Scotland 2017 6N debrief and Lions/Summer Tour lookahead

First topic message reminder :

Results

Scotland 27 - Ireland 22
France 22 - Scotland 16  
Scotland 29 - Wales 13  
England 61 - Scotland 21  
Scotland 29 - Italy 0  

Some stats:

- First time with 3 wins since 2006
- First opening round win and win over Wales in over a decade
- 14 tries scored - our best ever
- Our highest points tally (in 2014 we scored 45 points   )
- Up to 5th in the World Rankings


Verdict
Bar Twickenham this was a fantastic 6N where we won our games playing great rugby.  It was a huge monkey off our back to beat Wales and the Ireland game was a huge result for us.  The Twickenham game was a complete embarrassment but I'd like to think that was a freak result for this team as opposed to a sign that our wins over Wales and Ireland were 'lucky'.  It should keep the players grounded going forward, which is no bad thing.

All in all I'll give our 6N a 8/10

Lions hopefuls?

Pr - can't see any travelling
H Fraser Brown stands an outside chance, and could be injury cover
L - Jonny or Richie Gray stand a chance in the most competitive position
BR - I don't see any of our backrows going
SH - Laidlaw is down the list in terms of ability at 9 but may be picked as a good tourist/leader for the squad
FH - Finn Russell certainly divides opinion but personally I don't think he will travel
C - Dunbar and Jones are outside bets in what isn't actually a great position of depth for the Lions, but again may find themselves as injury cover
FR - Hogg is a near certainty and I can see another winger getting picked, probably Seymour

My prediction:

J Gray, Hogg, Seymour in the squad, Brown, Laidlaw and Jones as first choice injury cover.

munkian wrote:

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I'd say if you want to watch Scottish players then watch your Summer tour, if you want to support the Lions then watch the Lions tour.

Thanks for the insightful contribution.

It was genuine advice, if you get caught up in quotas etc it will drive you mad.

munkian wrote:It was genuine advice, if you get caught up in quotas etc it will drive you mad.

Enjoy your little Welsh lions clique munkian, come back and tell me if Gatlandball beat NZ at the 11th time of asking

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I think that's fair. Personally I'd take out Biggar and Moriarty, put in Russell and Watson. I don't think Biggar and Moriaty offer anything more.

Don't blame you for being detached. I can understand the frustation.

If J.Gray was there instead of Kruis I'd understand it too but can see why Kruis was favoured.

Lock is very competitive though.

beshocked wrote:

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I think that's fair. Personally I'd take out Biggar and Moriarty, put in Russell and Watson. I don't think Biggar and Moriaty offer anything more.

Don't blame you for being detached. I can understand the frustation.

If J.Gray was there instead of Kruis I'd understand it too but can see why Kruis was favoured.

Lock is very competitive though.

I'm more worried about Hogg and Seymour spending time with Gatland and Howley. They might come back and forget everything that Townsend has been drilling into them about how to play amazing counter attacking rugby.

I'm already setting myself up for Hogg being used as a crash test dummy midweek to keep Halfpenny safe for the tests.

Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

Biggar has far more big game experience than Russell.

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

Agree with this. Don't think most of the players (bar maybe Hamish Watson) could feel that they 100% deserved to be there, but the number of 50/50 calls which have not gone Scotland's way is frustrating. I get this is Gatland's team and the coaching staff are going to select players that they know can do a job for them and trust them to deliver under pressure.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I'm already setting myself up for Hogg being used as a crash test dummy midweek to keep Halfpenny safe for the tests.

Gatland is planning on playing him at 10 vs the Chiefs (with Mike Phillips drafted in as scrum-half due to injuries). Bad luck Stu.

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Selective reading is selective.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Somewhere in Wales now there is an enormous rupture, and a black hole will have appeared...

123456789 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Somewhere in Wales now there is an enormous rupture, and a black hole will have appeared...

Hopefully just over Merthyr

Next you'll be saying he picked his players based on those that have beaten New Zealand in New Zealand - that's what held the Scotland players back from selection apparently!

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Selective reading is selective.

Dodging the question is dodging the question.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I think that's fair. Personally I'd take out Biggar and Moriarty, put in Russell and Watson. I don't think Biggar and Moriaty offer anything more.

Don't blame you for being detached. I can understand the frustation.

If J.Gray was there instead of Kruis I'd understand it too but can see why Kruis was favoured.

Lock is very competitive though.

I'm more worried about Hogg and Seymour spending time with Gatland and Howley. They might come back and forget everything that Townsend has been drilling into them about how to play amazing counter attacking rugby.

I'm already setting myself up for Hogg being used as a crash test dummy midweek to keep Halfpenny safe for the tests.

Probably.

munkian Biggar isn't exactly a player used to beating the SH sides, if anything he has a history of struggling. Russell is less experienced but offers something different. He's a maverick whilst Biggar is simply inferior to Sexton and Farrell. (Probably Ford too, but Ford missed out).

Moriarty isn't in the same class as the other backrow picks.

Realistically Moriarty wouldn't get in the 23 of England or Ireland and would at best probably be benching for Scotland....

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Selective reading is selective.

Dodging the question is dodging the question.

It wasn't really a question though was it ? It was intentionally misquoting me.

Im not entirely sure what the duifference between form and reputation is.

We dont know what form the players will be in for the Lions, thats the future.
We know what theyve done in the past, thats their reputation.

Some have performed well recently and earned their repuation that way ( Daly)
Others have a history of getting red carded in a world cup, being dropped as their test captain and having fans suggest that Tipuric and Moriarty are better (Warburton)

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Selective reading is selective.

Dodging the question is dodging the question.

It wasn't really a question though was it ? It was intentionally misquoting me.

Yes because all the other Scottish Lions potentials have been poor for their clubs...

beshocked wrote:

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I think that's fair. Personally I'd take out Biggar and Moriarty, put in Russell and Watson. I don't think Biggar and Moriaty offer anything more.

Don't blame you for being detached. I can understand the frustation.

If J.Gray was there instead of Kruis I'd understand it too but can see why Kruis was favoured.

Lock is very competitive though.

I think Kruis is there on merit, given his record with England, despite his recent injuries - it should mean he is fresh and he has enough game time to get up to full speed. His relationship with Borthwick, Itoje and George will also be crucial. Lock is very competitive, I think Launchbury is the individual who can feel most aggrieved, he was my 6N player of the tournament. Gray is a wonderful player, his form did dip slightly at the tail end of the 6N, and it was a real shame he couldn't show what he can do against Sarries. Personally, I think this is due to the amount of work he is asked to get through for both Glasgow and Scotland, neither teams are replete with ball carriers, and he is asked to bear the brunt of alot of that workload. Still, he is a brilliant player who would have flourished in the Lions environment. Henderson and Lawes could easily have been Gray and Launchbury and I don't think the overall quality would have diminished at all.

Gooseberry wrote:Im not entirely sure what the duifference between form and reputation is.

We dont know what form the players will be in for the Lions, thats the future.
We know what theyve done in the past, thats their reputation.

Some have performed well recently and earned their repuation that way ( Daly)
Others have a history of getting red carded in a world cup, being dropped as their test captain and having fans suggest that Tipuric and Moriarty are better (Warburton)

I'm afraid what you need to understand is that the Welsh players didn't under perform because they're not very good anymore, Gatland quite rightly spotted that the coaching wasn't up to scratch.

Thank God that coach is nowhere near the tour.

EST wrote:

beshocked wrote:

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I think that's fair. Personally I'd take out Biggar and Moriarty, put in Russell and Watson. I don't think Biggar and Moriaty offer anything more.

Don't blame you for being detached. I can understand the frustation.

If J.Gray was there instead of Kruis I'd understand it too but can see why Kruis was favoured.

Lock is very competitive though.

I think Kruis is there on merit, given his record with England,  despite his recent injuries - it should mean he is fresh and he has enough game time to get up to full speed.  His relationship with Borthwick, Itoje and George will also be crucial.  Lock is very competitive, I think Launchbury is the individual who can feel most aggrieved, he was my 6N player of the tournament.  Gray is a wonderful player, his form did dip slightly at the tail end of the 6N, and it was a real shame he couldn't show what he can do against Sarries. Personally, I think this is due to the amount of work he is asked to get through for both Glasgow and Scotland, neither teams are replete with ball carriers, and he is asked to bear the brunt of alot of that workload.  Still, he is a brilliant player who would have flourished in the Lions environment.  Henderson and Lawes could easily have been Gray and Launchbury and I don't think the overall quality would have diminished at all.

Kruis if fit is prime candidate for me to be a test starter. My problem though same with AWJ, he is injured or has been long term injured. With so many fantastic other options in there (Launchberry, Gray) and others, I'm still not convinced Kruis or AWJ is a risk worth taking.

Let me be clear I rate Kruis a lot, but not enough to risk him in such a brutal tour schedule.

EST wrote:

beshocked wrote:

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I think that's fair. Personally I'd take out Biggar and Moriarty, put in Russell and Watson. I don't think Biggar and Moriaty offer anything more.

Don't blame you for being detached. I can understand the frustation.

If J.Gray was there instead of Kruis I'd understand it too but can see why Kruis was favoured.

Lock is very competitive though.

I think Kruis is there on merit, given his record with England,  despite his recent injuries - it should mean he is fresh and he has enough game time to get up to full speed.  His relationship with Borthwick, Itoje and George will also be crucial.  Lock is very competitive, I think Launchbury is the individual who can feel most aggrieved, he was my 6N player of the tournament.  Gray is a wonderful player, his form did dip slightly at the tail end of the 6N, and it was a real shame he couldn't show what he can do against Sarries. Personally, I think this is due to the amount of work he is asked to get through for both Glasgow and Scotland, neither teams are replete with ball carriers, and he is asked to bear the brunt of alot of that workload.  Still, he is a brilliant player who would have flourished in the Lions environment.  Henderson and Lawes could easily have been Gray and Launchbury and I don't think the overall quality would have diminished at all.

I do think Kruis is fortunate because lock is so competitive but there was always going to be a good lock or two missing out.

Launchbury doesn't run the lineout and that counts against him. Other players take more responsibilities than him.

I agree that J.Gray has perhaps suffered because of those England-Scotland and Sarries vs Glasgow games rightly or wrongly. Plus he still goes under the radar a bit.

J.Gray made a huge amount of tackles vs Ireland and perhaps deserved to be MOTM but the award went to Hogg.

When it comes to Scotland, the media limelight generally shines solely on Hogg.

It means getting recognition for the other Scottish players is tough.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Selective reading is selective.

Dodging the question is dodging the question.

It wasn't really a question though was it ? It was intentionally misquoting me.

Yes because all the other Scottish Lions potentials have been poor for their clubs...

I'm not saying they haven't, but Moriarty has been particularly highlighted for his current vein of form.

I doubt he'd make the test side but he'll love the smash em up games against the club sides.

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Selective reading is selective.

Dodging the question is dodging the question.

It wasn't really a question though was it ? It was intentionally misquoting me.

It was a question. The misquote wasn't intentional.

You have correctly identified that Moriarty is a form pick and are defending the selection on that basis. My question is whether or not you think that is the correct criterion upon which Lions should be picked?

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

EST wrote:

beshocked wrote:

EST wrote:Would anybody from the other nations have cared if Scotland had four representatives in total?  Add in 2 players from Gray, Gray, Maitland, Taylor, Dunbar, Russell & Watson, and take away a Lawes, Nowell, Te'o, Biggar or Moriarty - you can't tell me that is going to weaken the squad.    

Thats what most of the Scottish contingent on here have been arguing for, 2 more representatives and some recognition - 4/41 - it's hardly asking for much.  For those two players, you would have pretty much negated this whole argument.  I love the lions, but I can't help but feel detached from the whole concept this time around.

I think that's fair. Personally I'd take out Biggar and Moriarty, put in Russell and Watson. I don't think Biggar and Moriaty offer anything more.

Don't blame you for being detached. I can understand the frustation.

If J.Gray was there instead of Kruis I'd understand it too but can see why Kruis was favoured.

Lock is very competitive though.

I think Kruis is there on merit, given his record with England,  despite his recent injuries - it should mean he is fresh and he has enough game time to get up to full speed.  His relationship with Borthwick, Itoje and George will also be crucial.  Lock is very competitive, I think Launchbury is the individual who can feel most aggrieved, he was my 6N player of the tournament.  Gray is a wonderful player, his form did dip slightly at the tail end of the 6N, and it was a real shame he couldn't show what he can do against Sarries. Personally, I think this is due to the amount of work he is asked to get through for both Glasgow and Scotland, neither teams are replete with ball carriers, and he is asked to bear the brunt of alot of that workload.  Still, he is a brilliant player who would have flourished in the Lions environment.  Henderson and Lawes could easily have been Gray and Launchbury and I don't think the overall quality would have diminished at all.

Kruis if fit is prime candidate for me to be a test starter. My problem though same with AWJ, he is injured or has been long term injured. With so many fantastic other options in there (Launchberry, Gray) and others, I'm still not convinced Kruis or AWJ is a risk worth taking.

Let me be clear I rate Kruis a lot, but not enough to risk him in such a brutal tour schedule.

I think AWJ (who was always going to tour regardless) and Kruis are in different situations, Kruis played last week and potentially has another 6 games to go this season (if Sarries get to the final of both competitions) - he should have enough time to get up to speed.

Itoje and Kruis would start the first test in the boiler room, for me.

munkian Moriarty still isn't as good as numerous backrowers though even if he's in good form.

If injuries happen Moriarty could be bumped up to starting vs the ABs. That's not something I'd like to see.

He put in a valiant effort vs a scratch thrown together England backrow on his home turf with two experienced operators next to him but vs the experienced ABs on their own patch?

Moriarty might be able to do a job as a mid weeker but shouldn't be challenging for a spot in the Lions 23.

Moriarty s tackling was superb. The dan Lydiate of 2017 but not injured like the 2013 original which is a slight improvement. Carrying was sub par for a 6 let alone an 8.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

munkian wrote:Moriarty had a cracking 6 nations and is on top form for his club, taking him out just to bump up Scottish numbers is crazy.

So you think Gatland should have selected the Lions based on form over the 6 Nations?

Selective reading is selective.

Dodging the question is dodging the question.

It wasn't really a question though was it ? It was intentionally misquoting me.

It was a question. The misquote wasn't intentional.

You have correctly identified that Moriarty is a form pick and are defending the selection on that basis. My question is whether or not you think that is the correct criterion upon which Lions should be picked?

FESy FESy FESy.....

Don't you know that the yardstick used to measure England, Ireland and Welsh Lions contenders is totally different than those used to measure Scottish Lions contenders, mostly because we didn't have a coach to fight the case for our players!

beshocked wrote:munkian Moriarty still isn't as good as numerous backrowers though even if he's in good form.

If injuries happen Moriarty could be bumped up to starting vs the ABs. That's not something I'd like to see.

He put in a valiant effort vs a scratch thrown together England backrow on his home turf with two experienced operators next to him but vs the experienced ABs on their own patch?

Many, many rugby journalists disagree with you but if you say so. He seemed to do Ok against the much vaunted Irish back row.

Really? Which journalists think Moriarty is a better player than Vunipola or Faletau?

munkian wrote:

beshocked wrote:munkian Moriarty still isn't as good as numerous backrowers though even if he's in good form.

If injuries happen Moriarty could be bumped up to starting vs the ABs. That's not something I'd like to see.

He put in a valiant effort vs a scratch thrown together England backrow on his home turf with two experienced operators next to him but vs the experienced ABs on their own patch?

Many, many rugby journalists disagree with you but if you say so. He seemed to do Ok against the much vaunted Irish back row.

Hamish Watson did "ok" against the vaunted Irish backrow and every single member of the Wions backrow too, counted for the square route of FA tho.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Moriarty s tackling was superb. The dan Lydiate of 2017 but not injured like the 2013 original which is a slight improvement. Carrying was sub par for a 6 let alone an 8.

My only gripe with the Moriarty pick is that Gatland has gone with a form player ahead of three vastly more experienced operators in Robshaw, Barclay and Haskell, and yet when it comes to other areas of the squad he appears to have largely gone with experience ahead of form (AWJ ahead of Launchbury/J Gray, Tipuric ahead of Watson, Biggar ahead of Ford/Russell, JD2 ahead of Ringrose and making room for Halfpenny).

It just feels a bit like one rule for Welsh players, and another for the rest. That all said, he did pick Ben Teo ahead of Jamie Roberts....

123456789 wrote:

I'm afraid what you need to understand is that the Welsh players didn't under perform because they're not very good anymore, Gatland quite rightly spotted that the coaching wasn't up to scratch.

Thank God that coach is nowhere near the tour.

Hmmm...Gatland, - who put 12 Welsh players on the Lions plane (a bit of a surprise even to his fans) - went around all 'home' Nations during the 6N - watched practice/training - probably asked respective International coaches about their players - how they expected to use them, a little bit on tactics etc - all the better for Gats then to watch the 6N game that weekend and see how the players are responding to coaching instructions etc

- then he has Howley coaching his boys whilst he is away being a non-biased Lions Head but has Howley as part of his Lions set up anyway - so of course can have legitimate discussions with his fellow Lions coach about what he wants of Lions players etc

- and then, and then, that BIG, sly, never-to-be-forgotten, can't-hold-it-in-anymore smile at the end of the Wales v Ireland game.................

Gats had NO input into Welsh coaching during the 6N, having had privileged access to training ground runs of England, Scotland and Ireland???  Gats offered no whispered advise to Howley to help his Welsh boys along?  The Big Smile of satisfaction at the end of that Wales v Ireland game is a strong indicator that he a pretty big part in stalling the Irish plans anyway.

munkian wrote:

beshocked wrote:munkian Moriarty still isn't as good as numerous backrowers though even if he's in good form.

If injuries happen Moriarty could be bumped up to starting vs the ABs. That's not something I'd like to see.

He put in a valiant effort vs a scratch thrown together England backrow on his home turf with two experienced operators next to him but vs the experienced ABs on their own patch?

Many, many rugby journalists disagree with you but if you say so. He seemed to do Ok against the much vaunted Irish back row.

He did fine vs an off colour Heaslip thanks to his team mates.

Okay let's be serious munkian, where would you rank Moriarty?

I would rank these backrowers above Moriarty.

Billy
Stander
Faletau
POM
SOB
Tipuric
Warburton
Robshaw
Haskell
Watson

Might even pick Barclay or Hardie ahead too. An in form Heaslip is clearly a better player too.

Greig Laidlaw named on the bench for Gloucester this weekend.

If Connor Murray doesn't recover in time could we see him getting called up as a similar, controlling type 9?

Danny Care is more in the Reece Webb mould so offers too similar an option.  

If Gareth feckin Davies gets a callup instead there may be a meltdown on this forum.

123456789 wrote:

I'm afraid what you need to understand is that the Welsh players didn't under perform because they're not very good anymore, Gatland quite rightly spotted that the coaching wasn't up to scratch.

Presumably why he sacked him.

Just like he did last time.

RDW_Scotland wrote:Greig Laidlaw named on the bench for Gloucester this weekend.

If Connor Murray doesn't recover in time could we see him getting called up as a similar, controlling type 9?

Danny Care is more in the Reece Webb mould so offers too similar an option.  

If Gareth feckin Davies gets a callup instead there may be a meltdown on this forum.

I would think that Laidlaw has a fair shot at being called-up should there be an injury to one of the chosen 9s. I see Murray and Webb as strong front runners for the Test jersey, although we know that Ben Youngs is a great player when he's on song. Problem is, Aaron Smith is better than all of them.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Greig Laidlaw named on the bench for Gloucester this weekend.

If Connor Murray doesn't recover in time could we see him getting called up as a similar, controlling type 9?

Danny Care is more in the Reece Webb mould so offers too similar an option.  

If Gareth feckin Davies gets a callup instead there may be a meltdown on this forum.

I would think that Laidlaw has a fair shot at being called-up should there be an injury to one of the chosen 9s. I see Murray and Webb as strong front runners for the Test jersey, although we know that Ben Youngs is a great player when he's on song. Problem is, Aaron Smith is better than all of them.

I've heard from a reliable source that Murray may need shoulder surgery

Wow, that's a heck of a scoop!

Although chances of Laidlaw being called up? It's harder to imagine a less Gatlandy player. He's small, not very fast and not very powerful.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Although chances of Laidlaw being called up? It's harder to imagine a less Gatlandy player. He's small, not very fast and not very powerful.

Agreed. I suspect Danny Care would likely be next in line.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Although chances of Laidlaw being called up? It's harder to imagine a less Gatlandy player. He's small, not very fast and not very powerful.

Agreed. I suspect Danny Care would likely be next in line.

Although Danny Care falls down in terms of being "a good tourist" by being a complete gimp. Laidlaw may be selected if in fact Murray is injured since he has leadership qualities.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Although chances of Laidlaw being called up? It's harder to imagine a less Gatlandy player. He's small, not very fast and not very powerful.

Agreed. I suspect Danny Care would likely be next in line.

Although Danny Care falls down in terms of being "a good tourist" by being a complete gimp. Laidlaw may be selected if in fact Murray is injured since he has leadership qualities.

True, but Gatland has shunned Haskell/Barclay/Robshaw for Moriarty, so I don't think leadership qualities alone will get you there (unless your name is AWJ or Biggar).

I really am a big fan of Laidlaw's but without his goal kicking (on the basis that Biggar, Farrell, Sexton and/or Halfpenny will likely be doing that) I'm not sure I'd pick him ahead of Care (or even Ali Price). I don't think Laidlaw's form is good enough (not that Gatland worries about that in many cases).

munkian wrote:They should make you a special trophy

They did, its called the Bitter Cup.

SecretFly wrote:

123456789 wrote:

I'm afraid what you need to understand is that the Welsh players didn't under perform because they're not very good anymore, Gatland quite rightly spotted that the coaching wasn't up to scratch.

Thank God that coach is nowhere near the tour.

Hmmm...Gatland, - who put 12 Welsh players on the Lions plane (a bit of a surprise even to his fans) - went around all 'home' Nations during the 6N - watched practice/training - probably asked respective International coaches about their players - how they expected to use them, a little bit on tactics etc - all the better for Gats then to watch the 6N game that weekend and see how the players are responding to coaching instructions etc

- then he has Howley coaching his boys whilst he is away being a non-biased Lions Head but has Howley as part of his Lions set up anyway - so of course can have legitimate discussions with his fellow Lions coach about what he wants of Lions players etc

- and then, and then, that BIG, sly, never-to-be-forgotten, can't-hold-it-in-anymore smile at the end of the Wales v Ireland game.................

Gats had NO input into Welsh coaching during the 6N, having had privileged access to training ground runs of England, Scotland and Ireland???  Gats offered no whispered advise to Howley to help his Welsh boys along?  The Big Smile of satisfaction at the end of that Wales v Ireland game is a strong indicator that he a pretty big part in stalling the Irish plans anyway.

You need to get a paranoid lunatic check up.

Gwlad wrote:

You need to get a paranoid lunatic check up.

Ah you missed the lovely smile of relieved delight from the unbiased Lions Head Coach? That was the moment he rubber-stamped 12 Welsh men onto the Lions teamsheet. That pic should be on your wall, Gwlad.... special moment.

SecretFly wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

You need to get a paranoid lunatic check up.

Ah you missed the lovely smile of relieved delight from the unbiased Lions Head Coach?   That was the moment he rubber-stamped 12 Welsh men onto the Lions teamsheet.  That pic should be on your wall, Gwlad.... special moment.  

Would it go next go his Wales 30-3 England pic; or the Wales 22-9 Ireland pic?

mikey_dragon wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

You need to get a paranoid lunatic check up.

Ah you missed the lovely smile of relieved delight from the unbiased Lions Head Coach?   That was the moment he rubber-stamped 12 Welsh men onto the Lions teamsheet.  That pic should be on your wall, Gwlad.... special moment.  

Would it go next go his Wales 30-3 England pic; or the Wales 22-9 Ireland pic?

They're grand pics sure enough. But it'd go to a special place above both.... right next to the Ballboy pic.

SecretFly wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

You need to get a paranoid lunatic check up.

Ah you missed the lovely smile of relieved delight from the unbiased Lions Head Coach?   That was the moment he rubber-stamped 12 Welsh men onto the Lions teamsheet.  That pic should be on your wall, Gwlad.... special moment.  

Would it go next go his Wales 30-3 England pic; or the Wales 22-9 Ireland pic?

They're grand pics sure enough.  But it'd go to a special place above both.... right next to the Ballboy pic.  

and the Grand Slams and the moment he jumped out of his seat at RWC after England had a mass wibble

Oh yeah, let's not forget the Slams. Let me see... where are they? Place is a mess.

Oh here they are! - right under the framed scalps of BOD and Adam Jones.