Scotland : why are they so rubbish in tournaments?

This is not a dig. But perennially Scotland seem to perform much, much better in their Summer and Autumn International games than in the 6Ns and RWCs.

This must be so deflating for Scottish fans. The team always on the up when the match doesn't count for anything. The always seem to have decent units which have the staying power of an Austin Maxi.

I have always admired the Scots' spirit and they always seem have some great players and pairings/units.

I know that the player population is small, but that doesn't explain why they can perform when there's no gong on offer.

Except for in World Cups they've made it to at least the quarter finals in every comp so far.

Yeah they do pretty well in WC's, much better in them I think then in the 6N's. They always end better in the 6N's then they start though so I think it's a case of them being caught cold. In the WC they'll have had warm up games to play themselves into some sort of good form. That might be the difference.

Even in the RWC (except I think '91) have they ever they out-performed themselves.

There seems to be real problem. In tournament play generally they seem to offer nothing.

In the 6Ns. Well, you can hope for a performance to exceed expectations once in a decade. And although they flatter to deceive year after year, 3rd in the next 6Ns would be a mighty achievement.

Only over the last few years.

Not a very nice post, I am intrigued as to why you wished to post something along these lines without so much as a mention to the great Scottish teams and results?

Portnoys, a brave article with a Scottish banana skin lying in wait for your boys in NZ

Portnoy wrote:Even in the RWC (except I think '91) have they ever they out-performed themselves.

There seems to be real problem. In tournament play generally they seem to offer nothing.

In the 6Ns. Well, you can hope for a performance to exceed expectations once in a decade. And although they flatter to deceive year after year, 3rd in the next 6Ns would be a mighty achievement.

They regularly beat self hyped favourites like England, as well as the odd Springbok or Wallaby team in Murrayfield annually.

Notch wrote:Portnoys, a brave article with a Scottish banana skin lying in wait for your boys in NZ

Quite possible Notch.

Banana skins lie in the path of all. But the salient is why Scotland perform over expectation in 'frendlies' only normally to disappoint in tournaments.

I'm not dissing the Scots. I'm opening a question as to why that happens.

maestegmafia wrote:

Portnoy wrote:Even in the RWC (except I think '91) have they ever they out-performed themselves.

There seems to be real problem. In tournament play generally they seem to offer nothing.

In the 6Ns. Well, you can hope for a performance to exceed expectations once in a decade. And although they flatter to deceive year after year, 3rd in the next 6Ns would be a mighty achievement.

They regularly beat self hyped favourites like England, as well as the .

Self-hyping is not the sole preserve of the English.

But the point as you state so eloquently is that they can beat 'odd Springbok or Wallaby team in Murrayfield annually' - not to mention the Argentinians away. So what is the problem converting that potential to tournament play?

It's not (as I said) not a dig.

The question could equally be be put 'Why are England Grand Slam chokers? They do that time and time again when their chances turn up. And every home nation has their chance to relish the the delight of cropping them off at the last hurdle in recent years.

Portnoy wrote:

Notch wrote:Portnoys, a brave article with a Scottish banana skin lying in wait for your boys in NZ

Quite possible Notch.

Banana skins lie in the path of all. But the salient is why Scotland perform over expectation in 'frendlies' only normally to disappoint in tournaments.

I'm not dissing the Scots. I'm opening a question as to why that happens.

Fair enough! I, personally, don't know. Sometimes when you're going up against a team you're expected to have no chance against all the pressure is on them, not you. For Scotland the last 10 years in the 6N have been well below the standard of what was given in the amateur era and the start of the professional era, so I'd say there would be more pressure on them to give the public something and they'll face a lot more criticism in the 6N if they don't do well.

It could also be that on a four-game tour, their opponents underestimate them and consider the likes of Ireland, England, France, Wales to be bigger threats. These are just theories I'm throwing out there.

That said they have a better record than Ireland and Wales in the RWC and did a lot better last time out, despite being well behind those sides in the 6N on the whole. So it's a problem with the Scots in the 6N; not tournaments.

Of All the Home Nations they have the least resources and smallest player pool.the borders.south of Scotland was once a hot bed no more.They perform on tours better because,mainly they are to tier 2 counrties or borderline lacking some playeres .e.g Argentina awaymwhen most top players are plying there trade in France.

Argentina are tier 2?

OK - not worthy of the Quatro-Nations then.

Portnoy a full strength in a RWC Argentina I would consider borderline tier 1.That is a side that could on occasion cause an upset,as would Italy.For me tier one is the 5Ns plus the 3Ns.In as much as on most meetings I would expect the top 8 to win most of the time.You may have another definition that could apply to samoa,Tonga,Fiji too.

Without trying to run them down too much, to an extent they got pretty lucky with some of their scalps in friendlies. Like their series win in Argentina was good, but Argentina weren't very good at the time (as proven by Italy also winning down there). Their win over Australia was a little fortunate too, given Giteau's shocker of a conversion (plus it made a different Australia turn up against Wales the following week).

In a World Cup they perform to expectation generally by doing enough to finish second in their group. I'd expect them to qualify behind England this time round if I'm honest.

Part of the problem with the 6 Nations is that because they generally pick up a scalp in the Autumn, it's often thought that they will do well. I certainly expected them to beat Wales this year.

A (2/3?, I don't recall) match tour win on the pamas is not to be sniffed at.

England and the Blacks have failed that test.

They did play very well on that tour, regardless of opposition. Better than they have at home for a good while.

If you're asking why Scotland under-achieve at major tournaments, surely you need to spread the net wider to include Wales and Ireland, both of whom have worse RWC records, despite in recent times having better sides than Scotland.

Since the last RWC, Scotland have won away in Argentina, won away at Croke Park and beaten both Australia and South Africa at Murrayfield. Andy Robinson has struggled for consistency, but what he has managed to do is show that Scotland has the capabilities to beat better sides in one-off games. Going into the last two RWCs we hadn't done that (and still managed to go further than Wales and Ireland), so I'm more optimistic this time round that we can take a significant RWC scalp (which we haven't really done thus far).

The point about the 6 Nations though is a valid one. We have underachieved in the last couple of seasons. Not even so much looking at the results, but the performances as well. Wales this year was horrible. We never got out of the blocks. Similarly the defence against Ireland, where we conceded an embarrasingly easy try. Not sure how to explain it really.

To say Scotland play "Rubbish" in tournaments is a bit of an unneccesary slur.

A better title would have been "Why are Scotland Rubbish in the 6N". Because with the Exception of England and France we are the best performing 6N teams in RWCs.

Scotland in the 6N are a funny beast. The start of the 2011 6N against France we looked thretening and capable, only for me to turn up at the Wales game and bear witness to a shambolic rout.

Scotland do not do well when branded favourites. It's a bit like Andy Murray at tennis, when the preassure is off we have it in us to beat teams like Australia and South africa.

Risca Rev wrote:Their win over Australia was a little fortunate too, given Giteau's shocker of a conversion (plus it made a different Australia turn up against Wales the following week).

I have to come down on that as a harsh comment. Scotland's defense was like a brick wall in that game. I have never seen a more stuborn defensive display in my life. If Wales has defended like that perhaps they would not have shipped 4 tries to australia the week after.

Agreed Radge, there's nothing quite as silly as the comment "you only won because they didn't play very well against you".

That's not what I said though F.E.S. is it. The point is that despite Scotland's defence, they still should have lost. Clearly the main point is that they won due to a shocker of a Giteau conversion and not the comparison between the two Australian performances. So I am quite justified to call it a little fortunate.

Rev, if the shoe was on the other foot, and Wales had beaten SH oppo at home, would you still say the same thing? It's the old thing aboutdoes the scoreline ever lie? Giteau did miss a sitter, but one missed tackle in another part of the game could have meant a Wallaby try? Does that make Scotland fortunate?

Our away wins against Argentina were largely againt the same group of players that handed out a spanking to France a week or two later (not Italy)

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:To say Scotland play "Rubbish" in tournaments is a bit of an unnecessary slur

Marginally Radge. I certainly won't withdraw the assertion for the 6Nn. RWCs - hmmm, so so is the best they've managed.

Ayup As. I was expecting to hear from you!

Wanted to comment more fully but am in between meeting in Chicago on my iPhone - not conducive to clear thinking! Will have to wait till I get back at the end of the week!

Portnoy wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:To say Scotland play "Rubbish" in tournaments is a bit of an unnecessary slur

Marginally Radge. I certainly won't withdraw the assertion for the 6Nn. RWCs - hmmm, so so is the best they've managed.

Ayup As. I was expecting to hear from you!

The 6N is a constant source of disapointment to me. Scotland have the beating of just about any team in the 6N but the magins between winning and losing are always so close It's hard to call a team rubbish.

I guess that's the point I'm trying to make. In the 6N anyone can beat anyone. Just unfortunate that in the 6N anyone seems to beat Scotland!

Consistancey is the big Issue for Scotland.

Rev - you're still making a silly point. Scotland should not have lost, because over 80 minutes we had more points than Australia. We won because we scored more points. The game lasts 80 minutes, and doesn't boil down to a kick. Our defence was awesome on that day. In my view that's what won us the game. 80 minutes of tough tackling and tactical nous.

Having a decent and reliable kicker is part of a good team. Godman on the day kicked better than Giteau, and we were able to execute the crucial drop goal whilst Australia continued to hunt for the 7 pointer. Better tactics and better kicking paid off for Scotland on the day. There was no dire reffing decision (a la Wales v Ireland in the 6 Nations) or injustice that settled this game, just one team whose players handled pressure on the day better than others.

Not sure why you're so keen to do Scotland down on this one.

As Radge says, our big issue is consistency in the 6 Nations. Why we can't seem to play to the best of our abilities throughout that tournament is beyond me. Each year we seen to have one decent game, a couple of brave attempts and several capitulations.

Risca Rev wrote:Without trying to run them down too much, to an extent they got pretty lucky with some of their scalps in friendlies. Like their series win in Argentina was good, but Argentina weren't very good at the time (as proven by Italy also winning down there). Their win over Australia was a little fortunate too, given Giteau's shocker of a conversion (plus it made a different Australia turn up against Wales the following week).

In a World Cup they perform to expectation generally by doing enough to finish second in their group. I'd expect them to qualify behind England this time round if I'm honest.

Part of the problem with the 6 Nations is that because they generally pick up a scalp in the Autumn, it's often thought that they will do well. I certainly expected them to beat Wales this year.

Am I really trying to do Scotland down in my post. I think it's not too bad. Just highlighting that there's two sides to a coin when people mention about the Argentina tour and the AI results. If you can show me in the bit I wrote about Scotland deserving to lose to Australia, I'd be surprised. Calling it a little fortunate isn't saying that.

As, I'm happy to be proven wrong on the Italy win over Argentina. I'll look it up later and apologise accordingly if necessary.

By the way, you can't mention the refereeing decision in the Wales v Ireland game this year without mentioning the blatant O'Driscoll knock on before 3 of Ireland's points. As I say whenever it gets brought up, 12-10 would be the score, so Wales would still have won.

You said "despite Scotland's defence, they still should have lost".

Your reference to the BOD knock-on entirely proves my point. One incident rarely defines a game, even such a blatantly wrong decision directly leading to points. Games are 80 minutes long. Australia didn't lose solely because of one kick.

It's dangerous trying to articulate when winning teams "deserve to lose". It's the nature of the game that teams can dominate territory and possession and still not win, and the side with better players does not always win.

maestegmafia wrote:
They regularly beat self hyped favourites like England

Why the obsession with England ? In a thread about Scotland ? Not quite sure winning 4 matches out of the last 25 is regularly beating England. Now they do regularly beat Wales.......

nottins wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:
They regularly beat self hyped favourites like England

Why the obsession with England ? In a thread about Scotland ? Not quite sure winning 4 matches out of the last 25 is regularly beating England. Now they do regularly beat Wales.......

You were doing well until the last bit then you did exactly what he did.

Cymroglan wrote:

You were doing well until the last bit then you did exactly what he did.

He started it

I'll also jump to England's defence here - very rarely in the last 6-7 years have England fans been guilty of "self-hype".

The Welsh and Irish on the other hand with their hoards of "world class" players and golden generations.....

when was last time Scotland pulled a few good performance against full strengh decent teams in a tournament ? 1999?

Probably Hadden's first full season as coach in 2006 - Scotland finished 3rd winning 3 from 5, including wins against France and England. Margins of defeat against Wales and Ireland away were 10 and 6 points respectively, so we were pretty competitive in all games during that tournament.

Hadden's first year as coach was certainly something. Went to Murrayfield for the first time, and saw Scotland beat France, went back a few weeks later and witnessed them lifting the Cacutta Cup. I was convinced I must be there lucky mascot, this theory ended abruptly when I went to the Italy game the following year...

Firstly, I had my Scottish victories in Argentina wrong. I got confused between 08 and 10, so as I said I'll apologise for that.

Sending Apologies to Scotland (that okay As? )

As for the Australia game, well I haven't got the Internet connection at the minute to discuss it further.

I don't have any reason to rubbish Scotland. My wife's from there and I lived there for 3 years, so it's fair to say I have an affinity towards them. I was basically offering another side (albeit one of my examples was a bit muddled). Given the difficulty I have accessing the site at the minute (minus 3G or wireless) I wish I hadn't bothered.

Ha, ha, brilliant, Rev - Scotland Aren't Shoite! ;-)

Risca Rev wrote: stuff you said...
I don't have any reason to rubbish Scotland. My wife's from there and I lived there for 3 years ...
more stuff you said.

What more reason do you need?

Cymroglan wrote:

nottins wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:
They regularly beat self hyped favourites like England

Why the obsession with England ? In a thread about Scotland ? Not quite sure winning 4 matches out of the last 25 is regularly beating England. Now they do regularly beat Wales.......

You were doing well until the last bit then you did exactly what he did.

Yawn....!

[quote="maestegmafia"]

Portnoy wrote:Even in the RWC (except I think '91) have they ever they out-performed themselves.

They regularly beat self hyped favourites like England, as well as the odd Springbok or Wallaby team in Murrayfield annually.

Ambiguous sentence there. Granted; Scotland may 'regularly' beat England at home but I think it's a fairly long bow you're drawing in saying they beat 'the odd Springbok or Wallaby team annually'. Unless you are talking Saturnian years (28 years=1 earth year), lol.

Australia's narrow loss to Scotland last year was an anomaly really. Horrible match to watch from an Australian perspective. Giteau's miss only emphasised this. However, Scotland rightly deserved to win that day and I'm happy for the team and their followers. I think they'll do well in Invercargill and Wellington and let's hope they can give England another good contest at Auckland later this year.

With out jumping onto the argument about if it is dishing Scotland, I will try to look at the questions asked at the end.

Not sure it is really just tournements. I think there is a level the Scotland team has, and we usually end up around there at the moment. Unfortunatley this is near the bottom of the 6 nations at the moment.

We do have some wins against the bigger teams, and these are great.

Was at the Ozzie game, and would call us quite fortnate as well, as anyone with a kicking boot on their team would have killed us off (how many missed kicks) - However that is the way of Sport and part of that was our defence making each kick more pressuriesed. We won, and deserved to win, but I have some sweaty parts at the end. South Africa was a good win, but the enxt week we could have easily lost against Fiji

We have the smallest playing pool, 2 teams, and a very mixed structure, so finishing 5th is actually our level - but the margins are so tight, one bounce, a good kick and we could easily get to third.

HOWEVER, i think we have a good crop of players and could be doing a lot better, if we could just click and take the pressure. We start so slowly in the tournements that our confidence goes and the 6N is almost over before it begins. We then have a ok game and realise we can do somthing, then have a good game.

We need to start well, gain confidence and handle the pressure - then I see us getting in 3/4th place regularity