ITV 4.
Moderator: OptimisticJock
-
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 12:13 pm
ITV 4.
Can’t cast live so having to cast via a desktop browser on my laptop. Am I missing a different way to cast from my phone ?
-
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 9:19 am
Re: ITV 4.
dunnowhatisthejava wrote:Can’t cast live so having to cast via a desktop browser on my laptop. Am I missing a different way to cast from my phone ?
I'm watching the tele. Easier
- Mr Mwenda
- Posts: 2459
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:42 am
Re: ITV 4.
Good start for the boys in blue.
-
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:10 pm
Re: ITV 4.
You can cast from the ITV player app if you have a chrome cast device or something similar?whatisthejava wrote:Can’t cast live so having to cast via a desktop browser on my laptop. Am I missing a different way to cast from my phone ?
Pretty sketchy start from both sides. Like a preseason game
-
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:10 pm
Re: ITV 4.
No-one watching? Pretty effective so far, if not exactly pretty and with some worryingly basic mistakes
-
- Posts: 1934
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 10:34 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Maul is effective, kinghorn going well
-
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 12:13 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Watson and Cummings stand our forwards.paddy no 11 wrote:Maul is effective, kinghorn going well
Harris and Graham doing well as well
-
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:10 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Wish the commentary team wouldn't talk about an eerie Murryfield. Shows they've never been to an edinburgh game.
Looking for us to out them properly to bed by 60 minutes and throw it around a bit thereafter. Worrying signs about playing too far behind the gain line again in this half though
Looking for us to out them properly to bed by 60 minutes and throw it around a bit thereafter. Worrying signs about playing too far behind the gain line again in this half though
-
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:10 pm
Re: ITV 4.
I don't really care, but why does it matter if Cummings touched the ball? It was passed forwards.
- Mr Mwenda
- Posts: 2459
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:42 am
Re: ITV 4.
Was that what they were talking about? I found the whole thing strange.switchskier wrote:I don't really care, but why does it matter if Cummings touched the ball? It was passed forwards.
- Mr Mwenda
- Posts: 2459
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:42 am
Re: ITV 4.
I turned it on hoping for an unlikely underdog victory but i think i'll just head to bed.switchskier wrote:No-one watching? Pretty effective so far, if not exactly pretty and with some worryingly basic mistakes
-
- Posts: 4212
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 4:12 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Same old shite. Resorting to steamrollering a team below us to rack up the score rather than impose our alleged “game plan”
This is not going to work against big boys.
This is not going to work against big boys.
-
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:10 pm
Re: ITV 4.
This feels a bit harsh. They won the game handily without having to get out of third gear. Georgia were pretty bad (their fullback had a particular aversion to tackling) but you can only beat what's in front of you.hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Same old shite. Resorting to steamrollering a team below us to rack up the score rather than impose our alleged “game plan”
This is not going to work against big boys.
Notable difference in approach when Russell came on. Much wider and flatter, earlier. Thought that Horne sharpened things up a bit but that may be my general preference showing through.
Defence was mostly good, though untested. Good to see VDM getting more involved than Edinburgh often manage to get him.
-
- Posts: 5595
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Defensive structures looked good. Would need to watch again but not sure if they were moving Hastings to the edge deliberately at times or henjust ended up there. Finn is a far better defender.
Dalziel's first outing as forwards coach looked ok. Seemed to be organised enough.
Few players looked tentative but as a first outing it was ok.
Dalziel's first outing as forwards coach looked ok. Seemed to be organised enough.
Few players looked tentative but as a first outing it was ok.
-
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 12:13 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Big positive for me was the maul work and willingness to bring in extra bodies. Not sure if they will do that against wales next week.
Bit worried about mcinally throwing , I know it’s a cliche to blame the hooker but it’s doesn’t look as crisp as last year
Bit worried about mcinally throwing , I know it’s a cliche to blame the hooker but it’s doesn’t look as crisp as last year
-
- Posts: 5893
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Expected more from Georgia. Even their once feared scrum didnt pose a problem.
Scotland won very easily.
Scotland won very easily.
-
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 9:19 am
Re: ITV 4.
nonsense.hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Same old shite. Resorting to steamrollering a team below us to rack up the score rather than impose our alleged “game plan”
This is not going to work against big boys.
what game plan is that? The run everything you have no doubt slammed previously? The kick everything you would no doubt slam?
It was a professional demolition of a poor opposition, job done move on.
We got a free practice of our maul. Our scrum was excellent against famous scrummagers. We learned a bit in the backs; Lang defended well but looked a bit lost, Harris defended well as always but doesn't threaten to score or create tries. As a combination it does not work, for me neither are what we need although Harris may still be the best option. Kinghorn was poor. Again. Couldn't lace Hogg's boots and on this season's form Huw Jones miles ahead of him already. Wings did well and pick themselves now that Maitland has shot himself in the foot.
Front row all top drawer in set scrum, and around the park. Fagerson is a beast in the loose.
Locks both very good. Back row TBH were a bit meh. Fagerson looking ok until injury. Richie very quiet for him, CDP tried but looked so much slower than his Edinburgh days. Watson got MoM, I'm not sure why, did well enough I suppose in what he does (the rubber ball carries and tackles, as usual no jackals I can remember) but I think it was him who held on to the ball too long and then threw the shot pass high to Hastings who tried to palm it on as he got man and ball. His passing remains very poor in timing and technique even when he remembers he is allowed to pass. Same all career, no improvement. Very frustrating player
Russell then Horne came on and the cry comes "speeded things up". No shit. Replacement half backs virtually always do that, and if they don't against a 2nd tier team who play mostly second tier rugby tiring badly, something is very very wrong.
That said Russell's passing is a thing of beauty. A class above anyone anywhere right now.
But a much bigger test next week
-
- Posts: 12134
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Just finishing up the game and broadly agree with this. Fagerson looked to be going well, didn't catch what happened to him, but the backrow were a bit underhwelming.septic 9 wrote:nonsense.hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Same old shite. Resorting to steamrollering a team below us to rack up the score rather than impose our alleged “game plan”
This is not going to work against big boys.
what game plan is that? The run everything you have no doubt slammed previously? The kick everything you would no doubt slam?
It was a professional demolition of a poor opposition, job done move on.
We got a free practice of our maul. Our scrum was excellent against famous scrummagers. We learned a bit in the backs; Lang defended well but looked a bit lost, Harris defended well as always but doesn't threaten to score or create tries. As a combination it does not work, for me neither are what we need although Harris may still be the best option. Kinghorn was poor. Again. Couldn't lace Hogg's boots and on this season's form Huw Jones miles ahead of him already. Wings did well and pick themselves now that Maitland has shot himself in the foot.
Front row all top drawer in set scrum, and around the park. Fagerson is a beast in the loose.
Locks both very good. Back row TBH were a bit meh. Fagerson looking ok until injury. Richie very quiet for him, CDP tried but looked so much slower than his Edinburgh days. Watson got MoM, I'm not sure why, did well enough I suppose in what he does (the rubber ball carries and tackles, as usual no jackals I can remember) but I think it was him who held on to the ball too long and then threw the shot pass high to Hastings who tried to palm it on as he got man and ball. His passing remains very poor in timing and technique even when he remembers he is allowed to pass. Same all career, no improvement. Very frustrating player
Russell then Horne came on and the cry comes "speeded things up". No shit. Replacement half backs virtually always do that, and if they don't against a 2nd tier team who play mostly second tier rugby tiring badly, something is very very wrong.
That said Russell's passing is a thing of beauty. A class above anyone anywhere right now.
But a much bigger test next week
Pretty unexciting game and not a thing created in midfield until Russell came on is pretty disappointing. That's the most passive defence we'll face for a while and it still looks like Lang/Harris didn't have much to offer.
Not a lot more than knocking the rust off to be read into it other than that. Not sure we've learned anything more about most of the players.
-
- Posts: 5595
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm
Re: ITV 4.
I didn't think the starting backs were up to much bar Graham. Didn't need to be and I suspect regardless of opposition DVdM had some nerves which is understandable.
If we are playing with Harris I think Finn is the better 10 for him to play with as he challenges the gain line better with his flat passing.
Forwards were decent. I think our hookers are over rated due to the the general lack of top class hookers around. Brown definitely ahead of Rambo though. Our best props started and don't see that being a particularly close decision.
Toolis is really underrated in the set piece and is good there but should be the one to drop out of the 15 for Gray.
If we are playing with Harris I think Finn is the better 10 for him to play with as he challenges the gain line better with his flat passing.
Forwards were decent. I think our hookers are over rated due to the the general lack of top class hookers around. Brown definitely ahead of Rambo though. Our best props started and don't see that being a particularly close decision.
Toolis is really underrated in the set piece and is good there but should be the one to drop out of the 15 for Gray.
-
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 9:19 am
Re: ITV 4.
Watson fans and fans of "linking" opensides should watch Tiperic's pass for Wales early try tonight v France. Not in Watsons skill set
-
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:10 pm
Re: ITV 4.
Yeah, but that's always been a big part of Tipurics game. And he's been one of the very best for a while.septic 9 wrote:Watson fans and fans of "linking" opensides should watch Tiperic's pass for Wales early try tonight v France. Not in Watsons skill set
We don't have another openside as good as Watson and aren't likely to see one internationally until Boyle or Father start getting done game time. So it's more fun to concentrate on him bouncing people, which he actually does better than Tipuric.
And Tipuric completely sells himself, costing France a try. But watch, he won't get relentlessly beat up about it.
-
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 9:19 am
Re: ITV 4.
thought that, but replay suggests webb was he problem leaving the dog legswitchskier wrote:
And Tipuric completely sells himself, costing France a try. But watch, he won't get relentlessly beat up about it.
Point I was making was to compare that pass to Watson's inability to throw a simple pass. Tiperic carries differently its true, but he is a lot quick over the ground as well so tends to make more yards but in wider channels, I prefer that to my openside (if we are playing a "traditional" openside carrying hard tight yards the front 5, 6 and 8 are better equipped to do.
Watson is very good and its him or Richie at 7, depending on what we want from the back row, but Watson gets hero worship that ignores his glaring weakness. It is a main reason he won't be a Lion