fantastic athlete whose skills are comparatively limited and so realistically has to focus on the needs of one position only. If that is wing or fb.......my hunch is wing.

Also not sure how Slade is entering a serious discussion for full back, especially as a criticism of Daly was "not a natural FB"?

The fh and fb positions have clear overlap. Slade is a wonderfully talented rugby player who would work very well at fb especially if we were to revert to Farrell only less Ford.

robbo277 wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:During this winning streak England have not been blowing teams away.  They have been winning tough and grinding out most of their wins.  Consequently, I see no reason to expect England to go on a scoring tear against Scotland, who are very good.  Another tight match, win or lose.

All but 5 of the wins have been by 10 points or more. They took Aus twice and SA by 16.
So I guess it depends on your definition of blowing teams away. Their previous big run streak ( 2002/3) they had more hug victories ( 20+ margins) but as many close games, with the ones against quality opponents being really tight. Comnpared to New Zelands streak though yeah the dominance just hasnt been there, and they have looked like dead men walking a few times. That said there does seem to be a perception issue around games like the Italy one and to some extent Wales..as well as amnesia about how strong they were in the AI's.  


(Neither run streak is much compared to Cypruses 28 tests victories in a row more than half of which were 30+ ... even more impressive that they didnt get to face soft oppsition like Wales. )


All that aside I dont think a tightly contested match and a try fest ( or "scoring tear")  are mutually exclusive. England are a better attacking team and play to score than they are a defensive one. Scotland too are in a rare space where their best play comes from the backs and they are on a hiding to nothing tryiong to make it a physical contest in the forwards with England. Its hard to see Scortland turning up looking to spoil the game and slow it like Italy did. Sure they will scavenge and contest the ball, but the traditional approach of kicking for territory and looking for penalties just isnt on the table. England should get dominance in the set piece so should have a decent amount of ball even if they cant smash scotland off theirs.
As both teams are likley to be looking to play fast and loose it could very easily be a try fest. That doesnt mean it cant be close, but I really fail to see how Scotland will stop England scoring multiple tries. Theres been "dark horse" scotland teams turn up to Twickers a number of times in recnet years, many of them with better tacklers than Visser on the wing, and theyve almost universally leaked points. This one may be better placed to score them, but i dont see it as better placed to stop them and this is the strongest attacking England team since the last one that was stronger.
Current weather forecast supports attacking play too; theres no real excuse for similar failings in basic skill execution as we saw in the Italy game. Bonus points galore.

England should get dominance in the scrum. We have yet to lose a line out on our own ball in the tournament and we have come up against some renowned lineout jumpers. It helps when you have 2 sky scrapers in form of the Gray bros.

I do think the Scrums will be a bit more even though since the front row of Reid, Brown and Fagerson all regularly pack down for Glasgow. They are not a force to be feared in the scrum but rarely embarrass themselves.

England have taken 1 in 6 line outs on opposition throw and steal an average of 2 a game.

I think the point Gooseberry is trying to make though is that we can use our set-piece to hurt you. Scrums and driving line-outs can become attacking weapons for us, whereas if you guys execute your set-piece well, you will still probably only be using it as a means to secure possession for your backs to use.

lostinwales wrote:I think the match will look even everywhere except the scoreboard - where ultimately it will be a comfortable -ish win for England although going into the 2nd half the scores will be too close for comfort.

I still think there will be some nice back play from Scotland that will get the crowd on their feet etc which won't lead to many points. England will score quickly when they get a chance.

Poorfour wrote:

cascough wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:I think Browns days at XV are numbered, he gets tackled by the first man every time, compared to when he used to make yards every time he received the ball despite not being the quickest runner.

Interesting. I'm still seeing him breaking tackles and making hard yards, which has proved crucial to our game IMO.

I'm slightly divided about Brown. I've noticed something in his game that I think explains a lot, but I haven't seen enough of it to work out whether it's actually a tactic. We've seen that he can pass - as in the try against Wales. So why doesn't he?

I'm beginning to think that - at least some of the time - if he can't see anything on and he's opting to take it into contact and lay it back rather than burden his wingers with doing that. He does still miss some chances, but if there isn't anything on he's better at staying on his feet to give support time to arrive, and often better at presenting the ball than most other backs. If it is a tactic, and it's being applied correctly most of the time, it makes sense of a lot of what he does.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:

lostinwales wrote:I think the match will look even everywhere except the scoreboard - where ultimately it will be a comfortable -ish win for England although going into the 2nd half the scores will be too close for comfort.

I still think there will be some nice back play from Scotland that will get the crowd on their feet etc which won't lead to many points. England will score quickly when they get a chance.

As much as I hate to agree with this.....I actually agree with this.

funnyExiledScot wrote:It's true, we still have a penchant for conceding soft scores (e.g. the Liam Williams try against Wales).

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:

Aye but you guys haven't faced Dunbar yet.

Unbelievable lineout operator.

Scottrf wrote:The sources that read the 'secret whiteboard'.

kingelderfield wrote:But Daly has played quite a lot at fullback. Slade has not. How can that possibly be a black mark against Daly's name, but seemingly it doesn't matter for Slade?