How far off your first choice team is the one for Saturday? Obviously Hogg is a big loss in defence and attack.Mikey Brown wrote:So yeah, just smash our centres and bomb the shit out of Darcy Graham I guess.
Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Moderator: Sandydragon
-
- Posts: 1297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
-
- Posts: 2257
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 12:20 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Centres anywhere between 3rd and 6th choice. G Horne would be the popular choice at 9. Watson would be first choice 7, Strauss 3rd or 4th choice.
-
- Posts: 11997
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Hard to say to be honest. There's been so little consistency in selection except for (weirdly) some of the more underwhelming choices; Dell, Wilson, Laidlaw, a totally knackered looking Jonny Gray/Alex Dunbar.
There's a number of very good, promising players in there that don't really have the experience yet (Graham, Kinghorn (as a winger), Bradbury, Ritchie, Horne jnr) but should be far better than the incumbents.
GT's true first-choice team probably has a fully fit Watson at 7, a different 12 if any of them can stay fit, Huw Jones at 13, Hogg at 15. It's the bench that worries me as much as anything.
There's a number of very good, promising players in there that don't really have the experience yet (Graham, Kinghorn (as a winger), Bradbury, Ritchie, Horne jnr) but should be far better than the incumbents.
GT's true first-choice team probably has a fully fit Watson at 7, a different 12 if any of them can stay fit, Huw Jones at 13, Hogg at 15. It's the bench that worries me as much as anything.
-
- Posts: 1297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Been impressed with Ritchie and he looks as if he is developing into a fine international test player. With Watson, you have two good open sides in the mould of Tipuric and Warburton. Useful for games which are fast and furious with plenty of broken play.Mikey Brown wrote:Hard to say to be honest. There's been so little consistency in selection except for (weirdly) some of the more underwhelming choices; Dell, Wilson, Laidlaw, a totally knackered looking Jonny Gray/Alex Dunbar.
There's a number of very good, promising players in there that don't really have the experience yet (Graham, Kinghorn (as a winger), Bradbury, Ritchie, Horne jnr) but should be far better than the incumbents.
GT's true first-choice team probably has a fully fit Watson at 7, a different 12 if any of them can stay fit, Huw Jones at 13, Hogg at 15. It's the bench that worries me as much as anything.
Not long now until we find out just how our ambitions will pan out.
What’s the weather like in Edinburgh? Hope young Gail isn’t standing on top of the roof in a gale!
-
- Posts: 11997
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
So, err... anything goes in the ruck I guess.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Wales were allowed to kill ball all day.
But Scotland took advantage of a new law which (apparently) says flying off your feet over the ruck so far you risk going out of play, is fine & dandy.
Neither of those "forward" passes looks clearly & obviously forward to me. Bloody lovely inside run for the Scotland try, to call that back for an inch forward would have been a crime.
Otherwise, Wales showed once again how hard it is to score against a team even when you're all over them, IF they genuinely don't believe you can. Wales played like they'd borrowed a TARDIS and seen the result in advance. They're not much fun to watch (even if you're Welsh!) but they're bloody impressive and I can't help but be a little bit proud of them. Nothing we've seen so far will be enough next week, though.
But Scotland took advantage of a new law which (apparently) says flying off your feet over the ruck so far you risk going out of play, is fine & dandy.
Neither of those "forward" passes looks clearly & obviously forward to me. Bloody lovely inside run for the Scotland try, to call that back for an inch forward would have been a crime.
Otherwise, Wales showed once again how hard it is to score against a team even when you're all over them, IF they genuinely don't believe you can. Wales played like they'd borrowed a TARDIS and seen the result in advance. They're not much fun to watch (even if you're Welsh!) but they're bloody impressive and I can't help but be a little bit proud of them. Nothing we've seen so far will be enough next week, though.
-
- Posts: 11997
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Lol. Yes. As ever it took us a very long time to realise that the ref didn't give a shit about how anybody was entering the breakdown.Sourdust wrote:Wales were allowed to kill ball all day.
But Scotland took advantage of a new law which (apparently) says flying off your feet over the ruck so far you risk going out of play, is fine & dandy.
Neither of those "forward" passes looks clearly & obviously forward to me. Bloody lovely inside run for the Scotland try, to call that back for an inch forward would have been a crime.
Otherwise, Wales showed once again how hard it is to score against a team even when you're all over them, IF they genuinely don't believe you can. Wales played like they'd borrowed a TARDIS and seen the result in advance. They're not much fun to watch (even if you're Welsh!) but they're bloody impressive and I can't help but be a little bit proud of them. Nothing we've seen so far will be enough next week, though.
- Son of Mathonwy
- Posts: 4964
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
That was hard work. Great first half but failing to get some points from that last attack before half time almost cost us. Great defence at the end - and Scotland's missed conversion was very useful, keeping the gap at 4.
Shame we didn't have Halfpenny on the bench, as it turned out. But we managed.
Ireland will be harder. They are better at getting through us, and know it.
Shame we didn't have Halfpenny on the bench, as it turned out. But we managed.
Ireland will be harder. They are better at getting through us, and know it.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Yup. We cannot defend for an entire half and hope to beat Ireland. You have to imagine that even on their iffy current form, Murray and Sexton would have found enough half-gaps in that 2nd half to put us away.Son of Mathonwy wrote:That was hard work. Great first half but failing to get some points from that last attack before half time almost cost us. Great defence at the end - and Scotland's missed conversion was very useful, keeping the gap at 4.
Shame we didn't have Halfpenny on the bench, as it turned out. But we managed.
Ireland will be harder. They are better at getting through us, and know it.
When all's said & done it's a 7-point, 2-tries-to-1 away win, and we'd all have taken that this morning. But Bloody Hell, even if we do it next week I wouldn't want to be the sales manager for the DVD boxset. This is torture!
- Son of Mathonwy
- Posts: 4964
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
And I really thought we were going to run away with it at half time. Losing Liam didn't help, but it looks like Townsend did better work at half time than Gatland.Sourdust wrote:Yup. We cannot defend for an entire half and hope to beat Ireland. You have to imagine that even on their iffy current form, Murray and Sexton would have found enough half-gaps in that 2nd half to put us away.Son of Mathonwy wrote:That was hard work. Great first half but failing to get some points from that last attack before half time almost cost us. Great defence at the end - and Scotland's missed conversion was very useful, keeping the gap at 4.
Shame we didn't have Halfpenny on the bench, as it turned out. But we managed.
Ireland will be harder. They are better at getting through us, and know it.
When all's said & done it's a 7-point, 2-tries-to-1 away win, and we'd all have taken that this morning. But Bloody Hell, even if we do it next week I wouldn't want to be the sales manager for the DVD boxset. This is torture!
- Son of Mathonwy
- Posts: 4964
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
However...that poor second half might cost us second place in the championship if we lose to Ireland. We'll see how they get along tomorrow first, though.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Not wanting to be a clever bastard with hindsight, but I really didn't.Son of Mathonwy wrote: And I really thought we were going to run away with it at half time.
I thought 15-6 was a fair reflection at half-time, but I said I thought we'd regret not geting another score and I was right. For all our clinical stats and strong game-management, it's a frustrating theme under Gatland that we don't take chances to kill games early. Once we get a lead we feel we can defend, it's almost inevitable that we will try. To be fair, it usually works; but it drives me spare!
- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10466
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Well, that was mediocre. We started well enough but for our first half possession we should have been further ahead. The second half was all one way and fair play to Scotland for raising their tempo and fair play to our defence but too many mistakes again.
Discipline, what happened to that? The refs interpretation was a bit different but we need to adapt.
Line out. Awful throughout.
Hopefully Liam is alright for next week. I’m concerned by how many points Anscombe seems to leave on the pitch. That will cost us, and Biggar or Halfpenny would have added at least three more to our first half total.
Discipline, what happened to that? The refs interpretation was a bit different but we need to adapt.
Line out. Awful throughout.
Hopefully Liam is alright for next week. I’m concerned by how many points Anscombe seems to leave on the pitch. That will cost us, and Biggar or Halfpenny would have added at least three more to our first half total.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
When he nailed that 40m shot right down the middle I was impressed. But then he missed 5 points that an international 10 should be ticking over comfortably. Even with that failure to convert the third try chance, the score should have been 20-6 at the break. Anyone can miss a kick, but as you say Anscombe misses a few.Sandydragon wrote:I’m concerned by how many points Anscombe seems to leave on the pitch. That will cost us, and Biggar or Halfpenny would have added at least three more to our first half total.
- Son of Mathonwy
- Posts: 4964
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
It would be good to have Halfpenny on the pitch for that extra accuracy, but at this point I think we'd need to drop North. Which seems like heresy.
- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10466
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
I’m thinking that I’d prefer Biggar to start and have Anscombe on the bench. Our back 3 have gone well although North is most in jeopardy. I suspect we will. See the best if Anscombe when the game opens up, but we need to nail lockable penalties next weekend as I feel this will be the hardest game yet.
On a positive, Wainwright is playing very well. I thought he would be one for the future but he is doing well now.
On a positive, Wainwright is playing very well. I thought he would be one for the future but he is doing well now.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
I'm very open to the theory that while Anscombe's continued "development" is not costing us games, then persisting with him as a starter is worthwhile because Biggar won't be around forever. But the "long term" argument is weakened when you consider that Anscombe is only 18 months younger than Biggar; even if he blossomed tomorrow we'd only be looking at 3-4 years of use out of him.
Anscombe has had 3 starts now plus 1 cameo, and the best one can say is that he's done little damage. He "gets our backs moving better" than Biggar does, but we saw against England that that's not always what leads to actual tries. Anscombe couldn't unlock England's defence and Ireland's is at least as good. Combined with the inferior goalkicking (although that may be moot if ½p's back) I'm very tempted to call for Biggar to start next weekend.
Anscombe has had 3 starts now plus 1 cameo, and the best one can say is that he's done little damage. He "gets our backs moving better" than Biggar does, but we saw against England that that's not always what leads to actual tries. Anscombe couldn't unlock England's defence and Ireland's is at least as good. Combined with the inferior goalkicking (although that may be moot if ½p's back) I'm very tempted to call for Biggar to start next weekend.
- Son of Mathonwy
- Posts: 4964
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Since Patchell isn't in the running - unfortunately - I'd continue with Anscombe.
But I would like Halfpenny back (instead of North) in case we need those extra points. No to mention that he's looked pretty sharp playing for the Scarlets recently.
But I would like Halfpenny back (instead of North) in case we need those extra points. No to mention that he's looked pretty sharp playing for the Scarlets recently.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
I'm just going to quote this for no particular reason. I've made some bad predictions this year, too.Sourdust wrote:
Gatland doesn't seem to like hammerings in either direction.
_IF_ Wales get on top on Saturday, I can see us easing up in the second half and just keeping them at arm's length. We've got form for this under Gats and it would serve to keep the euphoria down. I think what he wants the most is people to be writing on Sunday about how Wales still aren't wholly convincing; for him to be able to say in post-match interviews that "there's a lot to work on" without seeming disingenuous. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we completely dominate the match but win it 18-10.
The problem with this is that I think Scotland have the firepower to play catch-up rugby, and if we try our usual "hold what we have" act we're going to need to be full-on for the 80 to do it. If Scotland get a lead, of course, anything could happen...
- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10466
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Pretty good prediction.Sourdust wrote:I'm just going to quote this for no particular reason. I've made some bad predictions this year, too.Sourdust wrote:
Gatland doesn't seem to like hammerings in either direction.
_IF_ Wales get on top on Saturday, I can see us easing up in the second half and just keeping them at arm's length. We've got form for this under Gats and it would serve to keep the euphoria down. I think what he wants the most is people to be writing on Sunday about how Wales still aren't wholly convincing; for him to be able to say in post-match interviews that "there's a lot to work on" without seeming disingenuous. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we completely dominate the match but win it 18-10.
The problem with this is that I think Scotland have the firepower to play catch-up rugby, and if we try our usual "hold what we have" act we're going to need to be full-on for the 80 to do it. If Scotland get a lead, of course, anything could happen...
-
- Posts: 1297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
What’s your thoughts on Saturday, Sourdust?Sandydragon wrote:Pretty good prediction.Sourdust wrote:I'm just going to quote this for no particular reason. I've made some bad predictions this year, too.Sourdust wrote:
Gatland doesn't seem to like hammerings in either direction.
_IF_ Wales get on top on Saturday, I can see us easing up in the second half and just keeping them at arm's length. We've got form for this under Gats and it would serve to keep the euphoria down. I think what he wants the most is people to be writing on Sunday about how Wales still aren't wholly convincing; for him to be able to say in post-match interviews that "there's a lot to work on" without seeming disingenuous. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we completely dominate the match but win it 18-10.
The problem with this is that I think Scotland have the firepower to play catch-up rugby, and if we try our usual "hold what we have" act we're going to need to be full-on for the 80 to do it. If Scotland get a lead, of course, anything could happen...
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Well, we didn't "completely dominate the match" but otherwise I did pretty well. It was not always thus. Strangely, my previous best prediction is probably also Scotland v Wales... in 2001. I called a 29-all draw, the final score was 28-28.Sandydragon wrote: Pretty good prediction.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
I have no idea.normanski wrote: What’s your thoughts on Saturday, Sourdust?
My fragile heart will not permit me to imagine that Wales might win, although objectively being narrow favourites is fair enough.
I can't see how what we've shown so far will be enough against Ireland, but then I couldn't win the England game in my head either.
Wales have not faced anything like the accuracy and intensity that Ireland will bring. Ireland have come nowhere near a defence as good as Wales' yet. The only thing I am reasonably sure of is that if we go 10-3 up and try to hold on, we will lose. It seems perverse but I almost hope Ireland score first!
If I was neutral I'd probably call it as a 3-5pt home win. But I'm not neutral, and I can't handle hope.

- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10466
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
It’s much too close to call. They stuffed us last year but we did them over the year before. Home advantage is always good but Ireland have a good record in Cardiff. Neither side has hit the heights of form yet, although both have played well in patches. Both sides can hold onto the ball and both can turn it over. Both have excellent defences.
Normally I’d suggest that the accuracy of the Irish halfbacks would be the key difference, but I’m not so sure at the moment.
I’m hopeful for a Wales win and the Slam, but I’m finding this one even harder to guess than the England game.
Normally I’d suggest that the accuracy of the Irish halfbacks would be the key difference, but I’m not so sure at the moment.
I’m hopeful for a Wales win and the Slam, but I’m finding this one even harder to guess than the England game.
-
- Posts: 1297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm
Re: Hammer of the Scots or Scots hammered?
Yes I’m finding it hard to get my head around this one.Sandydragon wrote:It’s much too close to call. They stuffed us last year but we did them over the year before. Home advantage is always good but Ireland have a good record in Cardiff. Neither side has hit the heights of form yet, although both have played well in patches. Both sides can hold onto the ball and both can turn it over. Both have excellent defences.
Normally I’d suggest that the accuracy of the Irish halfbacks would be the key difference, but I’m not so sure at the moment.
I’m hopeful for a Wales win and the Slam, but I’m finding this one even harder to guess than the England game.
Neither side has been overly impressive so far and Wales only seem to fire themselves up in the face of adversity!
Then I think back to the earlier games.
We scored five tries with two disallowed in Paris - indeed if liam’s try hadn’t been knocked on there would have been a different feel to the first half and honours would have been more even. Remember too all the fumbles, knock-ons and tries (apart from Liam’s effort) were played going in one direction so perhaps the terrible weather conditions had an adverse impact on that game far more than most pundits realised. If one of the two disallowed tries had stood we would have had a bonus point.
Our reserves scored five tries again in Rome with two marginally disallowed - again just missing the bonus point win. Gatland’s canny squad changes was great preparation for RWC and could pay dividends later this year.
Look at the stats on the England game. We were dominant throughout and if Peyper’s radio had been working he would not have awarded the first three points kick and the whole tenure of the following scores would have changed and England might have struggled to get double figures on the scoreboard. We only gave away three penalties in the whole game; one was for the ‘no arms’ tackle and the other was clearly Sinckler dropping a scrum while we were penalised.
The build up to the Scotland game meant training was disrupted because all the merger problems surfaced. Even so we had a great first half before we turned off (especially after Liam went off) but again Shaun’s defence carried us through unlike the same game two years earlier.
This team, in the words of Gatland, has forgotten how to lose and I would guess that on Saturday we will see a full 80 minute effort from them.
The last two home games against Ireland have been close. A last minute Jamie Roberts try gave us respectability in one and a stupid Irish centre joining the maul ahead of the ball carrier prevented an Irish try at a decisive point in the game.
It will be close but I think this team will give it their all for the full 80 and come out narrow winners. I hope so!