Bye bye Scotland?

First topic message reminder :

Sadly, I think so.

Argentina just have too much weight and power and if lacking everything else in the backs, they have an organised defence.
Can't see any soltaires waving at full-time.

Possibly they could beat England on passion - and especially if it's raining. They do well in inclement weather.

Neither team can create anything, neither team is on form, neither team is confident... both are poorly coached, and Contemponi is in terrible form with the boot.
Argentina have a decent pack though, and I doubt Scotland will hold their own against it.
Narrow win for Argentina.

Was`nt it 2009,when every one said Scotland would play a kicking game versus England.Came out running,lost a key player and England were happy to settle for a Draw.
Or not so long ago Scotland had no chance versus France or England and beat them both.
This is a RWC,not at Twickenham or Murrayfield this is on neutral ground.
Are they playing England in Dunedin?if so the weather,and turf problems are over for both sides.

I reckon Argentina will win but it would be nice to see the Scots do really well.

I'm backing Scotland to beat Argentina.

I'm also backing them to lose by more then 7 to us.

So it's going to come down to the Scotland/Argentina scoreline for who is in second place, can Scotland pile on the points to make sure they get in to second place?

Outplay England when? You haven't beaten England since 2008 and that was in Murrayfield. You haven't beaten England at Twickenham for over 20 years. I realise the match isn't at Twickenham but England win most of the time vs Scotland.

What side wager have you got in mind fly half factory?

Has Jackson ever manipulated your backs? I thought Scotland showed attacking abilities against France but that played into their hands and they comfortably beat you.

England took down Argentina playing badly. They crushed Georgia playing badly. Imagine what they could do to Scotland if they play well.

The only aspect of Scotland which worries me is the backrow. Also if it rains which will play into Scottish hands.

Scotland are arguably the most boring side in international rugby. Your best wins were when you scored no tries.

...or England play Tindall, who was crap 10 years ago and now is crap and slower !

Scotland v Argentina can go either way, do not rule Scotland out.

Scotland are a good side and are capable of beating Argentina, yes Argentina put in a really good performance but to be fair it was against a nobody country.

Scotland have the players, but the changes they have made might be a bit of a risk, leaving Kellock out could prove costly.

However it's a big game and should be exciting to watch, can see Scotland winning it by 5 or so points.

,,

[quote="flyhalffactory"]

beshocked wrote:Outplay England when? You haven't beaten England since 2008 and that was in Murrayfield. You haven't beaten England at Twickenham for over 20 years. I realise the match isn't at Twickenham but England win most of the time vs Scotland.

What side wager have you got in mind fly half factory?

Has Jackson ever manipulated your backs? I thought Scotland showed attacking abilities against France but that played into their hands and they comfortably beat you.

England took down Argentina playing badly. They crushed Georgia playing badly. Imagine what they could do to Scotland if they play well.

The only aspect of Scotland which worries me is the backrow. Also if it rains which will play into Scottish hands.

Scotland are arguably the most boring side in international rugby. Your best wins were when you scored no tries.

Are you mad?............. Jackson is well known for getting the backline moving, its one of his strengths

Are you mad?............. Boring!!. you dont have to score tries to be exciting, when we beat Australia there was no tries but a very exciting 80 mins.

Scotland have won 5 games on the bounce even tho we are playing poorly, but certainly not winning and playing as poorly as you are.

England IMO have deserved to win only 3 of their last 5 games (Wales in Cardiff, Ireland and Georgia).

What I have seen is England stuttering against Wales in Twickenham, beating a rusty Argentina side who 99 times out of 100 would never miss the kicks they did, and not exactly set the world alight against Georgia (lets be honest the scoreline flattered you).

yappysnap wrote:I'm backing Scotland to beat Argentina.

I'm also backing them to lose by more then 7 to us.

So it's going to come down to the Scotland/Argentina scoreline for who is in second place, can Scotland pile on the points to make sure they get in to second place?

Even if we only beat Argentina by one point we guarantee ourselves at least second place. Then the England game is a straight shoot for 1st place, winner takes all.

On the Scotland vs England debate, I'm pretty relaxed conceding that England are the better side with the better players (certainly in the backs).

The recent history between the sides doesn't say a lot though and in recent years it's been pretty even, with Scotland typically prevailing at Murrayfield and England winning at Twickenham. In terms of recent form however (and I'm talking performances rather than results) England are clear favourites. They are 6 Nations champions after all, and we were scrapping to avoid the wooden spoon.

We will cause England problems though. England give away alot of penalties when on the back foot and Paterson won't afford England the same courtesy misses as Contempomi or the Georgian 10. We are also a good side at the breakdown, an area where England haven't quite got it right. However, there's no denying that in Youngs, Tuilagi, Ashton and Foden, England have more dynamic and attacking backs than we do, and more crucially, in Flood or Wilkinson, a better platform for those backs.

I don't think the losing side will be more than 7 points away from the winning side. That's as brave a prediction as I'll make.

On neutral ground, England everytime v Scotland. England have been poor but have come away with good wins. I always think Scotland have a decent side and they they go and lose to Wales at home, or scrape past Georgia.

I have a feeling Scotland pulls this out. Don't ask me to provide any basis for this prediction. This is simple gut instinct combined with a wee bit of emotion and wishful thinking. But I expect the match to be decided by the Scotland back row who I think will have a huge match. And there, I think Scotland have a solid advantage. And Paterson will keep the points ticking over.

Scotland will win with the boot

I think Scotland will win, it'll be very close but we will come out on top. My prediction Scotland by 4.

One of the big areas of the game to me is how Contepomi preforms, a key player and captain of the Pumas. I wonder about his rib injury and just how well it's healed? I'd imagine that if Argentina were playing Georgia this weekend they'd rest Contepomi, however due to what is at stake he's playing regardless. As such I'd like to see Scotland target him, in particular to get players like Kelly Brown and John Barclay to inspect his ribs as it were...

flyhalffactory wrote:
I would say we are more concerned with the threat of the Pumas than England, we have already proved we can more than outplay them over 80 mins, we just need a playmaker at 10. If we manage to take the win against Argentina we should be able to take England if both teams are on form.

Absolute twaddle. If both teams are 'on form' you actually think Scotland are better than England? Jeebus! England showed how to dismantle Romania earlier and put a big score on Georgia while playing poorly. Argentina will probably do a number on the Scots and if England fire, which I think they will, they will comfortably beat Scotland. Just my opinion of course. Maybe you should stick to annoying the Welsh in the Hook/Jones debate

Hmm, England score 16 tries against Georgia and Romania collectively and concede 13 points. Scotland score 4 tries against them collectively and concede 30 points. I know that means very little in the grand scheme of things but you have to admit, it's looking ominous for the Scots.

I've got nothing at all against the scots and want them to go through over the pumas however I cannot see how they could beet England in the final game. Our backs had Romania in their pockets today and our scrum stood up very well. To memory Scotland's scrum was in full retreat against Romania and it took two tries scored in last few mins to win compared to England 10 tries and only a pen conceded. Can't see Scotland beating us on that evidence.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:
I would say we are more concerned with the threat of the Pumas than England, we have already proved we can more than outplay them over 80 mins, we just need a playmaker at 10. If we manage to take the win against Argentina we should be able to take England if both teams are on form.

Absolute twaddle. If both teams are 'on form' you actually think Scotland are better than England? Jeebus! England showed how to dismantle Romania earlier and put a big score on Georgia while playing poorly. Argentina will probably do a number on the Scots and if England fire, which I think they will, they will comfortably beat Scotland. Just my opinion of course. Maybe you should stick to annoying the Welsh in the Hook/Jones debate

Sour Cream
You don't ever say anything of note do you?

So you didnt see the last encounter between us and England then, who was the better overall team on the day?. Havent yet watched the match this morning but apparently England were very good and are coming into form at the right time, so will always give them credit, and I fell they will get to the final. However I feel we are a playmaker (at 10) short of been a pretty good team, hopefully Jackson will crank it up tomorrow, and then I'll chat to you about 11am on 1st October.

So you didnt see the last encounter between us and England then, who was the better overall team on the day?

England. They won. That's how you judge who was the best team on the day. In fact that's kind of the whole point.

It'll be tough game but hopefully a good one.

GangGreen wrote:I've got nothing at all against the scots and want them to go through over the pumas however I cannot see how they could beet England in the final game. Our backs had Romania in their pockets today and our scrum stood up very well. To memory Scotland's scrum was in full retreat against Romania and it took two tries scored in last few mins to win compared to England 10 tries and only a pen conceded. Can't see Scotland beating us on that evidence.

Fair analysis GG, but I will assure you that will not be our pack come next week. Have to say I havent yet watched the English match this morning but apparently you were the complete outfit today. The match between us (as normal in any match) will be won by the forwards.

HammerofThunor wrote:

So you didnt see the last encounter between us and England then, who was the better overall team on the day?

England. They won. That's how you judge who was the best team on the day. In fact that's kind of the whole point.

It'll be tough game but hopefully a good one.

Most rediculous statement yet.

For example you played Wales.......... the WC warm up Cardiff, you had massive possession and mucked about five try scoring opportunities, you were by far the better team yet you lost............. however 99 times out of 100 you would have taken that game.

So you didnt see the last encounter between us and England then, who was the better overall team on the day?

Thats obvious - England were. Scotland competed ferociously on the ground and tackled like demons but were completely toothless in attack, Max Evans touch of skill or no.

GangGreen wrote:I've got nothing at all against the scots and want them to go through over the pumas however I cannot see how they could beet England in the final game. Our backs had Romania in their pockets today and our scrum stood up very well. To memory Scotland's scrum was in full retreat against Romania and it took two tries scored in last few mins to win compared to England 10 tries and only a pen conceded. Can't see Scotland beating us on that evidence.

Was that the Romania side with 10 changes from when they played Scotland? Was that the Romania squad that are saving themselves for their 'big' match against Georgia in 5 days time?

lostinwales wrote:

So you didnt see the last encounter between us and England then, who was the better overall team on the day?

Thats obvious - England were. Scotland competed ferociously on the ground and tackled like demons but were completely toothless in attack, Max Evans touch of skill or no.

Toothless in attack OMG !!

We had more possession, more territory, more yardage gained.............. what are you on about man?

Do you mean we didnt have free flowing backs

It means you never looked like scoring a try - ever.

I wouldn't bother about the Ingurlund fans at the moment, we were poor for the first couple of games but we've got into a winning habit and with our recent results. However their nothing more than an ok side, better than us but certainly not significantly so. If we win tomorrow then it's an all out final game, which would be great to see and i'd think we'd have a chance. Though Jackson HAS to run more at the line.

flyhalffactory wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

So you didnt see the last encounter between us and England then, who was the better overall team on the day?

England. They won. That's how you judge who was the best team on the day. In fact that's kind of the whole point.

It'll be tough game but hopefully a good one.

Most rediculous statement yet.

For example you played Wales.......... the WC warm up Cardiff, you had massive possession and mucked about five try scoring opportunities, you were by far the better team yet you lost............. however 99 times out of 100 you would have taken that game.

No, Wales were the better team because they scored more points. There's a reason why it's called a win when you get more points. You don't get points for style or possession or territory or many other things. They're irrelevant.

HammerofThunor wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

So you didnt see the last encounter between us and England then, who was the better overall team on the day?

England. They won. That's how you judge who was the best team on the day. In fact that's kind of the whole point.

It'll be tough game but hopefully a good one.

Most rediculous statement yet.

For example you played Wales.......... the WC warm up Cardiff, you had massive possession and mucked about five try scoring opportunities, you were by far the better team yet you lost............. however 99 times out of 100 you would have taken that game.

No, Wales were the better team because they scored more points. There's a reason why it's called a win when you get more points. You don't get points for style or possession or territory or many other things. They're irrelevant.

TAXI...............

Probably for the best. Glad to see you own up to your craziness.

lostinwales wrote:It means you never looked like scoring a try - ever.

So in your bright eyes

Not scoring a try means you are the worse team .....................

HammerofThunor wrote:Probably for the best. Glad to see you own up to your craziness.

Mate don't be immature

I have never in my life read someone stating that

"Never has the better team lost"

Grow up

Grow up for thinking the team that scores the most points is the best team?

The only way the best team loses is if a TMO decision is clearly wrong for the last play of the game and the resulting points win the game. Anything else is just part of the game.

Against Wales, England had the territory and possession but couldn't score. They may have fluffed chances but they didn't take the points and therefore didn't deserve them. Wales took their chances and manned up in defence. Fair play to them. They were better on the day. If you think that makes me childish fair enough.

The immature remark was
HammerofThunor wrote:
Probably for the best. Glad to see you own up to your craziness.

Lets not flower this with "England did this" and "Wales did that"

You stated

"The best team is always the team that wins"

As I said I have heard some corkers in my long life, but that is probably the most rediculous statement I have ever heard.

Care to give some examples of where the best team hasn't won? And of course say why.

And how is mistakenly thinking you were calling for a taxi for yourself childish? And if it is then surely the call for the original taxi was itself childish. Is it a case of "takes one to know one"?

ok Hammer

If you asked a 1000 people who was the best team between England and Wales in Cardiff a few months ago, I would say 99% would have said England.

Scotland when we lost to Wales two years ago, even the Welsh said we were the better team and but for the two serious injuries (Evans and Paterson) and the dubious sending off .................

There's two for you,

Scotland were the better team for the majority of the game, but when it came to the important thing (scoring more points) Wales were better.

Injuries and refs are part of the game. Both have massive impacts on most games. But a team has to deal with them to win. If you don't you're not good enough.

How were England the better team against Wales when even with all that possession and territory they couldn't score enough points to win? You seem to suggesting that defence doesn't count as good play (I don't want to put words in your mouth).

How exactly to you determine who was 'best' side then. Just who you feel like based on your spectators view? Stats?

Enforcer wrote:Scotland were the better team for the majority of the game, but when it came to the important thing (scoring more points) Wales were better.

So are you saying the best team won?

In terms of scoring points yes, the best team won.

On a subjective matter such as performance then they might not have. But, as Thunor saying, stopping a team from scoring is as much a skill as scoring.

If team a has 85% possession and territory but lose to team b 14-0, who is the best team? You could argue team a, but team b managed to keep them out and took their chances.

Ok

Enforcer I could have taken you round your city that evening after the match and both sets of fans (100s of them) said the same thing............ except for a few of course!.

Right I get off that topic ....... and get back onto the thread.

I think we will get to the quarters, its going to be a hard task particularly against the Pumas, but if our 10 gets the backline moving we have a chance

flyhalffactory wrote:

Enforcer wrote:Scotland were the better team for the majority of the game, but when it came to the important thing (scoring more points) Wales were better.

So are you saying the best team won?

Have to agree Flyhalf.

a)The object of game is to end the game with more points than the opposition by scoring points and preventing them from scoring points.
b) Wales better fulfilled that objective by finishing with more points!

This article is rather premature. I expect two close games and I see Scotland as capable of finishing anywhere between third and first in their group.

I don't know what scares me more. Scotland win and come to us with confidence and going for topping the pool. Or Scotland lose and they're pumped up to force their way into the quarters. Either way it's probably going to a hard game (and hopefully a good one).

May the best team win

Argentina will beat Scotland by a single score 4-7 points I reckon.

I'm thinking England will beat Scotland by considerably more, around 20 points?

flyhalffactory wrote:

lostinwales wrote:It means you never looked like scoring a try - ever.

So in your bright eyes

Not scoring a try means you are the worse team .....................

Well scoring tries isnt everything but can be sort of important if the other team is scoring tries and you are not. In THAT game put it down to English defense or whatever but Scotland played wonderfully well in so many aspects except the ones that mattered

I'd just add that Scotland have often been my 2nd favourite team. I grew up watching and admiring Finlay Calder and the white shark (and others) in the 6N and its amazing how often Scotland seem to produce top class back rows and scrum halves. An uncle of mine even played for a Scottish representative team post 2nd world war (he was in a Scottish regiment)

Scottish lad was telling me this afternoon about the two wins down in Arg under Robinson (as i had commented how awful AR was coaching Eng).

To be fair you don't go down there and win too easily, so they must have edge on Arg.

He reckons they will win easily.

As for Eng-Scot, we'll have to see. If it's played at tempo I fancy england but a grind could go either way.

Hate saying this laddies but I have a very bad feeling about tomorrow. Not helped by the result/performance in the Rado at Firhill last night and I have no doubt Laidlaw will have another blinder for Edinburgh in Italy tonight to rub in the very obvious point that he should be starting v Argentina (at 9 or 10).

Anyhoo a beer breakfast beckons - please lads lets have a good performance whoever wins. C'mon the Scots !

I have a cat called Kevin who has psychic powers.
Tonight for dinner i am going to give him scottish salmon and argentine steak. Obviously i don't want to build up anyone's hopes but I think it's a pretty reliable test for who is going to win.

Gatts,

make sure the steak is Aberdeen Angus will you !

If Argentina manage to keep 15 players on the pitch (something they've failed to do on 3 of the last 4 occasions), they will be too strong for Scotland I fear.

Scotland will have to take every 3 point opportunity they get and that's where I think Parks' abscence will be felt most, particularly in terms of drop goal opportunities.

Jackson may be a better option for running the ball, but I'm not sure that's Scotland's best option. England have a better defense than Scotland and Argentina breached it almost at will, if Scotland chuck it about and someone gets isolated and turned over, Argentina will fill their boots.

I can't see past Argentina - What's the moggy say Gatts?