RugbyRebels

So painful. So familiar.

Fucking come on, Scotland.

It's so frustrating.

We have fixed many of the issues we had for the last few years. We are not easy to beat. We have a fair bit of physicality. We can play a tactical kicking game. But we also seem to have lost some of the attacking spark and the ability to really frighten teams so we never win easily either. Our first try last week and our try this week were both great attacking play, but at other times today we just plod through phases with limited support.

The real issue today though, against a limited Welsh team, was the unforced errors. Knock-ons by Gray and Gilchrist, kick out on the full by Russell, stupid ruck penalties and a bonus offside one too. Ten penalties isn't that many overall but is a lot considering Wales' attack was not a threat.

On the plus side, Graham was great and Fagerson looked great too. Fingers crossed he is back next week. I think him going off unbalanced the back row and Bradbury doesn't have the same all round game - fine if Ritchie is at 6 but not ideal with Skinner there.

Looking ahead, we don't need wholesale changes but need a few. Is a Skinner Cummings second row partnership workable? I just don't think we get enough from Gray and Gilchrist at the moment. It might lose something in the lineout but they might actually compete on opposition ball. If so, I'd go all out and pick Darge Watson and Fagerson (/Bradbury if Fagerson is not fit).

Tuipoluto went well but I'd still be looking to bring Redpath in. Harris actually had one of his best attacking games for Scotland - although (and I know this is unfair on him) every time he makes a half break it makes me wonder what someone else could have done in that situation.

Also, is Gray fully fit? He has never been the most dynamic but he used to have so much energy and top the tackle counts every week. Now he is the lock who comes off early.

The agony of supporting Scotland

Cameo wrote:It's so frustrating.

We have fixed many of the issues we had for the last few years. We are not easy to beat. We have a fair bit of physicality. We can play a tactical kicking game. But we also seem to have lost some of the attacking spark and the ability to really frighten teams so we never win easily either. Our first try last week and our try this week were both great attacking play, but at other times today we just plod through phases with limited support.

The real issue today though, against a limited Welsh team, was the unforced errors. Knock-ons by Gray and Gilchrist, kick out on the full by Russell, stupid ruck penalties and a bonus offside one too. Ten penalties isn't that many overall but is a lot considering Wales' attack was not a threat.

On the plus side, Graham was great and Fagerson looked great too. Fingers crossed he is back next week. I think him going off unbalanced the back row and Bradbury doesn't have the same all round game - fine if Ritchie is at 6 but not ideal with Skinner there.

Looking ahead, we don't need wholesale changes but need a few. Is a Skinner Cummings second row partnership workable? I just don't think we get enough from Gray and Gilchrist at the moment. It might lose something in the lineout but they might actually compete on opposition ball. If so, I'd go all out and pick Darge Watson and Fagerson (/Bradbury if Fagerson is not fit).

Tuipoluto went well but I'd still be looking to bring Redpath in. Harris actually had one of his best attacking games for Scotland - although (and I know this is unfair on him) every time he makes a half break it makes me wonder what someone else could have done in that situation.

Thought Russell very disappointing second half

Donny osmond wrote:

whatisthejava wrote:If your not shitting yourself, your not proper Scottish.

We have them in the front row, half the second row, the back row, the half backs and centres and are equal in the back 3.

We have them in the subs. We have confidence, patience and an amazing defence and the ability to attack from anywhere.

And yet.

I just think we fuck it up.

Same.

Based on having watched Scotland since 1989, totally and completely... same.

There's faaaaaaar too much confidence on these here boards about this weekend.

Sent from my CPH2195 using Tapatalk

Like, I'm not usually one for saying "Told ya so", but really....

Sent from my CPH2195 using Tapatalk

Cameo wrote: Harris actually had one of his best attacking games for Scotland - although (and I know this is unfair on him) every time he makes a half break it makes me wonder what someone else could have done in that situation.

he was utter utter shit in attack. Again. First couple of minutes he is put in space in their 22. He has options, especially Tuipolotu. He runs straight, insufficient pace to do much, no attempt to draw a man, or evade a tackler and is easily tackled. Utterly utterly useless in attack, again. Again best defensive 13 for both teams. we really need ot move on from him. We are just not going to convert enough possession to points with a carthorse at 13

Cameo wrote:Also, is Gray fully fit? He has never been the most dynamic but he used to have so much energy and top the tackle counts every week. Now he is the lock who comes off early.

needed to get Darge on and hope to speed the game up. A lock had to go. Not a lot in the stats but he is the least dynamic carrier of him Skinner and Gilchrist, and least likely to make dominant tackles as opposed to soak tackles, and lineout also no better.

Gilchrist has been playing well, but still has the obligatory stupid penalty. Cummings display last night should merit a recall, him and Skinner to start against France. Gilchrist to bench.

I thought Bradbury was out best back row after the injury and Skinner our best second row, which was an issue given he played mostly at 6. Not competing in every line out, especially the last one was a mistake too.

Schoeman went the best of all front rowers which isn't saying much. Fagerson Snr gave his obligatory mind numbingly idiotic penalty away. What is wrong with the lad? Turner gave away 3 in 35min, special stuff.

I don't think we'll see too many changes for the France game unless injury dictates but Radpath and Hutchison/Bennett should be the centre combo in Rome.

Fagerson going off and Russell getting blocked down were the 2 moments that turned the game.

Wtf happened! You go to Cardiff with a great match under your belts, favourites to win, most of the neutral supporters rooting for you and you screw it up! What’s worse, is that in all probability you’ll beat the French in Murrayfield!

francoisfou wrote:Wtf happened! You go to Cardiff with a great match under your belts, favourites to win, most of the neutral supporters rooting for you and you screw it up! What’s worse, is that in all probability you’ll beat the French in Murrayfield!

Scotland. Do. Not. Back. Up. Good. Performances.

Sent from my CPH2195 using Tapatalk

At what point does Townsend start dropping guys due to discipline? Gilchrist and Turner give away far too many daft penalties. I'd add Fagerson to that but we are short at TH.

Donny osmond wrote:

francoisfou wrote:Wtf happened! You go to Cardiff with a great match under your belts, favourites to win, most of the neutral supporters rooting for you and you screw it up! What’s worse, is that in all probability you’ll beat the French in Murrayfield!

Scotland. Do. Not. Back. Up. Good. Performances.

Sent from my CPH2195 using Tapatalk

Feeble excuses

Gilchrist was poor, grey was poor , Hogg and Russell were poor , VDM was poor

The amount of unforced errors really cost us but the thing that cost us the game.

We never adjusted to berry’s interpretation at the breakdown.

He allowed the tackler to become the jackler with very little time, so instead of doing what the welsh did which was to constantly have 2 men to clear we did our usual and didn’t change tactic.

This has done for us against SA as well and it’s something we need to deal with.

I wish I had the energy to try and analyse this loss but I don’t. My only positive is I guess it’s good to now feel gutted at a narrow 3 point loss to Wales away from home. Previously it feels like we’ve played above ourselves to get that result, rather than beneath, is that progress? I guess the Wales sides have generally been far better though.

Mikey Brown wrote:I wish I had the energy to try and analyse this loss but I don’t. My only positive is I guess it’s good to now feel gutted at a narrow 3 point loss to Wales away from home. Previously it feels like we’ve played above ourselves to get that result, rather than beneath, is that progress? I guess the Wales sides have generally been far better though.

Yeah, there is that. Made the mistake of looking at Twitter and various numnuts saying Townsend/Hogg need to go as there has been no progress. Easy to forget how far we have come.

I also think our success in solving the thing that everyone was blaming a couple of years ago (all out attack leading to wild inconsistency), has contributed to some of the issues we have in attack now. The people saying: "I just want us to be competitive in every game and not got blown away" don't seem so happy with it after all.

Quite a few of us said before the tournament that we were judging on performance rather result and that was a poor performance.

Am I alone in finding it a problem that Russell and Hogg were laughing like schoolboys with every mistake? I understand that Finn has that side to his personality and that at times it is a strength but I feel as captain, Hogg shouldn't be joining in with it. Maybe I'm overstating it but I had the impression it was a level of complacency that was there. I can't remember if it was after the penalty miss to touch, the kick off that went straight out or after the chargedown in the 22. I just feel that gave a bad impression to the rest of the squad and to the supporters, as well as motivation to the Welsh.

In terms of performances, I thought Darcy Graham was excellent again with ball in hand. Whoever said that Harris had a better game in attack, I thought that at the time but when I tried to come up with the standout reasons why I thought that, I struggled. I can remember him making one break and being tackled when an offload into space was on but I'm struggling to think of why I had him down as a positive in attack. Redpath showed in his little cameo what we have been missing, barely involved in terms of minutes but already he was creating space in the midfield and using the ball well.

I thought Schoeman was great! When he went off he'd been a good continuity player, setting up good ball for others but when he came back on he had the bit between his teeth to provide some go forward ball.

Overriding feeling is that attitude cost us that game, team selection seemed fine. As Septic pointed out, Nel was there to counter Wyn Jones but I don't really feel like it would have mattered much who had started and who finished that game.

I don’t remember seeing Hogg react like that, if anything he normally seems to be far too serious, but maybe I missed it.

I remember Russell making that stupid face he does every time he misses touch from a penalty. It’s annoying but I don’t think it’s as simple as meaning he isn’t taking it seriously.

It’s hard to judge much about the performance when we coughed the ball up so easily and so regularly. How many times did VDM lose it?

Harris put in some good hard, straight carries after spending the entire first half running sideways. A very low bar but it was an improvement.

There’s something to the attitude thing, definitely. It had that horrible familiar pattern of a promising first half, hoping to kick on in the second but it gets far too error strewn to make any inroads. Then we wait until the game is effectively lost to finally find some aggression and energy.

Bradbury was solid, but was gutted to lose Fagerson as he’s started to look like the player we’ve been hoping for.

Waiting so long to introduce Darge and Redpath was a mistake. Sure Kinghorn has been playing 10 (though still seems to get shuffled to wing/fullback) but with Tuipulotu coming off surely it made sense to put Redpath in and have Hogg support as first receiver.

I just don’t get this Kinghorn thing. It feels like a huge compromise in order to add some flexibility that is only occasionally a benefit. That’s not so much against him as a player. I think he’s a nice option to have as a wing, but not sure how far he’s come along as a 10 (again).

stevedog1980 wrote: Overriding feeling is that attitude cost us that game, team selection seemed fine. As Septic pointed out, Nel was there to counter Wyn Jones but I don't really feel like it would have mattered much who had started and who finished that game.

It would have allowed Fagerson to give more idiotic penalties away. So our penalty count is thankful.

A couple of things that I don't think I've seen yet:

- Ritchie was a huge miss. He's the vice-captain and pack leader. Watching it back I didn't see others trying to grab the game or even doing much talking, which is dissapointing with the large number of caps in there. It matters when Hogg is often so far from the action.

- Watson was pretty anonymous. Maybe he just needs some time off? Darge didnt really add much but at this stage I feel that he has to start the Italy game at least.

- We could really use some threat around the ruck. The Welsh defense was drifting early on us. Feel that the occasional snipe from Price would help to keep things honest.

- There was a chance for Tuipulotu to be that heavy carrier that frees up space for your others but it didn't happen. If that's the plan however the he and Russell need to play together because they rarely looked in synch.

Mikey Brown wrote:I don’t remember seeing Hogg react like that, if anything he normally seems to be far too serious, but maybe I missed it.

I remember Russell making that stupid face he does every time he misses touch from a penalty. It’s annoying but I don’t think it’s as simple as meaning he isn’t taking it seriously.

It’s hard to judge much about the performance when we coughed the ball up so easily and so regularly. How many times did VDM lose it?

Harris put in some good hard, straight carries after spending the entire first half running sideways. A very low bar but it was an improvement.

There’s something to the attitude thing, definitely. It had that horrible familiar pattern of a promising first half, hoping to kick on in the second but it gets far too error strewn to make any inroads. Then we wait until the game is effectively lost to finally find some aggression and energy.

Bradbury was solid, but was gutted to lose Fagerson as he’s started to look like the player we’ve been hoping for.

Waiting so long to introduce Darge and Redpath was a mistake. Sure Kinghorn has been playing 10 (though still seems to get shuffled to wing/fullback) but with Tuipulotu coming off surely it made sense to put Redpath in and have Hogg support as first receiver.

I just don’t get this Kinghorn thing. It feels like a huge compromise in order to add some flexibility that is only occasionally a benefit. That’s not so much against him as a player. I think he’s a nice option to have as a wing, but not sure how far he’s come along as a 10 (again).

It was the standard Russell face but I definitely remember him and Hogg sharing a laugh over one of the mistakes. I remember thinking at the time how daft it was to let the Welsh see the lack of belief that they were a threat. That was always going to be an easy way to inspire some more solidity.

I think Watson is suffering from a high bar and the expectation that comes with it. Like you sad, Ritchie being missing meant he wasn't able to have the dynamic support from 6 at the breakdown and I think Watson spent too much time as the tackler to be able to perform in the fetcher role. Fagerson compliments him pretty well at this too so him going off definitely left Watson a bit more exposed than he normally is. I agree that Darge should have been on earlier, but probably from the start.

Kinghorn was a needs must though, Tuipilotu came off when Russell was yellow carded and we needed a 10 on the pitch. I'd have been tempted to throw Hogg in there and bring Redpath on instead but I can understand why the decision was made to bring Kinghorn on.

Mikey Brown wrote:
There’s something to the attitude thing, definitely. It had that horrible familiar pattern of a promising first half, hoping to kick on in the second but it gets far too error strewn to make any inroads. Then we wait until the game is effectively lost to finally find some aggression and energy
.

It's been this way for, oh I dunno, about 20 years. It's a collective attitude problem that gets swept under the carpet time after time, season after season, on the back of the odd decent performance or genuinely international class player.

Right now we have a few decent players leading to more decent performances than usual, but the same attitude is still there. Saw it across the whole team on Saturday, you can see it in individuals during any game.

Sent from my CPH2195 using Tapatalk

stevedog1980 wrote:Quite a few of us said before the tournament that we were judging on performance rather result and that was a poor performance.

and as a performance it wasn't good enough.

Not ideal conditions but better than last week, so the handling error count unacceptable.
There were also some obvious selection and tactical issues.

Skinner in the back row played well enough, but like a second row in the back row; and no challenges to the usually fragile Welsh lineout. Moriarty had 2 clean unopposed takes; not acceptable. And work hard as he did, were beaten at the breakdown, or slowed down time and again. Just maybe a proper back row might have improved that. And this isn't hindsight, its what I was saying pre game.
Even allowing for the above, first 20 mins I thought we were going to blow them away. Pack so good on the carry and quick ball. They adapted but we could have gone quick pick and go a lot more to make them commit more nearer the ruck and keep them retreating so we could play wider with more time/space for the backs.
Berry is a truly awful ref, but we knew (or should have) from the Connacht-Glasgow game that he will penalise anyone anywhere near the back of a ruck, interfering with the ball or not, as he did Gilchrist. I think the coaches would know and would have spoken at length to the players, but some weren't listening or are incapable of not being stupid.
If Harris had any nous, any awareness, we would have scored in the 1st couple of minutes. He has none. Useless in attack

Russell is getting huge amounts of flack from some quarters. He's had better games. But this is OTT and the usual desire to attack hi, when he doesn't totally dominate a game. Had we won the same people would be drooling about that pass to Graham for the try. Tiresome. There were 23 in the squad, we cannot rely on one, or even 2 or 3 just producing a piece of magic to win games, or knock them when they don't. We need all the players functioning at or near their best, and better strategy to facilitate that