Six Nations round 4 Scotland vs Wales

First topic message reminder :

Sat, 9 Mar, 14:15
Murrayfield Stadium

Scotland.

Kinghorn, Seymour, Grigg, Graham, Horne, Russell, Price; Dell, McInally, Nel, Gilchrist, Gray, Bradbury, Strauss, Ritchie.

Reps: Brown, Reid, Berghan, Toolis, Watson, Laidlaw, Hastings, McGuigan



Wales.

Liam Williams; George North, Jonathan Davies, Hadleigh Parkes, Josh Adams; Gareth Anscombe, Gareth Davies; Rob Evans., Ken Owens, Tomas Francis; Adam Beard, Alun Wyn Jones; Josh Navidi, Justin Tipuric, Ross Moriarty.

Reps: Elliot Dee, Nicky Smith, Dillon Lewis, Jake Ball, Aaron Wainwright, Aled Davies, Dan Biggar, Owen Watkin.



Referee Pascal Gauzere (France)
Assistant Luke Pearce (England)
Assistant Federico Anselmi (Argentina)
TMO Marius Jonker (South Africa)

Scotland v Wales is on BBC One

jimbopip wrote:it is such a foregone conclusion that the programmes should be printed with the tables showing Wales already having an extra five points.

1. Dell
2. McInally (capt)
3. Nel
4. Toolis
5. Gilchrist
6. Graham (Micro, deserves a start for taking on the whole French pack single handed)
7. Watson
8. Fagerson Middle (very tough on Ritchie, but Hamish fae the glen is a class act and should start)
9. Aldi Price, who should be given the chance to make up for ruining tattie Scone's Day Out in Cardiff last year.
10. Russell
11. Maitland (McGuigan an outside call)
12. Johnson
13. Stafford McD
14. Graham D
15. Kinghorne

Subs
Shrek, just to keep up the abrasiveness in the last 20
Brown
Fagerson Z (more mobile than  Bergs )
Skinner (JG needs a long, long rest)
Ritchie
Frodo, in case we need to slow things right down
Hastings
Furra Linee

are Wales playing Scotland or Middle Earth...

RDW wrote:I really don't get how people can justify dropping Ritchie.

Exactly.

He's been the stand out performer for me, even with Russell playing well.

If you need to get Watson on the pitch then you play Ritchie at 6. We've done very well in the past with two "opensides" on the park at one time.

Also, if you really really want to get Graham (Macro) on the field, then play him (Graham that is) at 8 - especially given Jimbo's thoughts on playing a mobile 8 rather than a blunt instrument.

RDW wrote:I really don't get how people can justify dropping Ritchie.

Agreed, he is our standout player this 6Ns and one of the few to come out of the first 3 games with any credit.

If Watson and Ritchie have to battle it out for 7 it'll only be a good thing. What with Bradbury and Fagerson showing good form, when Barclay comes back he may be surplus to requirements, although his leadership is sorely missed.

Of course, dropping Ritchie is almost 100% indefensible. Doesn't mean it won't happen, though. Do the Luvvies ever play Ritchie-Hamish at 6-7? If they don't then there is probably a good reason for it, other than Bill McMata.

Edinburgh have played the Ritchie/Watson combo on a number of occasions with Mata at 8.

That's why I think we need a big lump at 8 - lightweight flankers need a physical presence at 8, not someone like Fagerson. if you were to play Fagerson you would need someone like Bradbury at 6 IMO.

Sir Clive Woodward, Stuart Barnes and Brian Moore would not be surprised if Scotland won on Saturday:-

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/i-wouldnt-surprised-scotland-beat-15916573

jimbopip wrote:Of course, dropping Ritchie is almost 100% indefensible. Doesn't mean it won't happen, though. Do the Luvvies ever play Ritchie-Hamish at 6-7? If they don't then there is probably a good reason for it, other than Bill McMata.

It has been done at Scottish level too I think, and wouldn't be a bad shout if you're up against lightweight teams. I can see it coming undone against the more physical teams at the top end of world rugby. I think Gary Graham has proven he's worth a shot at 6. When Barclay comes back he's a 6.5 so best of both worlds really and Bradbury is a big athletic lump and does well at 6 for Edinburgh, although arguably we should perhaps be trying to use him as an 8.

Ritchie is fantastic as an out-and-out 7, it seems a shame to use him at 6. I'd rather he come off the bench to replace Watson at 7 than putting him at 6.

tigertattie wrote:

RDW wrote:I really don't get how people can justify dropping Ritchie.

Exactly.

He's been the stand out performer for me, even with Russell playing well.

If you need to get Watson on the pitch then you play Ritchie at 6. We've done very well in the past with two "opensides" on the park at one time.

Also, if you really really want to get Graham (Macro) on the field, then play him (Graham that is) at 8 - especially given Jimbo's thoughts on playing a mobile 8 rather than a blunt instrument.

Its because he's not a Vunipola - making massive carries and ending opposition defense. In comparison Watson makes good yardage with every carry, Graham seems fairly bloody minded, Barclay is an endless stream of turnovers and intelligent play and Hardie just hits people over and over until they weep (or he breaks). All these players look good in a highlights reel whereas Ritchie's contribution is to make the correct decision 9/10, kind of like Kelly Brown. T

The highlights reel might not look as good but in a lot of other ways he's far more effective than the likes of Hardie or Graham (macro).

Yeah I don't get this desire to drop probably our best player this tournament so far. Graham has done nothing to justify taking the place of Ritchie or for that matter Watson. He had a decent 15 mins against a tiring French team, and did well enough, but Ritchie has played well for three games.

Graham came on for Strauss, so if folk really want him in the team, then play him at 8, I'd probably go with Bradbury at 8 though. Bradbury has bulked up and he's always been aggressive and physical into contact. Now he's bigger he hopefully should be even better at that.

Ritchie has looked terrific. Lions quality performances so far this tournament. Would rather not face him and Watson at the breakdown as, although Wales are tidy, I'm not sure they're overly aggressive and tidy - basically, I think there is more than enough reason to suspect they'll take a hammering at the breakdown against a good breakdown team. That said, if Ritchie and Watson do play, that makes it all the more likely that Wales treat this game as a dry run (as close to a dry run as you can get when going for a Grand Slam...) for the Australia game in the RWC.

With that in mind, I think a few things might happen to the Welsh team:

- Parkes gets dropped for Watkin.
- Minimum of 2 poaches in Welsh back row. Navidi and Tipuric this week, Ellis Jenkins comes into contention in the autumn.
- Adam Beard is picked to target tall locks (Ritchie Gray?) at the lineout ahead of Ball.
- Mobility, mobility, mobility: Ken, Rob and Tomas to run their hearts out for 55-60 minutes and then collapse on the bench. Lewis might keep his place over Samson to keep the team mobile.

That said, we might see no changes. Some are obvious - like picking Beard and Navidi - and some, like dropping Parkes, seem unlikely, even if on the face of it Parkes appears a weakness if the game opens up.

Not sure if we'll see Halfpenny back. I expect not - 1 more appearance for the Scarlets I suspect and then #23 against Ireland if everyone stays fit. As mentioned, you wouldn't drop Adams or Liam, and I also think North has been playing very well too. Some tidy work in the wide channels, stepping and strength is vital, if not always recognised. Wales are only a few injuries away from lacking physical power, can't take it for granted that we'll beat Scotland in the tight, which is why Samson might come back in as well.

As it's Gatland, I expect no changes other than injury returns - the players who performed against England will be rewarded.

It's great to be moaning about which player is better than the other instead of our older arguments of who was less gash!

We can't drop Ritchie but we also can't not pick Watson.

The easy way to look at it is not 6 or 7, with tackler or fetcher, but left and right with both players doing the job on either side of the scrum/breakdown.

I'm sure we did it against Oz with Barclay and Ross Rennie and they were complete menaces. We certanly did it with Barclay and Watson in 2017 when we put 53 points on them!

Then we pick Bradbury or Graham (Macro) at 8. Or big lump Struass if you want a big lump!

Lads, you are just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic

LordDowlais wrote:I will never forget the time we went up there, and we had not won there for years, but in 1997 we went up there and after going behind we just went wild with Arwel Thomas using up almost the whole in goal area to score. What a day that was, I was up there for my 20th birthday.

Didn't we score three tries in five minutes, or something stupid? I went to the toilet and missed the third!

Arwel Thomas was a great player to watch, when things were going his way. Finn Russell's not a patch on him

I know the BBC love building up 6 Nations hype.... but I hope this story doesnt come back to bite us on the butt..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47430755

But on reflection, looks like 2014 Scotland was too scared to turn up, so Wales played itself...  



Auntie, you really should review your stuff before posting it....

LordDowlais wrote:Sir Clive Woodward, Stuart Barnes and Brian Moore would not be surprised if Scotland won on Saturday:-

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/i-wouldnt-surprised-scotland-beat-15916573

Dont think the article is as sensational as the title... But the only pundit there that I'd respect to give an honest opinion and not an anti Welsh one is Brian Moore, and he actually says, fairly, Wales are in the driving seat and its a big ask for Wales to take the Grand Slam,not that Scotland will beat them, but that Ireland on for the title will be a tough ask.

Personally, I'm not underestimating Scotland, as they owe us a thumping...

The good thing for us is that, after 2017, we won't be taking anything for granted - not that I think we ever have done when we've gone to Murrayfield.

Great to see John Barclay training with the Scotland squad - presumably keeping his training up while Edinburgh are on rest weeks.

I'd have:

1. Dell
2. MacInally
3. Nel
4. Skinner
5. Gilchrist
6. Ritchie
7. Watson
8. Fagerson
9. Price
10. Russell
11. Maitland
12. Johnson
13. Grigg
14. Seymour
15. Kinghorn

I wouldn't be surprised if we saw McGuigan, I think Toonie is a big fan. I also think we might see Harris. I just think without are wily more experienced campaigners we might struggle with the experience and nous of Wales' best players. If we put the above team out, I'd be happy. But it also makes you wonder what we could do with fully fit Gray brothers, Barclay, Jones and Hogg. If we had them I'd make us narrow favourites against Wales at home. Not because I think we're a better team than Wales. But simply because Scotland tend to do that much better at home than away that I'd back us to do the business against them. I don't think Jamie Ritchie should be dropped, even when Barclay is fit I'd have my doubts. However I do think that Barclay's superior experience and leadership probably put him ahead albeit narrowly. I actually think Ritchie is a future captain. He's solid, dependable and doesn't seem to have bad games.

Out of interest for any Wales fans, how's Sam Hidalgo-Clyne doing at the Scarlets?

RDW wrote:Great to see John Barclay training with the Scotland squad - presumably keeping his training up while Edinburgh are on rest weeks.

Duncan Taylor was up there as well, though probably not running around. He is still very much in Toonie's thoughts!

Anyone would think we're facing Mel Gibson and a bunch of blue faced McTavishes

Scotland could beat Wales on Saturday but its pretty unlikely not least due to the injuries Toonie is having to deal with

Nel and Watson coming back is going to bolster the team but Scotland's biggest weakness is that they have yet todvelop the skillset to play at the tempo they need to to beat bigger teams and Wales will simply pressurise their possession as they did to Englanders

Scotland are good but having just two teams doesn’t allow them to build much depth, and with a few injuries they struggle. That’s what will happen to us if we lose just one region.

Scotland's depth is better than it has ever been, every side loses players to injury. We had decent players coming in to replace them and some of them, Ritchie, Graham and Kinghorn have done very well.

We did not lose to Ireland and France because of the team we had out, we had our chances in both those games, we just did not play as well as we could or should have done.

https://theoffsideline.com/scotland-v-wales-darcy-graham/

Getting some press attention the week before an international is often a good hint that you will be starting!

123456789. wrote:Out of interest for any Wales fans, how's Sam Hidalgo-Clyne doing at the Scarlets?

Not...not good...

Nonsense on the issues of Scottish depth. Scotland's centre depth, for instance, is incredible - Wales would kill for it. Might be echoing this if Parkes gets the runaround on Saturday! The concentration of two quality teams has clearly improved them, and add in 'overseas' players, depth isn't the issue. A strong tight 5 and Scotland would be up there with Eng/Ire/Wal in every sense.

Obviously mikey's a Dragons fan, but sad indictment at the weekend with them conceding the match deciding try when facing 13 players having just scored a try themselves. Wales' problems are not just an on-field issue, and not just a Dragons issue, but we need to shake-up the pro game and, tbf, Scotland seem to have done a good job on the off-field stuff in the last 6-7 years/whenever the new people came in and said they wanted to win a RWC.

miaow wrote:

123456789. wrote:Out of interest for any Wales fans, how's Sam Hidalgo-Clyne doing at the Scarlets?

Not...not good...

He may be heading off to North Wales then, they may be looking for volunteers!

miaow wrote:Nonsense on the issues of Scottish depth. Scotland's centre depth, for instance, is incredible - Wales would kill for it. Might be echoing this if Parkes gets the runaround on Saturday! The concentration of two quality teams has clearly improved them, and add in 'overseas' players, depth isn't the issue. A strong tight 5 and Scotland would be up there with Eng/Ire/Wal in every sense.

Obviously mikey's a Dragons fan, but sad indictment at the weekend with them conceding the match deciding try when facing 13 players having just scored a try themselves. Wales' problems are not just an on-field issue, and not just a Dragons issue, but we need to shake-up the pro game and, tbf, Scotland seem to have done a good job on the off-field stuff in the last 6-7 years/whenever the new people came in and said they wanted to win a RWC.

Interested in your take on our Centre Depth:
At 12 we have:
Dunbar (knackered)
Taylor (injured)
Horne (iffy at international level)
Johnson (new)
Scott (injured potentially knackered)
McDowall (very new, practically embryonic)

At 13 we have:
Jones (quality on his day, up with the best in the world, not been his day for a wee while, injured)
Bennett (see above but not quite as good and not injured anymore)
Taylor (injured)
Grigg (iffy at international level)
Harris (iffier at international level)

I'm not sure it's as good as you think. If Jamie Roberts was Scottish I'd wager he'd still be in the mix.

Perhaps, but only because you lack firepower elsewhere. Believe me, if Roberts was in Townsend's team, he wouldn't be trusted to pass the ball.

Think the point about the Scottish depth is best summed up with a phrase like "I've lost more than you'll ever earn" or some similar aphorism. Basically, if Wales lost even 4 or 5 of their centres, they'd genuinely be looking at bringing back Gavin Henson.

JD2
Parkes
Scott Williams
Owen Watkin
Tyler Morgan

Jack Dixon
Ashley Beck
BIG GAV

Also, you forgot Sean Lamont at 13...

miaow wrote:Perhaps, but only because you lack firepower elsewhere. Believe me, if Roberts was in Townsend's team, he wouldn't be trusted to pass the ball.

Think the point about the Scottish depth is best summed up with a phrase like "I've lost more than you'll ever earn" or some similar aphorism. Basically, if Wales lost even 4 or 5 of their centres, they'd genuinely be looking at bringing back Gavin Henson.

Hah! We’re already carrying one liability who can’t pass (at fullback while Hogg is out)!

Eejit wrote:

miaow wrote:Perhaps, but only because you lack firepower elsewhere. Believe me, if Roberts was in Townsend's team, he wouldn't be trusted to pass the ball.

Think the point about the Scottish depth is best summed up with a phrase like "I've lost more than you'll ever earn" or some similar aphorism. Basically, if Wales lost even 4 or 5 of their centres, they'd genuinely be looking at bringing back Gavin Henson.

Hah! We’re already carrying one liability who can’t pass (at fullback while Hogg is out)!

To be fair to Blairhorn, Hoggy never passed much at that age either!

BigGee wrote:

Eejit wrote:

miaow wrote:Perhaps, but only because you lack firepower elsewhere. Believe me, if Roberts was in Townsend's team, he wouldn't be trusted to pass the ball.

Think the point about the Scottish depth is best summed up with a phrase like "I've lost more than you'll ever earn" or some similar aphorism. Basically, if Wales lost even 4 or 5 of their centres, they'd genuinely be looking at bringing back Gavin Henson.

Hah! We’re already carrying one liability who can’t pass (at fullback while Hogg is out)!

To be fair to Blairhorn, Hoggy never passed much at that age either!

Very true, I was watching some of Hogg's old highlights recently and he was great at finding a gap but quite often didn't look for the pass and was hungry for more metres. Both players at very different stages of their careers as well.

Given some of the fullbacks we've had available to us in the professional era (Jack Cuthbert is capped...) I don't think we should complain too much about a young X-factor player who just hasn't worked out when to pass yet!

If he can do that and improve his last ditch tackling he'll be a real challenger for Hogg for years to come.

Gents

A Welsh mate has asked if I can get my hands on 2 tickets for Saturday.

Anyone on here have two for sale?

Cheers

RDW wrote:Given some of the fullbacks we've had available to us in the professional era (Jack Cuthbert is capped...) I don't think we should complain too much about a young X-factor player who just hasn't worked out when to pass yet!

If he can do that and improve his last ditch tackling he'll be a real challenger for Hogg for years to come.

And only 22, plenty of time!

I dream of a future where I'm not clenching my buttocks when the bench come on at 60 minutes.

The similarities with Hogg are remarkable - both real strike players with great pace and a huge boot, but in their early careers struggled to make the right decision every time, probably because all they want to do is run and score themselves! Hogg was also a little dodgy defensively but has improved on that massively.

Hopefully Kinghorn doesn't develop the attitude problem years that Hogg went through - red cards, tantrums and threats to move to Ulster etc...

I suspect that'll come after the WC if he's touted as being a 'world class' attacker. Then you know you're in for a season of poor form, tantrums, and even less passing.

I'd nearly forgotten the dark phase Hogg went through, he still has a slight tendency to exaggerate late hits (but so do a lot of tier one players) and he did kick a hole in a pitch side barrier against Ireland this 6N, but that was more from frustration at how Scotland were messing up the game. Hopefully all that is in the past and he's learned from it. Kinghorn is lucky to have a mentor in Hogg.

Good banter everyone - well done.

We cannot drop Ritchie. He's one of the few success stories in this almighty f#cktangle of injuries.

Can I also remind people who are ready to annoint Bradbury with warm Buckfast oil that he was absolutely anonymous in the last game and did not distinguish himself at all. If Graham can play 8, then that's where I would put him with Ritchie at 6 and Hamish From The Glen at 7.

The most Toonie-esque of selections would be to start M Fagerson at 8.

I would love to see that, actually. Do we think that there's any chance of that happening though?

George Carlin wrote:Good banter everyone - well done.

We cannot drop Ritchie. He's one of the few success stories in this almighty f#cktangle of injuries.

Can I also remind people who are ready to annoint Bradbury with warm Buckfast oil that he was absolutely anonymous in the last game and did not distinguish himself at all. If Graham can play 8, then that's where I would put him with Ritchie at 6 and Hamish From The Glen at 7.

He made the 2nd highest number of tackles for Scotland.  He might not have have made many barnstorming runs, but he certainly wasn't anonymous in his work for the team.  He also made more metres and defenders beaten than Strauss. I realise that's a low bar, but whilst he wasn't amazing, he was ok.  Also it was his 2nd game back from injury, so maybe not quite fully up to speed yet.

He would be my preferred choice at 8 with Graham on the bench ready to come on.

Bradbury was 2nd highest for tackles and carries I believe.

For the life of me I can't see how anyone can throw mud at the forwards in the games we've played, it's been either Frodo not getting the ball out from the ruck quickly, the backs not being set up quickly to allow Frodo to release the ball, or when the ball was released it was shuffled side to side with not an angle cut until the backs dropped the ball!

George Carlin wrote:The most Toonie-esque of selections would be to start M Fagerson at 8.

I would love to see that, actually. Do we think that there's any chance of that happening though?

He showed a lot of faith in the young fagerson in the Autumn/Summer. I wouldn't be surprised if he was straight back in. At only 20 he's got plenty of time to develop as an 8, and we really need someone to grab that shirt. Strauss has repeatedly proven he's not up to the job, Bradbury has shown some potential and may be worth a look but Fagerson has shown the best consistency in form. Pair him up with a big abrasive lump at 6 like Graham and a scavenger at 7 and that'd be a pretty balanced back row.

Bradbury put in a shift against France but I think he was to blame for the early second half try. As Jim Telfer pointed to this week, Scotland lack gritty forwards who can take the game to the opposition. That moment where Scotland failed to take the game to the French pack at the start of the second half set the tone for the rest of the half until the subs came on.

I wouldn’t be annoyed if Bradbury started at 8 though, he is a good player and still getting up to speed a bit. Strauss is the most experienced 8 and its good he’s there to cover whilst others are injured.

munkian wrote:Lads, you are just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic

Very funny but I’m not so confident, this could be a cracking game

NeilyBroon wrote:

George Carlin wrote:The most Toonie-esque of selections would be to start M Fagerson at 8.

I would love to see that, actually. Do we think that there's any chance of that happening though?

He showed a lot of faith in the young fagerson in the Autumn/Summer. I wouldn't be surprised if he was straight back in. At only 20 he's got plenty of time to develop as an 8, and we really need someone to grab that shirt. Strauss has repeatedly proven he's not up to the job, Bradbury has shown some potential and may be worth a look but Fagerson has shown the best consistency in form. Pair him up with a big abrasive lump at 6 like Graham and a scavenger at 7 and that'd be a pretty balanced back row.

A balanced back row?? In Scotland?!?! There's not been one of those since the Killer Bs played in 2010

Bring back the Moffat Method - every player on the park is an openside flanker, the opposition would never have the ball!

maestegmafia wrote:

munkian wrote:Lads, you are just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic

Very funny but I’m not so confident, this could be a cracking game

“No you’re going to win.”
“No you!”

Seriously though, you’re going to win.

maestegmafia wrote:

munkian wrote:Lads, you are just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic

Very funny but I’m not so confident, this could be a cracking game

Could be cracking, could be an utter borefest.

Scotland have regressed in the attacking stakes and we're back to scoring very very little. Coupled with Wales's brick wall defence, I can see this being a low scoring game. Wales won't even want the ball. They'll kick it to us and wait for us to make the mistake to then launch thier attack wither from a turn over or from the set peice.

That being said it could end up being a 38 all draw!

tigertattie wrote:Bradbury was 2nd highest for tackles and carries I believe.

If I remember correctly, Bluto had the highest number of carries and he and Malcolm Bradbury added together made less than half the yardage Picamole made for France.

As ever with statistics (a) you can prove anything with them, (b) 47.8% of them are inaccurate or the product of faulty memory....still...

it would appear that our big-hitters were receiving the ball too close to the French defence and merely trucking the ball up to the next ruck rather than receiving it in space and galloping for the wide open prairies. I'm thinking back to when Bluto, JG and the Ruck Inspector were in the Warriors' pack: one way to create quick ball would be to have a big carrier (Bluto) run close and narrow, hit the defender and go to ground, second row (JG) smashes over and next man (Ruck Inspector) picks up and smashes into the next defender. This gets you maybe two yards beyond the gain line but ties up defenders and if the ball is then moved quickly the defensive line is still trying to re-set. In order to succeed it relies on quick recycling, otherwise you are just going nowhere slowly. You also need a scrum half who is "nippy" rather than "ponderous".

So, maybe the problem with Bluto and Bradbury wasn't that they aren't big enough, or dynamic enough, to make yards in international rugby but had more to do with the type of runs they were being asked to make.


For Saturday, I would love the back row (plus replacement) to be Graham-Ritchie-Fagerson-Hamish. Certainly the Welsh gave a master-class in ball-retention against England and two 7's would go a long way to nullifying that threat. Also, Fagerson played 8 against Billy V and "had him on the ropes" for large periods.

In the backs, Scott Hastings is talking up Furra Linee-Smiling Sam as a centre pairing. It could work. Best put Stafford Of McDowell on the bench then.

EWT Spoons wrote:

George Carlin wrote:Good banter everyone - well done.

We cannot drop Ritchie. He's one of the few success stories in this almighty f#cktangle of injuries.

Can I also remind people who are ready to annoint Bradbury with warm Buckfast oil that he was absolutely anonymous in the last game and did not distinguish himself at all. If Graham can play 8, then that's where I would put him with Ritchie at 6 and Hamish From The Glen at 7.

He made the 2nd highest number of tackles for Scotland.  He might not have have made many barnstorming runs, but he certainly wasn't anonymous in his work for the team.  He also made more metres and defenders beaten than Strauss. I realise that's a low bar, but whilst he wasn't amazing, he was ok.  Also it was his 2nd game back from injury, so maybe not quite fully up to speed yet.

He would be my preferred choice at 8 with Graham on the bench ready to come on.

Agree that it is a pretty harsh statement from GC, given he put in a big shift and was only his second game back, against a hugely physical French team. He made a few mistakes but who didn't.

I'm also not sure why Matt Fagerson is viewed as being the answer to all our prayers based on a good game against Zebre...