Team for Scotland

[Mikey Brown]

I don't know anything about stats but I clicked the 'dominant carries' tab and ben youngs was top.

And third on tackle evasion!

Hang on. 9 carries. 4 try involvements. 4 dominant carries. 80% gainline. 75% tackle evasion. 100% attacking ruck effectiveness.

Maybe the problem was never his passing, he just should have been a backrow/centre instead of 9.

Dan Cole on 0% is pretty funny.

[Mellsblue]

I don't know anything about stats but I clicked the 'dominant carries' tab and ben youngs was top.

And third on tackle evasion!

Unlike the exposed ribs of his 10.

[FKAS]

Good work Mikey. I wasn't going to bother pulling that together.

[FKAS]

I don't know anything about stats but I clicked the 'dominant carries' tab and ben youngs was top.

And third on tackle evasion!

Hang on. 9 carries. 4 try involvements. 4 dominant carries. 80% gainline. 75% tackle evasion.

Maybe the problem was never his passing, he just should have been a backrow/centre instead of 9.

Dan Cole on 0% is pretty funny.

Ben Youngs, the master of the go and slow.

Dan Cole knows his job. Clear rucks and scrum.

[p/d]

Just watch the game, enjoy and not worry when we make replacements

The only stats that matter will be those at around 6.30 tomorrow

[Mellsblue]

The only stats that matter will be those at around 6.30 tomorrow

You really should give Stephen Jones Esq. longer to get out his player ratings.

[p/d]

The only stats that matter will be those at around 6.30 tomorrow

You really should give Stephen Jones Esq. longer to get out his player ratings.

[Oakboy]

I haven’t been tracking him for the full 80, I’ve not even seen these infamous tackle completion stats, but it does seem funny how almost every back row with any sort of ‘highlights’ contribution eventually gets accused of “going missing” in the intervening minutes.

I’m never quite sure if that’s just in relation to their big moments, or it really is a zero-sum game in terms of effort and output.

It would make sense if Borthwick isn’t pleased with something in Hill’s stats/GPS, as he seems to have basically all the component parts we want in a 6.

Your last sentence sums it up. If CCS had carried on improving and shown he had 80 minutes worth of stamina, I think he would have kept the 6 shirt with Hill lined up to deputise as necessary, albeit with a full-game question mark. Sacrificing the line-out presence led to T Curry getting the shirt and, when fully fit, there is no doubt about his 80 minute capacity.

If TC stays fit, I can see him moving to 7 and forcing Earl to the bench for some games so that height can start at 6.

Maybe, SB is going to be more and more 'horses for courses' with his back row as the team develops. Might the counter-argument be that it needs the 6:2 split to work?

Oakboy, did you add that to wind me up? T Curry is very stodgy as an openside these days imo ( the last Lions tour conclusively proved this for me). I think there’s a good reason that his best test performances ( certainly post 2019) have come when he’s been selected at 6 with a more attack focussed player ( including his twin) at 7

No. I think our best 7 is Jack Willis and 2nd is TC. However, SB and Jones before him have picked what most label as two opensides. These days the distinction between the two functions is blurred anyway. Arguably, it has been since 2002 or so with Richard Hill our best flanker in either 6 or 7 shirt. Remember him performing so well for the Lions at 7 but reverting to 6 when Back was (disastrously) recalled after injury (if my memory serves)?

To call TC stodgy is somewhat inaccurate, IMO. If fully fit, he is our best available flanker whatever his shirt number. A few months back, I doubted he would get back to his best. I am delighted to have been proved wrong.

[Mikey Brown]

Well, despite PD asking that I not be interested in the numbers, I do find some of it quite interesting.

Scotland’s breakdown work this year has been impressive, with Gregor Townsend’s men averaging the quickest ruck speed in attack of any side (3.3s). It has been crucial, too, given they have hit more rucks (235) and enjoyed more possession (58%) than any other team.

While Scotland have generated quick ball, England have struggled to get things flowing from phase to phase. Their average ruck speed of 4.8s is the slowest of any nation. To be fair though, they have been far more effective in disrupting opposition ball, winning a competition-high nine jackal turnovers.

For all of Scotland’s possession, they have struggled to find real penetration. Their gainline success rate of 50% is the second-lowest in the tournament (Wales 49%), while their dominant carry rate of 21.1% is also second-worst (Italy 20.7%).

Scotland’s forwards have particularly struggled in this area, with their dominant carry rate dropping to 18% – the lowest of any team. A lack of go-forward from the pack can stifle attacking momentum, and when combined with high possession rates, can lead to fatigue rather than attacking gains.

I'm surprised at those ruck speed stats for Scotland, particularly given how difficult it's been to make big gains in the carry. Maybe it doesn't include the 2 seconds of Ben White just kind of staring at the ball once it's become available.

[p/d]

Well, despite PD asking that I not be interested in the numbers, I do find some of it quite interesting.

Scotland’s breakdown work this year has been impressive, with Gregor Townsend’s men averaging the quickest ruck speed in attack of any side (3.3s). It has been crucial, too, given they have hit more rucks (235) and enjoyed more possession (58%) than any other team.

While Scotland have generated quick ball, England have struggled to get things flowing from phase to phase. Their average ruck speed of 4.8s is the slowest of any nation. To be fair though, they have been far more effective in disrupting opposition ball, winning a competition-high nine jackal turnovers.

For all of Scotland’s possession, they have struggled to find real penetration. Their gainline success rate of 50% is the second-lowest in the tournament (Wales 49%), while their dominant carry rate of 21.1% is also second-worst (Italy 20.7%).

Scotland’s forwards have particularly struggled in this area, with their dominant carry rate dropping to 18% – the lowest of any team. A lack of go-forward from the pack can stifle attacking momentum, and when combined with high possession rates, can lead to fatigue rather than attacking gains.

I'm surprised at those ruck speed stats for Scotland, particularly given how difficult it's been to make big gains in the carry. Maybe it doesn't include the 2 seconds of Ben White just kind of staring at the ball once it's become available.

Now Mikey, team stats are quite different.

[FKAS]

Some consternation over the 6:2 bench split earlier. France have reacted to their loss last weekend by dropping Penaud and Jalibert whilst also going for a 7:1 bench split.

[Mikey Brown]

But Penaud beat 6 defenders…

[Danno]

Dropping Penaud is wild

[Mikey Brown]

Dropping Penaud is wild

He's channeling Ted Hill with his 27.8% tackle completion and 0% ruck effectiveness.

[FKAS]

Dropping Penaud is wild

He's channeling Ted Hill with his 27.8% tackle completion and 0% ruck effectiveness.

[p/d]

Dropping Penaud is wild

He's channeling Ted Hill with his 27.8% tackle completion and 0% ruck effectiveness.

Joking apart he has a 55% ruck effectivness!!!

CCS has the 0% badge of honour

[Stom]

Looking at those backrow stats, it's clear that Hill's role is vastly different to the others in that list. Not that his tackling is bad.

[Mikey Brown]

Looking at those backrow stats, it's clear that Hill's role is vastly different to the others in that list. Not that his tackling is bad.

Ah. The Farrell defence.

[Puja]

Dropping Penaud is wild

Agreed. Dropping him for playing badly after being thrown in immediately after recovering from injury would be harsh, but when going through the m-b-m, he had a pretty decent game and was a crucial part of two of the tries. It can only be for a personality clash.

Some consternation over the 6:2 bench split earlier. France have reacted to their loss last weekend by dropping Penaud and Jalibert whilst also going for a 7:1 bench split.

Dropping Jalibert I do understand - he was tosh. Here's hoping the French get three minor injuries in the backs early on and learn a painful lesson.

Puja

[FKAS]

Dropping Penaud is wild

Agreed. Dropping him for playing badly after being thrown in immediately after recovering from injury would be harsh, but when going through the m-b-m, he had a pretty decent game and was a crucial part of two of the tries. It can only be for a personality clash.

Some consternation over the 6:2 bench split earlier. France have reacted to their loss last weekend by dropping Penaud and Jalibert whilst also going for a 7:1 bench split.

Dropping Jalibert I do understand - he was tosh. Here's hoping the French get three minor injuries in the backs early on and learn a painful lesson.

Puja

Flament in at 10, back to his Loughborough days. Be grand.

[jngf]

Your last sentence sums it up. If CCS had carried on improving and shown he had 80 minutes worth of stamina, I think he would have kept the 6 shirt with Hill lined up to deputise as necessary, albeit with a full-game question mark. Sacrificing the line-out presence led to T Curry getting the shirt and, when fully fit, there is no doubt about his 80 minute capacity.

If TC stays fit, I can see him moving to 7 and forcing Earl to the bench for some games so that height can start at 6.

Maybe, SB is going to be more and more 'horses for courses' with his back row as the team develops. Might the counter-argument be that it needs the 6:2 split to work?

Oakboy, did you add that to wind me up? T Curry is very stodgy as an openside these days imo ( the last Lions tour conclusively proved this for me). I think there’s a good reason that his best test performances ( certainly post 2019) have come when he’s been selected at 6 with a more attack focussed player ( including his twin) at 7

No. I think our best 7 is Jack Willis and 2nd is TC. However, SB and Jones before him have picked what most label as two opensides. These days the distinction between the two functions is blurred anyway. Arguably, it has been since 2002 or so with Richard Hill our best flanker in either 6 or 7 shirt. Remember him performing so well for the Lions at 7 but reverting to 6 when Back was (disastrously) recalled after injury (if my memory serves)?

To call TC stodgy is somewhat inaccurate, IMO. If fully fit, he is our best available flanker whatever his shirt number. A few months back, I doubted he would get back to his best. I am delighted to have been proved wrong.

Again I think will have to disagree on this (one of our favourite old s ), imo Hill looked a bit stodgy compared to Back and Winterbottom when playing at 7 for England. His Lions appearances there are great but the balance of the Lions backrow was often picked more for all out size than was the case for England.

[Mikey Brown]

Right. That’s it. First thing tomorrow I’m getting a lobotomy.

[Spiffy]

Right. That’s it. First thing tomorrow I’m getting a lobotomy.

Eh. Another one?

[francoisfou]

Dropping Penaud is wild

Agreed!
It is said that Galthié dropped Penaud for his “lack of commitment and sharpness”!
Penaud’s performances in Blue are nearly always of the top drawer and to drop him for the above reasons is crazy.
Galthié’s detractors are growing in number and he needs convincing wins in the rest of the 6N.
First up is the potential banana skin on Sunday in Rome followed by a trip to Dublin.
Galthié is maybe feeling a tad nervous.