Autumn Squad

[Donny osmond]

I’ve calmed down slightly now.

While France were there for the taking today, I think that if we get a win at the bedpan, it will have been a good autumn.

I have not.

See when everyone bursts into tears next summer at the lack of Scottish representation on the Lions tour, I'm just going to go right ahead and point them to this game.

Need players to close out a tight game against a big physical opposition? Nah, not us, we're more the 'give it away with stupid penalties' players.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Have you watched any of the other games this weekend. The main thing that Scotland was lacking, an attack, was lacking from all teams.

That was not an attempt to close out a tight game. That was an attempt to snatch a game that we had clung on it at all day.

If anything, that game was what half of you were calling for back when we were fun. "Let's be competitive in every game rather than be great one week and blown away the next." Well, this year we keep all our losses to 7 points.

I did and you're right, most of the home nations are struggling to put an attack together, but being no better than anyone else at attacking isn't a great defence of our display today.

I feel like you're splitting hairs slightly with not closing out a game versus snatching one but fair enough, my point still stands about potential lions selection, with the possible exception of Cummings no one from our last two games has advanced their claims to a lion's Jersey and there's not going to be any point at the usual suspects crying about it next year when we've put in displays like that this year.

I was never calling for a more balanced game plan, I would've been delighted for GTs teams to keep going with their all out attack.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[septic 9]

Price runs the defensive line to block that and totally fucks it. So frustrating.

He's just not good enough at this level. There's a minimum of one clanger of a mistake from him every game.

you have always been an OTT clueless hyper excitable poster, but you have genuinely excelled yourself today.

[af73]

Have recorded the game to watch later (2am kick off here :ph34r: ) but seeing 1st the scoreline and nature of the scores then skimming the comments/commentary here, this is what I expect to see on review from us.
A team that has (voluntarily) foregone attacking capacity for defensive solidity founders against a team that can also tackle. Relies on "give it Hogg/Duhan" whereupon one gets isolated & the other wastes 1 of the 2 opportunities that comes their way.
Game is lost as team bereft of creative spark finds 5 penalty kicks at goal insufficient to win a against a below par opposition who are guaranteed to score 21 minimum on a bad day.

What a f***ing surprise.

[Mikey Brown]

Gatland didn’t pivot from “fastest brand of rugby in the world” though (as much as I thought that was nonsense) so I’m really not sure the relevance. I’d love to see a bit of balance is all I’m saying. I simply don’t believe you need to throw out the entire attacking play book in order to kick better and defend better.

I know we’ve changed coaches, but attack is meant to be Townsend’s area of expertise and innovation isn’t it? That’s why I felt this total abandonment of attacking intent feels a bit odd. Obviously Weir is not Russell/Hastings, but I’m not sure what we’ve done tactically to adjust to that.

RE: Hogg I agree kicking is about territory and closing off the return. That’s why I find it strange watching him make the same mistake over and over and over and over- allowing the kick returner to get past him and make a clearance under no pressure. He’s been doing it for years.

I’m not sure I’d distinguish between yips and simply making (the same repeated) poor decisions in the red zone, but I agree on the lineouts. Fagerson seemed a particularly odd target competing against Ollivon.

Not sure I caught the Price “clanger” amongst the sea of other daft penalties, but thought he was generally really good today. Some very accurate box kicks, though we still don’t seem like a team setup to play that game. Not sure where exactly he was running off too for Vakatawa’s try but would need to see it back.

[Cameo]

I also thought Price was good today. Box kicking especially (though that is maybe indicative).

Yeah, conscious it wasn't all the same posters crying out for solidity even if we lost some ambition but there is some overlap. I just enjoyed feeling like we could score tries against anyone and hope we can get at least some of that back.

I actually don't think the performance was as bad as some say either. France are a good team. They didn't play great but we competed physically and showed heart. We just didn't have any spark.

[Adder]

Price runs the defensive line to block that and totally fucks it. So frustrating.

He's just not good enough at this level. There's a minimum of one clanger of a mistake from him every game.

you have always been an OTT clueless hyper excitable poster, but you have genuinely excelled yourself today.

Not even close

[stevedog1980]

Anyone else think Duncan Taylor injected some life into the midfield when he came on?

[switchskier]

Anyone else think Duncan Taylor injected some life into the midfield when he came on?

Not really, but a bit unfair to expect him to do so given the pattern that the game was in. Bringing him off the bench was also never really going to result in a change of approach, which is why I objected to him being there in the first place. Felt more like injury cover than an option to go win a game.

Can we stop Johnson from kicking in the future though?

[Mikey Brown]

Anyone else think Duncan Taylor injected some life into the midfield when he came on?

Not really, but a bit unfair to expect him to do so given the pattern that the game was in. Bringing him off the bench was also never really going to result in a change of approach, which is why I objected to him being there in the first place. Felt more like injury cover than an option to go win a game.

Can we stop Johnson from kicking in the future though?

Yeah what was that about? There was a really odd one where Price spent 5 minutes setting up a caterpillar ruck for a box kick then just passed to Weir anyway who did a switch back inside to Johnson, who then just hoofed it straight up the middle of the pitch. Very inventive, but not sure what it was supposed to achieve other than making sure as many players were offside as possible. Doing everything 20 metres behind the gain-line as usual.

In theory Taylor could add a bit of pace and spark to the midfield but I've no idea if he's the same player as 5 years ago in terms of physical ability or confidence. Always thought he was a better 13 anyway.

[hugh_woatmeigh]

Price runs the defensive line to block that and totally fucks it. So frustrating.

He's just not good enough at this level. There's a minimum of one clanger of a mistake from him every game.

you have always been an OTT clueless hyper excitable poster, but you have genuinely excelled yourself today.

Trawl through my post history and you'll see it's an opinion I've had for years - nothing to do with today in isolation. Go on - you've got the time

I don't think Price is a bad player - he just isn't good enough if we have serious international ambitions. He just makes too many mistakes and they're often quite important ones - intercepts, out on the fulls, turnovers in key positions, etc. The upside with him isn't good enough to make up for that imo.

Then again... you didn't actually want to discuss it did you. It's an inevitable message board dynamic anyway - for every hyperbolic poster like myself there's always an overly aggressive wee e-cunt like yourself. It's just the way it is.

[switchskier]

Someone mentioned back-row balance in an earlier post and I thought this article in the telegraph was relevant (nicked from the EMB). I think that all of Ritchie, Watson and Faegerson can play international rugby, but a big powerful carrier would really allow them to play like Curry and Underhill do atm. Unfortunately we don't have that player, though I've not given up on Bradbury yet.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... -simmonds/

What makes Billy Vunipola so valuable to England and he is not in competition with Sam Simmonds anyway

Billy Vunipola amassed 25 tackles against Ireland, forced two turnovers and made more metres than any forward on the pitch

Sam Simmonds is an excellent player. His pantomime shrug at the Twickenham Stoop on Friday evening, in celebration of an electric individual try against Harlequins and presumably referencing his England omission, revealed a sense of humour as well.

But, less than 24 hours later as Ireland were beaten 18-7 on the other side of the A316, Billy Vunipola staged a comprehensive exhibition of what he offers as a Test match number eight.

We are continually told that selection is about balance. In his first three England starts, Simmonds shared a back row with Chris Robshaw plus either Maro Itoje or Courtney Lawes.

In his most international outing, the Exeter Chiefs star was flanked by Robshaw and James Haskell. That day, Ireland overturned England at Twickenham, sealing the 2018 Grand Slam with a 24-15 victory.

Eddie Jones has likened Simmonds to an exciting Twenty20 cricketer. Two years ago, he acknowledged that his team had to “adjust” to playing with him. Part of that adjustment, evidently, is complementing Simmonds with at least one heavy-hitter in the back row. Rob Baxter apparently agrees.

Exeter teammate Dave Ewers, who weighs 125kg, has proven to be an effective foil for Simmonds. The imposing Jannes Kirsten, a rangy lineout jumper, joined those two in Chiefs’ starting back row for the Premiership final and again on Friday night.

Simmonds does not shirk hard graft, but those colleagues bend gain-lines and clear rucks so he is free to do what he does best. Conversely, the presence of Billy Vunipola allows England to team up Tom Curry and Sam Underhill.

At the weekend, Vunipola demonstrated his distinctive traits, and why they are so valuable.
Set-piece responsibilities

Vunipola junior is England’s rock at kick-offs and restarts. Watch how he slips past James Lowe in the opening seconds after gathering Ross Byrne’s kick.

CJ Stander fells him, but loses the collision. In fact, England could have been awarded a penalty for tackler’s inability to roll away immediately. What a tone that would have set:

Vunipola carrying so often in this area of the pitch means that Underhill and Curry can remain on their feet to lead England’s destructive, suffocating kick-chase.

As well as control at the base of scrums, Vunipola is a fine lineout forward. He often adopts the scrum-half role, steering mauls or distributing.

He would have been frustrated that Ireland managed to derail a couple of drives at the weekend, notably this one prior to Jonny May’s first try. It seems to be Vunipola that loses possession about two metres out as Caelan Doris hits the maul

[Mikey Brown]

I was really impressed with Fagerson actually. I thought that was by far his best game for Scotland and I do see him as potentially a great ball carrier. Most of his carries were fighting through a barrage of very physical defence from the French forwards, but he did well a number of times to soak those up.

We are still pretty useless at getting any of our carrying threats hitting weak shoulders at any sort of pace, particularly off 10. We tend to just keep plugging away with short balls off 9 in to a set fringe defence. Cummings will occasionally make some dents, but we need some brighter ideas here. I don't think there's much point waiting for a Scottish Vunipola/Picamoles to appear. Bradbury is the only one I can think of who has that ability to go forward from nothing with defenders hanging off him, but he's so inconsistent.

We have guys like Fagerson, McInally, Cummings, Thomson who have power, good foot-work and can run intelligent lines, but they're not bulldozers. We really need to work out a way to use them more effectively.

[Cameo]

I was really impressed with Fagerson actually. I thought that was by far his best game for Scotland and I do see him as potentially a great ball carrier. Most of his carries were fighting through a barrage of very physical defence from the French forwards, but he did well a number of times to soak those up.

We are still pretty useless at getting any of our carrying threats hitting weak shoulders at any sort of pace, particularly off 10. We tend to just keep plugging away with short balls off 9 in to a set fringe defence. Cummings will occasionally make some dents, but we need some brighter ideas here. I don't think there's much point waiting for a Scottish Vunipola/Picamoles to appear. Bradbury is the only one I can think of who has that ability to go forward from nothing with defenders hanging off him, but he's so inconsistent.

We have guys like Fagerson, McInally, Cummings, Thomson who have power, good foot-work and can run intelligent lines, but they're not bulldozers. We really need to work out a way to use them more effectively.

Yeah, I am happy for Bradbury to be given another chance when he hits form but, until then, I'd stick with Fagerson. He carried better than other bigger players and has great leg drive after contact. His footwork also took him past a few tacklers in tight spaces.

[General Zod]

I’d still like to see Skinner at 8, but would rather he got a few games at Exeter to try it out. Unlikely.

I get that you can’t be expected to run it out of your own half all the time, particularly in international rugby, so kicking is very much part of the game. However, an awful lot of our kicks seemed to lack much purpose or position, particularly when the receiver wasn’t put under much threat or found the chasing kicker (often Hogg) a piece of piss to avoid.

[septic 9]

He's just not good enough at this level. There's a minimum of one clanger of a mistake from him every game.

you have always been an OTT clueless hyper excitable poster, but you have genuinely excelled yourself today.

Trawl through my post history and you'll see it's an opinion I've had for years - nothing to do with today in isolation. Go on - you've got the time

I don't think Price is a bad player - he just isn't good enough if we have serious international ambitions. He just makes too many mistakes and they're often quite important ones - intercepts, out on the fulls, turnovers in key positions, etc. The upside with him isn't good enough to make up for that imo.

Then again... you didn't actually want to discuss it did you. It's an inevitable message board dynamic anyway - for every hyperbolic poster like myself there's always an overly aggressive wee e-cunt like yourself. It's just the way it is.

ooooooh big hard man talk

I know its aye been your opinion. Which is pretty much exactly the point. You see something once, doesn't matter how long ago, it makes in your eyes the player permanent shite or permanent gold dust. I notice you did exactly the same recently with Gary Graham, you'd rather call him names than debate his ability. And with Richie Gray - in every squad for you, yet he has been poor for years even when fit more than 2 weeks in a row (and injured again!), meanwhile his brother has been a top notch player who delivers every game, Toolis is better in the lineout, Skinner an athlete to level Richie can only dream about, while Cummings is best of all. All have proper current form, but you remember Richie selling Kearney a dummy a decade back, so he is still ace.

Then you get all upset when called out. Try watching games without the blinkers, it'll be a revelation for you. But you won't, because you would need to challenge your own ill informed prejudices

[hugh_woatmeigh]

you have always been an OTT clueless hyper excitable poster, but you have genuinely excelled yourself today.

Trawl through my post history and you'll see it's an opinion I've had for years - nothing to do with today in isolation. Go on - you've got the time

I don't think Price is a bad player - he just isn't good enough if we have serious international ambitions. He just makes too many mistakes and they're often quite important ones - intercepts, out on the fulls, turnovers in key positions, etc. The upside with him isn't good enough to make up for that imo.

Then again... you didn't actually want to discuss it did you. It's an inevitable message board dynamic anyway - for every hyperbolic poster like myself there's always an overly aggressive wee e-cunt like yourself. It's just the way it is.

ooooooh big hard man talk

I know its aye been your opinion. Which is pretty much exactly the point. You see something once, doesn't matter how long ago, it makes in your eyes the player permanent shite or permanent gold dust. I notice you did exactly the same recently with Gary Graham, you'd rather call him names than debate his ability. And with Richie Gray - in every squad for you, yet he has been poor for years even when fit more than 2 weeks in a row (and injured again!), meanwhile his brother has been a top notch player who delivers every game, Toolis is better in the lineout, Skinner an athlete to level Richie can only dream about, while Cummings is best of all. All have proper current form, but you remember Richie selling Kearney a dummy a decade back, so he is still ace.

Then you get all upset when called out. Try watching games without the blinkers, it'll be a revelation for you. But you won't, because you would need to challenge your own ill informed prejudices

I agree with all in bold. Which begs the question - are you having conversations with me in your head? I cannot fathom how you concluded this from my increasingly brief and sporadic posts on the board these days. My view has been that I'd have liked to have seen if Ritchie still has anything to offer at international level before the ship has sailed. I would have thought that obvious given those opinions have been voiced on game threads pertaining to warm-ups, pre-major tournament games or cases when we have availability/injury as we have had in the second row recently.

I'm not upset I'm "called out" - it's a laid back, small community rugby forum ffs. I am taking issue with the fact you constantly get overly personal with anyone you disagree with - I've seen it with others on the board also. So get fucked you wee rat.

[septic 9]

Trawl through my post history and you'll see it's an opinion I've had for years - nothing to do with today in isolation. Go on - you've got the time

I don't think Price is a bad player - he just isn't good enough if we have serious international ambitions. He just makes too many mistakes and they're often quite important ones - intercepts, out on the fulls, turnovers in key positions, etc. The upside with him isn't good enough to make up for that imo.

Then again... you didn't actually want to discuss it did you. It's an inevitable message board dynamic anyway - for every hyperbolic poster like myself there's always an overly aggressive wee e-cunt like yourself. It's just the way it is.

ooooooh big hard man talk

I know its aye been your opinion. Which is pretty much exactly the point. You see something once, doesn't matter how long ago, it makes in your eyes the player permanent shite or permanent gold dust. I notice you did exactly the same recently with Gary Graham, you'd rather call him names than debate his ability. And with Richie Gray - in every squad for you, yet he has been poor for years even when fit more than 2 weeks in a row (and injured again!), meanwhile his brother has been a top notch player who delivers every game, Toolis is better in the lineout, Skinner an athlete to level Richie can only dream about, while Cummings is best of all. All have proper current form, but you remember Richie selling Kearney a dummy a decade back, so he is still ace.

Then you get all upset when called out. Try watching games without the blinkers, it'll be a revelation for you. But you won't, because you would need to challenge your own ill informed prejudices

I agree with all in bold. Which begs the question - are you having conversations with me in your head? I cannot fathom how you concluded this from my increasingly brief and sporadic posts on the board these days. My view has been that I'd have liked to have seen if Ritchie still has anything to offer at international level before the ship has sailed. I would have thought that obvious given those opinions have been voiced on game threads pertaining to warm-ups, pre-major tournament games or cases when we have availability/injury as we have had in the second row recently.

I'm not upset I'm "called out" - it's a laid back, small community rugby forum ffs. I am taking issue with the fact you constantly get overly personal with anyone you disagree with - I've seen it with others on the board also. So get fucked you wee rat.

definitely not upset, no sirree

[af73]

I was really impressed with Fagerson actually. I thought that was by far his best game for Scotland and I do see him as potentially a great ball carrier. Most of his carries were fighting through a barrage of very physical defence from the French forwards, but he did well a number of times to soak those up.

We are still pretty useless at getting any of our carrying threats hitting weak shoulders at any sort of pace, particularly off 10. We tend to just keep plugging away with short balls off 9 in to a set fringe defence. Cummings will occasionally make some dents, but we need some brighter ideas here. I don't think there's much point waiting for a Scottish Vunipola/Picamoles to appear. Bradbury is the only one I can think of who has that ability to go forward from nothing with defenders hanging off him, but he's so inconsistent.

We have guys like Fagerson, McInally, Cummings, Thomson who have power, good foot-work and can run intelligent lines, but they're not bulldozers. We really need to work out a way to use them more effectively.

Good points here. We've never had the one-man wrecking ball type 8 and, showing my age, I think back to our international back-row players when I started watching the game;
Derek White, Iain Paxton and John Beattie had speed off the mark that almost always got him over the gain line...or even the try line. White especially had an excellent pick up from the scrum base. Inevitably JJ was on the shoulder to carry on the momentum or make sure no opposition got in the way. Finlay Calder was around in case any needed extra 'persuasion'
Prior to them Calder the elder and David Leslie performed the same role and made for excellent balance.

None were the bulldozing Vunipola or Dean Richards type leviathan's but the fact that they could all play number 8....and 5 of played in the same forward pack at Twickenham in '87 says much about their athleticism and ball playing. Would have worked that year as well had the game not be rescheduled and played in a downpour. Another Triple crown gone begging

Simon Taylor could have been with Jason White but the Murrayfield knee-angel put paid to that. Peters was athletic (would have preferred Stuart Reid). Rob Wainwright could play all 3 roles effectively. The Killer B's shone brightly but briefly then coaches favourites stalled Barclay, Mower and a few others I can't remember.

[stevedog1980]

Anyone else think Duncan Taylor injected some life into the midfield when he came on?

Not really, but a bit unfair to expect him to do so given the pattern that the game was in. Bringing him off the bench was also never really going to result in a change of approach, which is why I objected to him being there in the first place. Felt more like injury cover than an option to go win a game.

Can we stop Johnson from kicking in the future though?

And Kinghorn!!

It wasn't a night and day change by any means, but I did think that the midfield had more purpose when Taylor came on, the tactics were still the same but execution seemed to be a bit crisper and he was hitting soft spots in the defensive line instead of just running into whoever was in front of him.

Whoever is in the centre is going to have a hard time until Russell or Hastings is back, unless we bring Peter Horne back into the fold. Unfortunately Weir doesn't have any running game to keep the defence honest and that makes it very easy for the opposition, all of a sudden we are reliant on a missed tackle or a dropped ball by them to create space. To have any chance with Dunc I think we need to see Duhan regularly coming in off his wing, along with Hogg from full back and preferably Darcy Graham on the other

[Big D]

Not for the next game obviously but if Crosbie can develop how we hope he can I'd love to see him in at 6 with Ritchie moving to 7 at some point next year.

[septic 9]

Not for the next game obviously but if Crosbie can develop how we hope he can I'd love to see him in at 6 with Ritchie moving to 7 at some point next year.

can't happen soon enough.

[Big D]

Given GT didn't name a 10 on the bench last week and JVdW is joining up with them this week I think there is a strong chance he benches next game.

With the pro sides playing next weekend and the premiership starting back we may see some of the squad released too.

[Chunks Baws]

Not for the next game obviously but if Crosbie can develop how we hope he can I'd love to see him in at 6 with Ritchie moving to 7 at some point next year.

can't happen soon enough.

You not a fan of Watson?

[septic 9]

Not for the next game obviously but if Crosbie can develop how we hope he can I'd love to see him in at 6 with Ritchie moving to 7 at some point next year.

can't happen soon enough.

You not a fan of Watson?

haven't always been but TBF its hard to be critical of him these last 2/3 seasons.

Our pack used to get rag dolled every other game. Front 5 used to, not so much now (rare scrum apart).

The reality is for me that our current back row still gets rag dolled in the arm wrestles. So something has to give.
If we bring in a bigger more powerful player, then for me Watson loses out - Richie and Fagerson are much more physical players in terms of outcomes like dominant tackles, more rucks hit effectively, more value if both attacking and defending mauls. Watson' remaining USP should be the jackal, but again IMHO all players need to do that, and Hamish isn't a Pocock or a Barclay.

Picking a team is a tough job and if we have to leave out a very good player, that's life. No room for emotion, the team needs to be picked to do a job, we know where we are weak. We need to try to fix it

[Big D]

Not for the next game obviously but if Crosbie can develop how we hope he can I'd love to see him in at 6 with Ritchie moving to 7 at some point next year.

can't happen soon enough.

You not a fan of Watson?

For me it is that I rate Ritchie very highly and I have hopes Crosbie can grow into the 6 we have been missing for a long time.

There are questions over Watson that I can see preventing him being close to a Lion (other than he is Scottish before the Lions haters arrive). He carries to upright relying on strength and his attacking play really is only his carrying. I do like him as a player, he just wont be a shoe in should others develop as hoped.