Australia v Scotland, 17 June

First topic message reminder :

          
AUSTRALIA v SCOTLAND  
17 June 2017
15:00 AEST (UTC+10)
Allianz Stadium, Sydney

Live on Sky

Referee: Wayne Barnes (England)
ARs: [tbc]
TMO: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

30 Played 30
21 Won 9
0 Drawn 0
9 Lost 21
729 Points 386 

B. Recent Form

12 November 2016
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
22 – 23 to Australia

18 October 2015 
Twickenham
35-34 to Australia

23 November 2013
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
15 – 21 to Australia

5 June 2012
Hunter Stadium, Newcastle
6 – 9 to Scotland

21 November 2009
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
9 – 8 to Scotland

C. TEAMS:

AUSTRALIA

Israel Folau; Dane Haylett-Petty, Tevita Kuridrani, Karmichael Hunt, Eto Nabuli; Bernard Foley, Will Genia; Tom Robertson, Tatafu Polota-Nau, Allan Alaalatoa; Sam Carter, Adam Coleman; Ned Hanigan, Michael Hooper (capt), Scott Higginbotham.

Bench to be announced.

SCOTLAND 

Greig Tonks; Lee Jones, Alex Dunbar, Duncan Taylor, Rory Hughes; Finn Russell, Ali Price; Gordon Reid, Fraser Brown, Zander Fagerson; Ben Toolis, Jonny Gray; John Barclay (capt), Hamish Watson, Ryan Wilson.

Replacements: Ross Ford, Allan Dell, WP Nel, Tim Swinson, Josh Strauss, Henry Pyrgos, Ruaridh Jackson, Matt Scott.

There's a video clip on Warriors TV this week with Scott Cummings and Sam Johnson which is mostly pretty bland platitudes about pre-season training. You can almost hear the conversation, "Guys we have to produce two minutes of screen time and you're the only first team squad members who're not away on international duty. Please say something. Anything."

However, it gets interesting when they are asked about the Scotland- V -Convicts match. Sam Johnson says he's hoping Scotland do well. When asked if he has a conflicting emotions he says, "No. I've been here three years now and I want Scotland to do well."
As I mentioned a while ago, Jason The Gentle Second Row and myself chatted with young Johnson for some time at Allianz Park and we were both really impressed with him. At one point I asked him how he felt about becoming Scotland qualified.
"Ah mate, I've never really thought about it. You know, it's not something I've ever really considered."
He went on to say his main priority was getting into the Glasgow starting line up more often.
But as we all know the qualification period is three years

If he eventually pulls on a Scotland jersey I want some kudos from you guys.
Mind you that would give us a choice from: Dunbar, Horne, Taylor, Johnson at 12 and Jones, Bennett, Grigg, Dunbar, Taylor and MattScott12 at 13.
When you think back to the days of G-Dog and De Luca and Max Evans it's like we've won the Lottery.

TJ wrote:the selkirk pixie is a much better player now than when he first played for scotland - and really what other choices are there?

I'm not too bothered about Jones - I still don't think he'll be a genuine option when all our players are back but he's deserving of his chance this summer.

My real concern is Hughes when Hoyland played so well and Tonks, although he's only really there because there isn't anyone else.

What happened to Blair Kinghorn?

TJ wrote:What happened to Blair Kinghorn?

At the JWC with the under 20s. Think he needed it to try and get some confidence back after playing in an Edinburgh backline all season...

highland_scot wrote:

TJ wrote:What happened to Blair Kinghorn?

At the JWC with the under 20s. Think he needed it to try and get some confidence back after playing in an Edinburgh backline all season...

Was definitely the right decision to keep him at the under 20s after his terrible run of form for Edinburgh. He started off a bit shakey for the under 20s but has put in some good performances since (with the odd mistake or two thrown in for good measure!)

RDW_Scotland wrote:

highland_scot wrote:

TJ wrote:What happened to Blair Kinghorn?

At the JWC with the under 20s. Think he needed it to try and get some confidence back after playing in an Edinburgh backline all season...

Was definitely the right decision to keep him at the under 20s after his terrible run of form for Edinburgh. He started off a bit shakey for the under 20s but has put in some good performances since (with the odd mistake or two thrown in for good measure!)

Absolutely

it would have completely ruined the lad had he been brought along with the senior squad and told he was lining up against the Falou and co he'd have Hughes and Jones for company in defense!

He'd have run off the pitch quicker than Joubert!

Don't recognise some of the forwards but that there is some talent in that backline. Any of our Aussie friends able to give more detail?

Wallabies to take on Scotland

1. Tom Robertson (8 Tests)

2. Tatafu Polota-Nau (69 Tests)

3. Allan Alaalatoa (10 Tests)

4. Sam Carter (14 Tests)

5. Adam Coleman (10 Tests)

6. Ned Hanigan (1 Test)

7. Michael Hooper (c) (66 Tests)

8. Scott Higginbotham (33 Tests)

9. Will Genia (76 Tests)

10. Bernard Foley (43 Tests)

11. Eto Nabuli*

12. Karmichael Hunt (1 Test)

13. Tevita Kuridrani (46 Tests)

14. Dane Haylett-Petty (15 Tests)

15. Israel Folau (53 Tests)

Reserves

16. Stephen Moore (118 Tests)

17. Scott Sio (30 Tests)

18. Sekope Kepu (78 Tests)

19. Rory Arnold (10 Tests)

20. Richard Hardwick (1 Test)

21. Joe Powell (1 Test)

22. Quade Cooper (68 Tests)

23. Reece Hodge (11 Tests)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40301161

Johnny Gray and Finn Russel mentioned by name in this article as Lions call ups.

Yeah there's plenty rumours now about this - if Gatland wants to protect his test 23 then he'll need another 10 and a lock (assuming Lawes fails his HIA) and probably a new front row too. We could lose more than those two before the Fiji game.

would you go? called up as cover for the midweek games so the "stars" can shine in the tests?

I don't think anyone in recent memory has turned down the Lions so I can't imagine anyone would. I just hope they don't do it just before the Aus game - they really need to if they are to be involved by Tuesday though.

yeah it looks a bit like being sent out to get battered to preserve his test players. If they could force themselves into contention, it might be worth it.

Russell could force himself into contention if he gets the right players around him. Gray could be the same. Watson if he gets called IMO would be our best chance at a starter though.

RDW_Scotland wrote:I don't think anyone in recent memory has turned down the Lions so I can't imagine anyone would.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/apr/30/jonny-wilkinson-turns-down-lions

To be fair, Wales are in Auckland, they'll be getting picked up first.

Gooseberry wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:I don't think anyone in recent memory has turned down the Lions so I can't imagine anyone would.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/apr/30/jonny-wilkinson-turns-down-lions

That's different though he know his body just wasn't up to it. I'm talking about a player turning them down out of principle or because they don't want to go just to hold tackle bags.

I'd much rather Johnny and Finn stayed with the Scotland squad than going over as Lions afterthoughts at this stage, but you can obviously understand why the players would want to go and get involved

I'm the complete opposite I'm afraid. I'd be delighted if our boys went. It will be hugely beneficial to them. Yes, they will be dirt trackers with little chance of forcing their way into the test teams, but the Lions are still the pinnacle for any player and a New Zealand tour is as good as it gets. Even if they're only going out to sit on the bench for the Chiefs game and to potentially play against the Canes, I think our guys would be daft to turn it down. It won't do their chances of being picked next time any harm either. It should be up to them and from what Toonie says it will be.

None of the scots should go to sit on the bench midweek. and thats all this would be. The scottish players were snubbed by Gatland he showed no respect so he is entitled to none

I would say go...but only if it's after tomorrow.

Not sure about pinnacle.

To me, representing Scotland would be higher than anything, especially the Lions.

The Lions is meant to be about being the absolute best in your position and getting picked based on that fact.

Unfortunately, being the best in your position hasn't been a factor since 1997.

I totally agree it should be up to the players themselves, no argument there. I still don't see any tangible benefit to the players other than getting to experience the whole concept, which admittedly would be a lure - getting to know (albeit briefly) players from other countries and play alongside them would be a great experience. Do I believe it will benefit them as players to go and play in a thrown together side against a super rugby team missing their star players? No.

If we had another 3 or 4 players called up it would certainly help normalise the idea of picking Scottish players in the first place!

Or would it normalise the idea that you pick the good players first, then when they get injured or need to be wrapped in cotton wool then you turn to the Scottish players?

Hypothetical question here. In an ideal world, we have the following centres fit to be selected:
Bennett, Dunbar, Huw Jones, Taylor, Scott.
(I've discounted Grigg and Horne as not being in the same category)
On this hypothetical situation, we are due to play Oz. What centre pairing do we go with and who benches?
My preference would be 12 - Dunbar, 13 - Taylor, bench - Jones.
but I'm curious what combo others would pick?

nickj wrote:I'm the complete opposite I'm afraid. I'd be delighted if our boys went. It will be hugely beneficial to them. Yes, they will be dirt trackers with little chance of forcing their way into the test teams, but the Lions are still the pinnacle for any player and a New Zealand tour is as good as it gets. Even if they're only going out to sit on the bench for the Chiefs game and to potentially play against the Canes, I think our guys would be daft to turn it down. It won't do their chances of being picked next time any harm either. It should be up to them and from what Toonie says it will be.

I think the risks to the players outweigh the benefits.  It's pretty clear that the players who are called up now will be cannon fodder, whose primary function is to protect the chosen ones.  The chances of them being injured are probably higher than their chances of getting into the Test team.  Next Lions tour will have Townsend as head coach, so they'll be picked anyway

i also have reservations about what the current Lions coaching staff will do to our players.  I'm not so bothered about the forwards - Gray and Watson fit well into the current game plan of trucking it up the middle and tackling themselves to a standstill.   However, players like Russell are a different matter.  The Lions coaches won't change their game plan to suit Finn, he'll have to learn to play their way.  The thought of our best 10 this century being coached into playing Warrenball makes me break out in a cold sweat.  He can be a bit flaky at times, but I don't want the creativity knocked out of him.

Anglobraveheart wrote:Hypothetical question here. In an ideal world, we have the following centres fit to be selected:
Bennett, Dunbar, Huw Jones, Taylor, Scott.
(I've discounted Grigg and Horne as not being in the same category)
On this hypothetical situation, we are due to play Oz. What centre pairing do we go with and who benches?
My preference would be 12 - Dunbar, 13 - Taylor, bench - Jones.
but I'm curious what combo others would pick?

12. Taylor 13. Jones

Bench : Bennet

That's who I feel is the best centres we have at our disposal.

Dunbar in at 12 and Scott in at 13 after that.

As for Gatland calling up midweek cannon fodder extra Lions. I could see Taylor also getting called.

Personally I'd be tempted to tell him to bolt though.

My order of preference

12 Dunbar, Scott, Taylor, Horne
13 Taylor, Jones, Scott, Bennett, Grigg

Bennett has been electric but he is going to be out for a long time and there will be question marks on whether he will be as sharp when he returns. The game will have moved on a lot by the time he does and he may be left behind (especially with Hodge as a coach!)

13 is certainly our area of greatest strength - I think Taylor is more of a 13 than a 12.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

TJ wrote:the selkirk pixie is a much better player now than when he first played for scotland - and really what other choices are there?

I'm not too bothered about Jones - I still don't think he'll be a genuine option when all our players are back but he's deserving of his chance this summer.

My real concern is Hughes when Hoyland played so well and Tonks, although he's only really there because there isn't anyone else.

Agree about Jones - his tackling used to be pretty awful, but his time with the 7s turned him into a much better defender.

Not sure about Tonks.  From memory, his defence is good, he kicks well from hand, and is a competent full-back.  He may have been playing Championship rugby last season, but LIrish were a class apart and walloped everybody.  Taylor played well at 15 last week, but was a bit slow getting back into position on a couple of occasions.  That wasn't a problem against a weak Italy, but Folau and Haylett-Petty are a different proposition.  I think I would rather have a specialist full-back, even if Tonks isn't the footballer that Taylor is.  Anyway, that frees Taylor for his best position, in the centres.

RDW_Scotland wrote:My order of preference

12 Dunbar, Scott, Taylor, Horne
13 Taylor, Jones, Scott, Bennett, Grigg

Bennett has been electric but he is going to be out for a long time and there will be question marks on whether he will be as sharp when he returns.  The game will have moved on a lot by the time he does and he may be left behind (especially with Hodge as a coach!)

13 is certainly our area of greatest strength - I think Taylor is more of a 13 than a 12.

I know that sarries play Barrett at 12, but I honestly thought that was where Taylor's strengths lie. Hes a great link man, more so than Dunbar, who I thought was getting touted as a 13 on this very thread. I can't even begin to keep up!

My tu'pence worth on the centres debate.

12. Dunbar/Taylor dependent on form, Dunbar at his best is the best we have but I'm not convinced we've seen his best this season. Then Horne, then Scott. Horne's distribution and kicking game are better than Scott's. Although if Sam Johnson throws his hat into the ring then his creativity may put him ahead of Horne.

13. Huw Jones' outside break is a thing of beauty and his tries to chances ratio puts him ahead of the rest. Taylor then Dunbar then Bennett, if he regains full fitness, then Grigg who is electric fast and then Scott.

It is amazing that not so long ago Scott-Dunbar were the best centres we had produced in a long time and looked to be the incumbents for the foreseeable future. Then Mark Bennett was the future of Scotland's back play. Sic transit Gloria mundi, as Mrs Pip says when she looks at our wedding album.

I kinda get the feeling Jimbo doesn't rate Matt Scott...

Horne might be able to pass and kick better but he's a defensive risk.

I still don't get why folk are not rating Matt Scott.

Sure he was a bit quiet against Italy last week but not any more that Dunbar was. Scott was also one of the best backs in the Jeff last season!

tigertattie wrote:I still don't get why folk are not rating Matt Scott.

Sure he was a bit quiet against Italy last week but not any more that Dunbar was. Scott was also one of the best backs in the Jeff last season!

He used to play for Edinburgh

If we win (big if) I think we could potentially move up to 4th in the World Rankings.

No, it's not that. Well, not just that.

I mentioned some time ago that when he returned after his shoulder injury he seemed to have lost all confidence in his defensive abilities. Certainly his performance against Samoa at St James' Park was one of the least convincing I have ever seen. His improved form, and very impressive scoring rate for Glaws, have followed his move to 13. Is that because he avoids the heavy traffic there? Do we remember the reason why we called him MattScott12? Mainly because he was a much better 12 than anywhere else. Also, Mark Benett was a much better 13.
My own assessment is that Huw Jones is the quickest 13 we have, his outside break is stunning, his time in Sooperrugby has toughened him up and made him much more suited to the "fastest rugby in the world" Toonie aspires to play.

In the past I have compared Matt Scott to Monica Seles, I wasn't being flippant: even when Ms Seles recovered full fitness she was never the same player, she said herself she never fully felt confident or safe on a tennis court. Matt Scott's defensive showings at Twickenham, when Dunbar pulled out at the last minute, and then against Samoa in the World Cup had all the hallmarks of a player who didn't believe he he could put in the tackles he needed. (I think Alex Dunbar has had a bit of this about him this season, but nowhere near as catastrophically). It does look as if a change of club, and position has allowed him to believe in himself again, and all credit to him I say. However, offensively he is behind Jones, Bennet and possibly Grigg. Defensively, he is behind Taylor and Dunbar.

If anyone thinks I'm being unfair, just look again at the England and Samoa matches. Apparently Dan Parks said he was shocked that any Scotland player could ever look so defensively inept.

For me in terms of centre options:

12. Taylor, 13. Jones

Dunbar on the bench. I think I've gone for nearly the same options as Radge, but I've gone with Dunbar over Bennett as I know Dunbar can and has regularly played 12 & 13, whereas I don't think Bennett has played anything other than 13. Plus not sure how he'll be after his knee injury, and the excellent guidance of Hodge.

In terms of Horne, I like him as a player, but only as a backup 10. He's struggled at centre at international level.

Scott - stats wise, he and Dunbar were pretty even at the weekend. Scott does need to work on his defence, but his attacking game has come on leaps and bounds since he moved down south.

Overall preference would be:
12, Taylor, Dunbar, Scott
13, Jones, Dunbar, Bennett, Scott

I realise I've got Dunbar twice, but I think he is equally strong in either position.

I wouldn't consider Horne at international level in the centre at the moment.

I fully expect that last comment to be unpopular

jimbopip wrote:No, it's not that. Well, not just that.

I mentioned some time ago that when he returned after his shoulder injury he seemed to have lost all confidence in his defensive abilities. Certainly his performance against Samoa at St James' Park was one of the least convincing I have ever seen. His improved form, and very impressive scoring rate for Glaws, have followed his move to 13. Is that because he avoids the heavy traffic there? Do we remember the reason why we called him MattScott12? Mainly because he was a much better 12 than anywhere else. Also, Mark Benett was a much better 13.
My own assessment is that Huw Jones is the quickest 13 we have, his outside break is stunning, his time in Sooperrugby has toughened him up and made him much more suited to the "fastest rugby in the world" Toonie aspires to play.

In the past I have compared Matt Scott to Monica Seles, I wasn't being flippant: even when Ms Seles recovered full fitness she was never the same player, she said herself she never fully felt confident or safe on a tennis court. Matt Scott's defensive showings at Twickenham, when Dunbar pulled out at the last minute, and then against Samoa in the World Cup had all the hallmarks of a player who didn't believe he he could put in the tackles he needed. (I think Alex Dunbar has had a bit of this about him this season, but nowhere near as catastrophically).  It does look as if a change of club, and position has allowed him to believe in himself again, and all credit to him I say. However, offensively he is behind Jones, Bennet and possibly Grigg. Defensively, he is behind Taylor and Dunbar.

If anyone thinks I'm being unfair, just look again at the England and Samoa matches. Apparently Dan Parks said he was shocked that any Scotland player could ever look so defensively inept.

I see what you're saying but you're around 2 seasons out of date if you're brining up England and Samoa performances. Since then he's moved to Glaws, become a player reborn and - to his credit - worked hard on his defencive game.

IMO Scott can do things at international level that Horne can't do (or indeed ever has done) and Horne for me is never going to be more than a squad player or emergency cover. Scott may end up in the same way due to the quality of options but he's a step up from Horne as a centre option.

I'm also not sure how you can claim Grigg is a better attacking option given that he's uncapped - it is a huge step up to international rugby and he's completely unproven. Just ask SHC - one good club season doesn't make you an international class player.

EWT Spoons wrote:If we win (big if) I think we could potentially move up to 4th in the World Rankings.

Beacuse of the away weighting a 15+ win could bump them as high as 3rd (depends on other results)
Its not going to happen though is it.

A loss will probably see them drop to 7th....or even 8th depedant on other results.

Gooseberry wrote:

EWT Spoons wrote:If we win (big if) I think we could potentially move up to 4th in the World Rankings.

Beacuse of the away weighting a 15+ win could bump them as high as 3rd (depends on other results)
Its not going to happen though is it.

A loss will probably see them drop to 7th....or even 8th depedant on other results.

Not that that really matters, the world rankings are important once every 4 years. Otherwise they are absolutely irrelevant.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

EWT Spoons wrote:If we win (big if) I think we could potentially move up to 4th in the World Rankings.

Beacuse of the away weighting a 15+ win could bump them as high as 3rd (depends on other results)
Its not going to happen though is it.

A loss will probably see them drop to 7th....or even 8th depedant on other results.

Not that that really matters, the world rankings are important once every 4 years. Otherwise they are absolutely irrelevant.

If you are above Wales ...it matters.

Gooseberry wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

EWT Spoons wrote:If we win (big if) I think we could potentially move up to 4th in the World Rankings.

Beacuse of the away weighting a 15+ win could bump them as high as 3rd (depends on other results)
Its not going to happen though is it.

A loss will probably see them drop to 7th....or even 8th depedant on other results.

Not that that really matters, the world rankings are important once every 4 years. Otherwise they are absolutely irrelevant.

If you are above Wales ...it matters.

Not really, it hardly impacted the only other cyclic Olympiad, the Lions.  

Cheers fellas, good to see a certain amount of uniformity in the opinions, and yes, we are well blessed with centres.
This is a little late now, as I overlooked to press 'send'
Much as I love the Lions, I feel they are now Gatlands poisoned chalice, and I hope he leaves our players alone.
Using anyone at this stage as last minute midweek cannon fodder to protect his favourites is insulting.
As per previous post, I look forward to Toonies Lions in 8 years time. 6 years as Scotland coach would be good, followed by 2 years Lions prep.

Morning....

Morning all, here we go!

First turnover to John Barclay

Morning lads.

That was a sneaky punch by the Aussie 5, not needed after a very good tackle to touch.

How is that not reckless? He dove into contact, jumping for the ball but very dangerous...

So that's why we picked Tonks!

3-0 Scotland

Duncan Taylor!!!!!

Taylor

Deserved try for Scotland.

Duncan Taylor intercepts and scores. You can't say we don't deserve to be in the lead!

Love the look on Checka's face!