Scotland v Australia 25th November

by **BigGee** Sun Nov 19, 2017 12:25 pm

First topic message reminder :

Scotland v Australia
25th November 2017
BT Murrayfield Stadium

ko 14.30
Coverage BBC/BT Sport

While the overall balance in this fixture leans heavily towards Australia, it is also fair to say that the Aussie's don't have the hex over Scotland in the same way that the All Blacks do. Scotland have won on several occasions, including their most recent fixture in Australia in the summer and before that was the infamous (from a Scottish perspective) WC quarter final, with a certain dubious reffing decision, that may have had an impact on the result.

Australia were in the middle of a post WC slump during the summer, from which they have largely recovered now, but similarly Scotland were missing a few key players and it could well be argued are a more complete side now.

Probably more influential on the result will be what the two games this weekend have taken out of the two teams, particularly in terms of injured players.

Australia ended up well beaten by England, but with a score line that did not really reflect the match, in fact, with a few of the more marginal calls going their way, the result could easily have gone the other way. They did however worryingly run badly out of steam in the last 10 mins when the match ran away from them.

Scotland, on the other hand, despite taking a horrible injury toll against NZ, actually finished the game the stronger team and how often can that be said when playing the blackness.

My worries for Scotland are that they may have lost, from an already inexperienced side, just one or two players to many; as well as just how can they possibly get themselves back up again after playing so well and getting nothing to show for it. This match will actually be a massive test for them in terms of their progress. Are they just a team that can get themselves up for a big game, or can they be consistently good now and back up a performance with another. In the 6N last year and on the summer tour, they failed to do that and to move forward, they need to start doing so.

by tigertattie Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:05 pm

how often do you see it employed as an attacking weapon though!

normally its a defensive kick which more often than not surrenders the ball and most of the time, the catcher makes it to almost the same place as where the ball was kicked before he'd grounded!

by **George Carlin** Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:21 pm

I am very disappointed that this thread has degenerated into a series of interesting and perceptive comments about rugby.

This goes against everything that these boards stands for.

by **LondonTiger** Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:21 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:yeah there's definitely still place in the game for a well executed box kick. Sometimes it just isn't possible to get a pass away to your 10 to clear as it will put them under too much pressure, and if you've got a good chase it can be a real attacking weapon.

Perhaps it is not a box kick, but there are also times when it makes sense for the SH to employ the same kick but to touch. After all how many times do we see the SH pass back 10m to the FH who then finds tough 25m ahead (a gain of just 15m) as they are still rushed.

The problem is more the amount of aimless kicking that happens in a game - and often SHs are guilty of this (but not the only ones). Technically (as May flicked the ball up to himself) all four England tries against Aus were the results of kicks.

by **RDW** Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:22 pm

Quite often I’d say – Edinburgh beat the Blues in a large part due to well contested box kicks, taking advantage of the Blues fullback being tiny. Scotland have done a few over the last few weeks too, especially against Samoa – I do remember Lee Jones chasing some box kicks and (probably because he knows he’s not going to out jump them) try and put in a dominant hit to get the turnover. It is particularly useful if you have support with you to put a lot of pressure on the person who has just caught the ball.

by dummy_half Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:25 pm

Be interesting to see if a patched up Scotland have enough left to beat a good Aussie side. I think the Scotland back line is as strong an attacking force as I ever remember (going back to Laidlaw - Rutherford - Renwick - Irvine); perhaps this has come slightly to the detriment of their defence. In fact, my feeling is that Scotland are one or two players (a top class 8 being one) and a bit of squad depth away from being a really top team.

I do though feel that the defensive issues are usually a systemic issue rather than down to individual errors. Certainly, against England in the last 6Ns, we found a way to swamp the 10-12 channel before your back row could get across, and this led to space for Joseph in particular to exploit between Dunbar and Jones. That Ford and Farrell had great accuracy in passing that day also helped, meaning the ball carriers were hitting the line at pace. I don't recall seeing Scotland players falling off one-on-one tackles to any great extent though

Against the ABs, it just came down to a couple of moments of great skill from SBW in particular, and taking advantage of the time Dunbar was out of action. I'm not reading too much into the Samoa game, as that was a bit 'soft'.

by SecretFly Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:26 pm

tigertattie wrote:how often do you see it employed as an attacking weapon though!

normally its a defensive kick which more often than not surrenders the ball and most of the time, the catcher makes it to almost the same place as where the ball was kicked before he'd grounded!

Box kicking to a team that has all the tools to chase back down your throat with it, is to me the biggest mystery in Rugby Union for the past .... well about 20 years. No coach will explain to me well enough why it makes sense. It makes none and certainly none in terms of 'defence'. If you can't attack your way out of your own half, why choose to 'defend' your way out by kicking to the opposition when getting no traction in attack?
However, in the dim and distant past Ireland often got much traction from them when many of the players chased after said ball and one Rob Kearney often hoisted himself into the air and took it in prime attacking territory.
However, even that genuine use of box kicking - that even I can understand the merits of - that too often fell down in the execution as even in his high catching heyday (long since gone) Rob would often be left as the only chaser of note and would be turned over the minute he landed with ball in hand.
It has its merits but it simply must have enough chasers onto it to make the catch a viable attacking position.

I guess the only frequent benefit, if any, is in making opponent players second guess themselves and it can therefore often divide up and kill the rhythm of a running attacking side.

by beshocked Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:34 pm

Box kicking allows you a way to gain some territory and regather the ball or if not target the opposition who catches the ball and go for the turnover.

It's mainly about execution. Execute a box kick well and it can be effective, like any other aspect, if you do it poorly it can be exploited.

A kick too far with no pressure is much easier for the opposition to catch and return with interest.

Same with any other kick, if it's a good it can potentially lead to good territory/pressure or even a try but a bad one will waste the move.

I guess the problem that if you box kick too much it makes it easier to predict and makes it easier to counter that.

by Poorfour Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:45 pm

England aren't recovering the ball much from box kicks at the moment, but they are arriving in time to pressure the catcher and stop the opposition making yards. Against Australia they came off better in several kick exchanges.

by RuggerRadge2611 Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:47 pm

dummy_half wrote:

I do though feel that the defensive issues are usually a systemic issue rather than down to individual errors. Certainly, against England in the last 6Ns, we found a way to swamp the 10-12 channel before your back row could get across, and this led to space for Joseph in particular to exploit between Dunbar and Jones. That Ford and Farrell had great accuracy in passing that day also helped, meaning the ball carriers were hitting the line at pace. I don't recall seeing Scotland players falling off one-on-one tackles to any great extent though

What you saw there was a sublime bit of homework by the English coaching staff. They absolutely exploited our defensive system to maximum advantage. That's why Dunbar only had 1 missed tackle all game, he never laid a finger on Joseph or Watson as they ghosted past him on numerous occasions.

The Scottish defence is not too bad, there are mitigating factors in all of the games we have played where we have leaked tries.

England : See above
Fiji (summer tour) : a very experimental and lightweight backline against one of the most dynamic and physical backlines in world rugby.
Samoa : A mad game where defence was optional for both sides.
New Zealand : They scored some tries but mostly due to phenomenal skill, accuracy and speed of their players, in some aspects Barrett's try could not be defended, SBW was tackled well, wriggled free to offload to McKenzie who's line was sublime and then when he got tackled Barrett was there to support with speed that looked like someone had invented a player in a video game with 99 speed to get into the right position and carry it home.

Other than that in the 6N other teams have struggled to break us down, including Oz in the summer. We were battered into submission by France in Paris and that huge level of physicality is where I worry for Scotland.

by lostinwales Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:30 pm

Box kicks- optimum defensive alignment for kicks and for passes will be different, so it's good to keep the defense guessing by switching things around.

Overusing box kicks isn't great but on crappy wet slippery days like last Saturday in Twickenham they made a lot of sense.

by **RDW** Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:04 pm

So 8 years ago we somehow managed to beat Australia with this lot - surely we can win with our current team??

R Lamont; S Lamont, Grove, Morrison, Danielli; Godman, Cusiter; Jacobsen, Ford, Low, Hines, Kellock, Strokosch, Barclay, Beattie.

Replacements: De Luca for Morrison (40), Paterson for Danielli (63), R. Lawson for Cusiter (21), Hall for Ford (77), Traynor for Low (57), White for Strokosch (48), Vernon for Beattie (63).

by dummy_half Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:40 pm

Can there ever have been a more inspiring substitution than Nick de Useless coming on for Morrison?

Those were the days when Scotland on paper looked good from 1 to 9 and then picard

Now if anything the strength is in the back line

by RuggerRadge2611 Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:46 pm

dummy_half wrote:Can there ever have been a more inspiring substitution than Nick de Useless coming on for Morrison?

That's an easy one...

Traynor for Low (57) in the same match....

by **RDW** Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:11 pm

The stadium was only 2/3rd full for that game - no surprise when you see the players we had back then.

Kids these days don't know how good they've got it!

by **George Carlin** Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:23 am

Oops. Further proof that we are not very good at hiding it when we cheat.

An angry criminal wrote:Wallabies forced to train on hockey field to prepare for Scotland Test
JIM TUCKER, EDINBURGH
The Australian, 10:39AM, November 22, 2017

Michael Cheika’s Wallabies have copped another classic Scottish rugby stitch-up by being barred from their boggy training field in Edinburgh and being offered a sloping B-grade lacrosse pitch as a farcical replacement.

The sham forced on the Wallabies under grey skies in the bleak Scottish capital was pulled just 90 minutes before the team was to start their most important and physically intense session of the week to prepare for Sunday’s Test at Murrayfield.

The cancellation by the groundsman at the University of Edinburgh’s Peffermill grounds came after initial advice that the Wallabies would be able to go fullbore to train away the disappointment and dodgy try calls that dogged their losing day at Twickenham last weekend.

Instead, the Wallabies were forced to make do with a limited training run on artificial grass and restricted scrum and ruck drill work on the field’s narrow in-goal areas.

The in-goals were so limited, forwards with bigger turning circles like Rob Simmons, Lukhan Tui and Lopeti Timani found themselves turning in the winter leaves and trees beyond the deadball line.

It’s believed the field was being protected for a university game 24 hours later.

A justifiably frustrated Cheika jumped on the phone while his team took a break for lunch but the only alternatives offered were a sloping perimeter lacrosse field that made Lord’s Cricket Ground, with its 2.5m drop, look completely flat, and an outside field at Murrayfield.

While the Murrayfield option was a quality field, running through a full raft of match moves and defensive alignments under the noses of the Scottish Rugby Union was politely declined.

The disruptive episode is far from the first time the Wallabies have encountered training disruptions on tour and it will be shrugged off if the team’s “no excuses” policy is as strong as skipper Michael Hooper suggests.

In 2004, then-Wallabies coach Eddie Jones was staggered when claiming Murrayfield had been narrowed by 5m overnight from the 70m dimension expected.

He figured the narrow-minded Scots, in their bad old days, had conveniently found a way to hem in Australia’s dangerous wing men. It didn’t work with Clyde Rathbone (two) and Lote Tuqiri scoring three tries in Australia’s 31-14 win.

“Considering we were playing on an under-16s pitch, we’re pretty happy with our game,” Jones said after making an official complaint that day.

Drizzling rain all week is expected to clear for the kick-off early on Sunday (AEDT) when crisp six degree daytime temperatures are forecast.

Supersub Karmichael Hunt indicated it was better to train under grey skies rather than the perfect weather of London last week.

“The week leading up to the England game was just sunny so we got put into a false sense of security leading up to the Test,” Hunt said wryly.

“Then, we turned up on game day and it’s bucketing down.

“If we train with a wet ball this week, hopefully it will be sunny at the weekend and it will make all our passes stick.”

With forwards Adam Coleman (thumb) and Ned Hanigan (knee) having flown home injured, the opening is there for Test rookie Tui, 21, to come straight into the starting pack after missing the three Tests of the tour to date with a hamstring issue.

Tui could slot into lock for Blake Enever to create a starting backrow spot for hardhead Ben McCalman or play No.6 himself in a pack that would retain Enever.

Tui trained fully today.

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 7:22 am

No hyperbole whatsoever in that article of course!

If they were training at Perfermill then the SRU would have had absolutely 0 control over what pitches they trained on.

by tigertattie Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:49 am

I love how they declined to train at Murrayfield as they didn't want the SRU seeing their training run throughs.

As if the SRU weren't going to have spies in the trees around peffermill...............

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:01 pm

Apparently Townsend is about to name the team!

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:07 pm

Scotland v Australia 25th November - Page 2 DPPDP6dWkAAaAFp

Gilchrist in for Toolis, Berghan and Wilson starting. Maitland returns.

I'm amazed so many are passed fit!

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:12 pm

Head Coach Gregor Townsend has made four changes to the Scotland team to start against Australia at BT Murrayfield Stadium this Saturday (25 November, kick-off 2.30pm) – live on BBC and BT Sport.

The match is the third and final Autumn Test at the national stadium to be played in front of a capacity, 67,144 crowd, with Townsend’s men keen to end the series in credit after an opening win over Samoa (44-38) and a narrow loss to World Champions New Zealand (22-17).

Townsend, said: “This is the third and final game of our autumn series and the players are looking forward to ending it on a high.

“Last weekend’s game was a proper Test match – intense, competitive and full of drama. Unfortunately, we just fell short of our goal, and were disappointed with the loss, but take confidence going into the game against Australia.”

Three of the changes appear in the pack, where Glasgow Warriors number 8 Ryan Wilson returns to start after missing the All Blacks match with a shoulder injury.

Edinburgh Rugby lock Grant Gilchrist starts his first match of the series alongside Jonny Gray, while tighthead prop Simon Berghan earns his first start for the national team in the front-row.

Recent squad addition Sean Maitland (Saracens) is the only change to an otherwise all-Glasgow Warriors backline.

He starts in place of wing Lee Jones - who misses out on the match-day 23 - to combine with Stuart Hogg and Tommy Seymour in the back-three, leaving an unchanged half-back pairing (Ali Price and Finn Russell) and midfield (Alex Dunbar and Huw Jones), providing Dunbar completes the graduated return-to-play protocol, having sustained a concussion last weekend.

Last week’s starting back-row Cornell du Preez, lock Ben Toolis and prop Zander Fagerson move to the bench, where Fraser Brown - who recovered from a knee injury to join the squad this week - replaces fellow Glasgow Warriors hooker George Turner.

Townsend added: “Scotland’s recent history against Australia has been one of close-fought matches and, after a couple of narrow defeats, we managed to record a win last June out in Sydney.

“Our players have been training hard and will draw on all they’ve learned in the games against Samoa and New Zealand to rise to the challenge of this final Autumn Test.”

Scotland team to play Australia at BT Murrayfield
Saturday 25 November (kick-off 2.30pm) – live on BBC / BT Sport

15. Stuart Hogg VICE CAPTAIN (Glasgow Warriors) - 55 caps

14. Tommy Seymour (Glasgow Warriors) - 38 caps
13. Huw Jones (Glasgow Warriors) - 10 caps
12. Alex Dunbar (Glasgow Warriors) - 28 caps
11. Sean Maitland (Saracens) - 28 caps

10. Finn Russell (Glasgow Warriors) - 31 caps
9. Ali Price (Glasgow Warriors) - 10 caps

1. Darryl Marfo (Edinburgh Rugby) - 2 caps
2. Stuart McInally (Edinburgh Rugby) - 11 caps
3. Simon Berghan (Edinburgh Rugby) - 4 caps
4. Grant Gilchrist (Edinburgh Rugby) - 17 caps
5. Jonny Gray (Glasgow Warriors) - 37 caps
6. John Barclay CAPTAIN (Scarlets) - 65 caps
7. Hamish Watson (Edinburgh Rugby) - 14 caps
8. Ryan Wilson VICE CAPTAIN (Glasgow Warriors) - 31 caps

Substitutes:

16. Fraser Brown (Glasgow Warriors) - 28 caps
17. Jamie Bhatti (Glasgow Warriors) - 2 caps
18. Zander Fagerson (Glasgow Warriors) - 14 caps
19. Ben Toolis (Edinburgh Rugby) - 6 caps
20. Cornell du Preez (Edinburgh Rugby) - 4 caps
21. Henry Pyrgos (Glasgow Warriors) - 26 caps
22. Pete Horne (Glasgow Warriors) - 27 caps
23. Byron McGuigan (Sale Sharks) - 1 cap

by Mad for Chelsea Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:29 pm

Seems a bit harsh on Lee Jones, who I thought did very well on Saturday. Other than that, great that so many have been passed fit, though hope they really are so.

Brown onto the bench is IMO a good call. I'll admit to being a bit puzzled by swapping Berghan and Fagerson. I can only think it's to keep units, i.e. Edinburgh starting front row, and Glasgow bench. Also a little surprised by the lock switch, as I thought Toolis had done pretty well so far, though Toonie might want to see what Gilchrist - who also did well off the bench on Saturday - can do from the start.

All in all, it's a good team, just hope they are all recovered from last Saturday, and can find that same level of intensity again.

by tigertattie Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:34 pm

Can't really argue with the team.

Turner is unlucky but he's got plenty time to feature again in the future.

I'd not have started with GG and left Toolis starting.

Wilson is always "meh" for me, under powered for a No 8 and CDP has done well in this series so I'd have left CDP starting. Mind you, CDP coming on for Wilson as the Ozzies are tiring could make all the difference!

Fagerson was schooled last week in the scrum but Berghan didn't do much better so I guess this is purely a rotational thing as there's little between them.

Amazed that Hamish is fit to play. I hope he is 100%

Dunbar was 50/50 so pleased he's been passed (so far) to play.

Seymour is a bit iffy. He's just not been at the races and this could be down to a niggling injury that he's carrying. Might have been better "resting" him and leaving Jones on the Wing with No Maits replacing Seymour instead.

Bit harsh on Jones not to make the bench, I take it McGuigan is also being considered as cover at 15 which is why he keeps the bench place instead.

by No 7&1/2 Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:36 pm

Liking the look of your team especially with Watson making it. I reckon you'll do the aussie s by about 7.

by Mad for Chelsea Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:38 pm

I thought Fagerson did fine in the scrum, think we conceded one penalty when he was on, and that was at the end of the half when he'd probably already picked up a knock. When Berghan was on we conceded at least three IIRC, including of course that one on the NZ line on our ball. Though I reckon a significant part of that is down to Turner, who I think is very lightweight in the scrum (certainly Glasgow's scrum has been better when either Brown or McArthur have been there).

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:53 pm

tigertattie wrote:Can't really argue with the team.

Turner is unlucky but he's got plenty time to feature again in the future.

I'd not have started with GG and left Toolis starting.

Wilson is always "meh" for me, under powered for a No 8 and CDP has done well in this series so I'd have left CDP starting. Mind you, CDP coming on for Wilson as the Ozzies are tiring could make all the difference!

Fagerson was schooled last week in the scrum but Berghan didn't do much better so I guess this is purely a rotational thing as there's little between them.

Amazed that Hamish is fit to play. I hope he is 100%

Dunbar was 50/50 so pleased he's been passed (so far) to play.

Seymour is a bit iffy. He's just not been at the races and this could be down to a niggling injury that he's carrying. Might have been better "resting" him and leaving Jones on the Wing with No Maits replacing Seymour instead.

Bit harsh on Jones not to make the bench, I take it McGuigan is also being considered as cover at 15 which is why he keeps the bench place instead.

You then went to argue with it! Laugh

by tigertattie Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:07 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:
tigertattie wrote:Can't really argue with the team.

Turner is unlucky but he's got plenty time to feature again in the future.

I'd not have started with GG and left Toolis starting.

Wilson is always "meh" for me, under powered for a No 8 and CDP has done well in this series so I'd have left CDP starting. Mind you, CDP coming on for Wilson as the Ozzies are tiring could make all the difference!

Fagerson was schooled last week in the scrum but Berghan didn't do much better so I guess this is purely a rotational thing as there's little between them.

Amazed that Hamish is fit to play. I hope he is 100%

Dunbar was 50/50 so pleased he's been passed (so far) to play.

Seymour is a bit iffy. He's just not been at the races and this could be down to a niggling injury that he's carrying. Might have been better "resting" him and leaving Jones on the Wing with No Maits replacing Seymour instead.

Bit harsh on Jones not to make the bench, I take it McGuigan is also being considered as cover at 15 which is why he keeps the bench place instead.

You then went to argue with it!

not argue, just point out some opinions Smile

pretty much nit picking for nit pickings sake

also, is it nit picking or nip picking?

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:10 pm

Nit picking - nip picking is something very different that would probably get you in trouble...

by bsando Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:50 pm

Hard on L Jones but Maitland is an awesome player so a tough one for Townsend. Du Preez on bench will hopefully make a solid impact later on. Hope Gilchrist plays well, Toolis has been very good so far, I'm glad they're both getting lots of game time this series. I thought Turner was very good also so hard on him to miss out to Brown but again, tough selection.

I wouldn't say I am expecting a win, I think Scotland have just as much work to do as they did last week so this is by no means a weaker side than the AB's. In fact I feel Australia may well attack from the get go and try and notch up a cricket score like England did back in the 6N.

Awesome test match incoming! thumbsup

by **BigGee** Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:15 pm

Very happy (and a bit surprised) that everyone has proved to b fit for the game. Suddenly that looks a strong team again with a bit more opmph coming on from the bench this time. It was our lack of grunt up front later on in the game, costing us our own ball at scrums, that probably more than anything that lost us the game last week.

CDP probably had a better game off the bench against Samoa than starting against NZ and Wilson has the higher work rate. So can see the sense in this one.

Toolis/Gilchrist, both played well last weekend, so the toss of a coin really.

Bringing in Brown for Turner, a no brainer, but hopefully he has things to work on and we have not seen the last of him.

Maitland for Jones, a tough one as LJ has played well in both games and would not normally have expected to be dropped. Still SM is a proven performer at this level and can probably do things, particularly in defence, that LJ can't. McGiugan, who did not get much of a shout last weekend, gets another chance, maybe offers a little bit more versatility on the bench.

All in all, about the best side we could have got out on the day.

by sensisball Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:05 pm

Berghan isn't an international standard prop, end of. I now consider my conspiracy theory about the bad blood between the Tombola and Jon Welsh to no longer to be a theory.

Berghaus will see us several scores down by half-time if the Aussie scrum is as competitive as it was last week and Foley can kick his goals.

It is utter madness to continue with a player who is simply not up to the job when a more than able deputy is able to take his place.

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:13 pm

I don’t think we should give up on Berghan yet. His scrummaging has been excellent for Edinburgh all season and it is worth noting the mitigating factors from his Scotland displays to date. He had a horror show against France but it is worth remembering how makeshift our pack was by the time he came on.

Similarly against NZ he had Bhatti and Tuner alongside him, who have been part of a poor Glasgow scrum this season. Scrummaging is an 8 man effort.

A lot has been made about the scrum penalty against us on their line but I think it was an incorrect call. We were penalised for wheeling, which to me was Love sacks because A) why would we deliberately wheel the scrum when we had a man advantage and were right on their line? and B) it looked to me like NZ were the ones doing the wheeling (they probably thought they would lose in a straight pushing contest so might as well wheel it and hope they get the 50/50 decision, which they did).

I also think this wasn’t helped by the ref being so inexperienced – an experienced ref should have reset the scrum, had a word with both front rows to push straight then taken it from there. Instead he immediately gave a penalty which had a significant impact on the game.

by **George Carlin** Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:28 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:Nit picking - nip picking is something very different that would probably get you in trouble...

Or apparently a job coaching vulnerable female gymnasts in the US. mad

by **BigGee** Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:48 pm

Having just finished a night shift this morning and not really being up to much today, I watched the game again this afternoon.

It is easier to be judgemental with hindsight and the availability of replays!

There were two scrums 8 v 7 in fairly quick succession and the first one went fine which presumably encouraged Barclay to call for another one. The advantage of tying in all their forwards being obvious and it was very central on the pitch, lots of attacking options.

The NZ loosehead in that scrum bored in at a crazy angle and should have been penalised. It was absolutely barn door and I am no scrum expert.

Berghan apart from being relatively inexperienced at this level and maybe not prepared for it, really did not do an awful lot wrong.

It should have been a Scotland penalty.

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 7:21 pm

BigGee wrote:Having just finished a night shift this morning and not really being up to much today, I watched the game again this afternoon.

It is easier to be judgemental with hindsight and the availability of replays!

There were two scrums 8 v 7 in fairly quick succession and the first one went fine which presumably encouraged Barclay to call for another one. The advantage of tying in all their forwards being obvious and it was very central on the pitch, lots of attacking options.

The NZ loosehead in that scrum bored in at a crazy angle and should have been penalised. It was absolutely barn door and I am no scrum expert.

Berghan apart from being relatively inexperienced at this level and maybe not prepared for it, really did not do an awful lot wrong.

It should have been a Scotland penalty.

That matches my recollection having watched replays on the big screens, although I haven't watched the game back yet.

Contrary to popular belief I think a scrum was 100% the right call. The ABs defence was well set up for a tap penalty and we could have pounded away forever at their line and not scored. We had a man up with a scrum in the middle of the posts - scrum all day long. Had we won a penalty (which we should have) or scored from it everyone would have said good decision.

It frustrates the hell out of me when ref's don't apply common sense or have a feel for the game at scrum time. As I said earlier, Scotland had very little to gain from a wheeling, unstable scrum 5m from the try line with a man advantage. All Scotland wanted was a stable platform to attack from and at best getting a bit of a nudge on.

Did NZ have something to gain from a wheeling unstable scrum when they were a man down and 5m from their line? You bet they did.

Penalty NZ. Doh

It certainly didn't help having such an inexperienced front row - how good would it have been to have had a fit Dickinson and Nel in that position!

by jimbopip Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:13 pm

If you look at the penalty again it wasn't wheeling that was the problem.
The AB loose head bores in at an outrageous angle, as Gee rightly said, but then actually slips his binding so he can get his outside shoulder under Berghan for that little bit of extra lift. Berghan has nowhere to go except up and the ref decided that was enough for a penalty.
I'm not convinced taking the scrum was the correct option. If I'm on the defending team I'm thinking, "If Scotland win clean ball we're Donald McDucked. If we destroy the scrum illegally either we get a penalty and we're out of trouble or they get a penalty and we're no worse off." This is assuming that the ref won't give a penalty try first time, which they never do. So really the choice of a scrum just hands the initiative to the defending side, as long as there is something approaching parity in the scrum.

by **RDW** Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:24 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/42071381

Another excellent Barclay article

by sensisball Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:49 pm

Im sorry guys, i think i just watch a different type of rugby to the rest of you. I really prefer a tighthead who can resist his opposite man boring in on him and popping him upwards in a scrum when we had a one man advantage, McInally back at 2 and the AB's had Reid playing second row behind their loosehead.

its not about scrumagging being an 8 man job, the size of your hooker or the change in second row behind you. Its about being able to cope with your opponent and at least be stable in the most important scrum of the game, 5 m from their line. Particularly as he had only been on for 30 minutes. Its why top tight heads are usually the second highest paid players in a squad. If they cant do their job effectively then your scrum will be targeted ruthlessly by stronger opponents. Penalties will be conceded and points usually clocked up against you, making victory that much more difficult.

IMO Berghan has shown minimal ability to do this vital job at the highest level. At least he should get about 50 minutes to prove me wrong!

by SecretFly Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:08 am

Australia are now refusing to play on a level playing field, given that they've gotten used to training on a sloping one.

by **George Carlin** Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:06 am

SecretFly wrote:Australia are now refusing to play on a level playing field, given that they've gotten used to training on a sloping one.

by Mad for Chelsea Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:26 am

That is rather good Fly clap

On the Berghan point, I'm somewhere in the middle. Yes the NZ LH was blatantly boring in at that scrum, and the ref should really have spotted it. It's one of my gripes about the scrum, that refs seem to be just about happy for a free-for-all and just ping the side going backwards.

Take the recent Exeter-Glasgow game. Yes Exeter scrum was dominant, but at least two of the penalties the LH was blatantly boring in. Also, I thought there was a new directive that meant one of the front row players had to actually hook the ball (in counterpart the SH is allowed to feed the ball slightly)? Again, in that game, there were scrums when the drive from Exeter came so quickly that either they were just driving over the ball and not hooking it, or they had picked The Flash at hooker. I'm all for rewarding dominant scrums, but not for simply ignoring blatant offences to do so.

Having said that, the TH's job at scrum time is very much to be the anchor, and that includes countering the dark arts. I feel a more experienced TH (Nel) would have expected NZ to try something and been more alert to it. In the previous WC for instance, Australia countered Marler's dodgy angles by taking a calculated step to the left before each scrum to make them more obvious (not that this would necessarily have helped in this case...).

by tigertattie Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:58 am

Few points

1. Refs have confirmed that the mandate that has come from World Rugby is when a scrum goes pete tong, they've to give a penalty to the "Dominant" scrum. We were getting horsed at scrum time the whole game so you run the risk of being penalised even when it is not your fault.

2. Berghan can't be blamed for conceding the penalty. As a former scrummager I can confirm that if you are scrummaging legally and your opponent illegally does something, you are stuffed unless you can totally overpower him. If Berghan had gone in to counter this illegally, then he could easily have been penalised for that. As said before, the scrum was being horsed all game, even more so with Fagarson on. Does this mean we've to write him off too?

3. Even with a man advantage, opting for the scrum was the wrong call. Barclay should have identified that the ref had decided that NZ were the dominant scrum so if something was going to go wrong, which it did, he was going to give NZ the penalty.

by sensisball Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:59 am

Tiger

Except Beghan should have anticipated skullduggery, given the blackness were:

a) 5m from their line
b) Down a forward
c) They had Reid in the row

The fact that he lined up to scrum as if his opponent was going to play marquis of Queensberry shows his naivety and lack of power and technique, as you rightly say he didn't have the power to resist his opponent from boring in on him.

We shall agree to disagree and I wont say another word about SB, until after the match.

by bsando Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:05 am

Feeling a bit nervous for Scotland tomorrow. I think they're going to meet a vengeful Wallabies team who will be out for blood. Not only because of their loss in the summer but because it's their final test match of the year, Moore's final test for the Wallabies and they had a dispiriting finish vs England last week. If we were playing SA I would be expecting a win, but Australia I feel is going to be a very loose game which will come down to whoever takes their chances best. really want to see Scotland back up last weeks performance well.

by **RDW** Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:13 am

bsando wrote:Feeling a bit nervous for Scotland tomorrow. I think they're going to meet a vengeful Wallabies team who will be out for blood. Not only because of their loss in the summer but because it's their final test match of the year, Moore's final test for the Wallabies and they had a dispiriting finish vs England last week. If we were playing SA I would be expecting a win, but Australia I feel is going to be a very loose game which will come down to whoever takes their chances best. really want to see Scotland back up last weeks performance well.

I share your apprehension - Australia are a damn good team and they have a lot of motivation to win this. I also think last week will have taken a hell of a lot our of us and I'm not convinced some of our players will be fully fit. A win against this Aus team will be an incredible result.

by cascough Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:19 am

Scotland should be targeting a win. Australia have been in decline since the World Cup and for all the talk of a resurgence, they've been pretty underwhelming so far this Autumn. I managed to catch all but 2 games in the Rugby Championship and the standard across the board was not good. Anything can happen in a one off game of course, but in general, I don't think Scotland have anything to fear.

by **RDW** Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:32 am

Well our job has just been made more difficult - Dunbar has failed the HIA return to play protocol so Peter Horne starts, Phil Burleigh to the bench.

by SecretFly Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:32 am

cascough wrote:Scotland should be targeting a win. Australia have been in decline since the World Cup and for all the talk of a resurgence, they've been pretty underwhelming so far this Autumn. I managed to catch all but 2 games in the Rugby Championship and the standard across the board was not good. Anything can happen in a one off game of course, but in general, I don't think Scotland have anything to fear.

The Standard is probably taking a well earned break until the next WC begins to loom larger. The NH sides as per usual will run themselves into the ground desperately trying to be the main contenders on day one. We've seen that story before. I wouldn't take too much from the current 'form' books. But yep...apart from all that, Scotland are in a good position to win...and win well.

by cascough Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:56 am

SecretFly wrote:
cascough wrote:Scotland should be targeting a win. Australia have been in decline since the World Cup and for all the talk of a resurgence, they've been pretty underwhelming so far this Autumn. I managed to catch all but 2 games in the Rugby Championship and the standard across the board was not good. Anything can happen in a one off game of course, but in general, I don't think Scotland have anything to fear.

The Standard is probably taking a well earned break until the next WC begins to loom larger. The NH sides as per usual will run themselves into the ground desperately trying to be the main contenders on day one. We've seen that story before. I wouldn't take too much from the current 'form' books. But yep...apart from all that, Scotland are in a good position to win...and win well.

There's something in that for sure. I agree that come the world cup these teams will probably be in markedly different places. Luckily for Scotland though, they play Australia tomorrow.

by GLove39 Fri Nov 24, 2017 11:00 am

FUUUUUUUUCK
That rather changes the complexion of tomorrow's match. Look at some of the beasts Australia have in their backline. They could have an actual field day down Horne's channel

by Tattie Scones RRN Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:10 pm

Doesn't matter how big they are. Get them round the ankles are they're going nowhere.

by Sponsored content