Scotland 10 - 6 Ireland

New kit, same old Scotland

So the team ran out with their shinny new Scotland kit, complete with optimistic gold (fools gold...)

and yet in the first half, so much promise, so much possession, so much
territory. And yet NO points on the board. No tries, not even a penalty.

3-0 down here's hoping we can turn it around...

.........................................................................................................................................................

It took 76 minutes, but finally Scotland scored a TRY
Great pass by Nick De Luca, to Joe Ansbro. Good turn of pace, stepped inside Trimble, to give Scotland the win.

A scrappy match. Good play by Cross, good in the scrum and supported well, better than most of our backs...Thought Rennie played well, some nice turnovers. Real credit to Ireland, but in the end we just managed to sneak it.
Lawson looked a little slow, Laidlaw injected pace nicely when he came on.

Glad got the try. were up in possesion etc. some good stuff. as first game back quite positive. walker looked good before off. lamot good. ansbro good. front row good. so some positives

I was disappointed with Scotland to be honest. I thought they would win by more against that Irish team and they only have 1 more game. That being said i was impressed with the Irish defence. We did lack invention though. Both our centres werent great. Might be an idea to try McFadden at 12 against France with someone new outside him (if BOD is still out). Kearney and TOL had decent returns i thought and both wingers look lively if a little rusty. Really pleased with the defence though tougher tests await

that left winger with the orange boots, looks an amazing player, sorry I havent checked the lineups yet, and was only watching the game when the Wales - England game was on stop. But every time I saw him, he was causing havoc.

Orange boots was lamont

Good game - the low score really doesn't tell the whole story!

It's important that we learn from the negatives without getting carried away, and enjoy those positives without it going to our heads!

So, the positives:
Cross, Rennie, Lamont, Hamilton, Ansbro, Strokosch
Scrummaging, the defence, fitness, attempting to play expansive rugby... oh and a try.

and the inevitable negatives:
Hall, Lawson (purely for his slow service), Beattie (harsh, but still not as good as two years ago)
Forwards slow to the breakdown, Walker's injury, lack of support in attack, and generally a bit rusty.

I don't think we should worry too much - I was a bit annoyed at our poor showing in the lineout, but Wayne Barnes did miss a fair bit of pulling by the Irish...


Final thoughts: my throat hurts. Usually a good sign.

Firstly well done Scotland. A win is a win. No complaints on the result.

From an Ireland perspective I'm pretty happy. The pack went far better than I was expecting and the defence was superb. There was a real lack of penatration in midfield though and a lack of effective ball carrying from the back row.

From and individual perspective I was very impressed with Kearney, Fitzgerald, Wallace and Leo Cullen. Donnacha Ryan and Cronin also did well.

McFadden was pretty disappointing. He was caught out for the try and didn't really threaten in attack. Trimble looked rusty and Sexton wasn't great but am not to worried about him.

Overall a very good showing from an experimental Irish side.

Riskysports wrote:Orange boots was lamont

He looked fantastic to be honest, and really hungry for the ball.

It's great to see Scotland winning, just what they need prior to the World Cup.

Rodders

I actually thought Trimble looked decent. Not much chance to get going but made the most of it. Fitz had a game of two halves. Looked excellent in the first and less so in the 2nd (still made some nice plays though). I thought McFadden was anonymous but i didnt think Paddy was great either. Cronin was poor imo.

At times I wonder what Gregor Townsend teaches the backs? They still badly lack that cutting edge. Admittedly, with the exception of Ansbro, is was a pretty slow back line.
Another concerning aspect of play is supporting runners. There was an occasion today where the first player supporting the line breakers was Geoff Cross, a prop! The backs really need to look at that, as if support had been better maybe the brakes by Lamont and Walker could have produced more of those rare 5 pointers.

Standulstermen wrote:Rodders

I actually thought Trimble looked decent. Not much chance to get going but made the most of it. Fitz had a game of two halves. Looked excellent in the first and less so in the 2nd (still made some nice plays though). I thought McFadden was anonymous but i didnt think Paddy was great either. Cronin was poor imo.

I'd have to agree, Trimble looked quite threatening, good pace, and nice running motion. As a Scotland fan I was wary of him. I think the real issue for Ireland today was that they kicked to much ball away, Fitzgerlad especially should have looked to run more.

Standulstermen wrote:Rodders

I actually thought Trimble looked decent. Not much chance to get going but made the most of it. Fitz had a game of two halves. Looked excellent in the first and less so in the 2nd (still made some nice plays though). I thought McFadden was anonymous but i didnt think Paddy was great either. Cronin was poor imo.

Agree with that cronin missed his chance once again. I though that ryan, mccarthy and leamy all played very well. Trimble and kearney were the pick of the backs. I though wallace and mcfadden did well considering how little ball they got. Wallace was better but they both did well and mcfadden could have been pleased with his game except for the try.

Leamy was probably the best of the Irish team, I was actually surprised at how good he was. Ronan on the other hand, kicking the ball away after ryan forced the knock on by killing denton was one of the worst bits of play I've seen him do and thats saying something.

One of the biggest positives of today happened not on the pitch but in the stands, from the looks of things it was a pretty big crowd. And its good to see the public rallying behind the team and people taking advantage of being able to buy tickets on the day. Although maybe buy them a bit earlier next time...

Indeed Glove.

I am worried about Scotland though. In 2007 we only had 2 games before the RWC and were undercooked. Couple that with the fact that many of your guys missed the end of the Magners i worry. Hope to god im wrong and you knock england into 2nd place though

valjester wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:Rodders

I actually thought Trimble looked decent. Not much chance to get going but made the most of it. Fitz had a game of two halves. Looked excellent in the first and less so in the 2nd (still made some nice plays though). I thought McFadden was anonymous but i didnt think Paddy was great either. Cronin was poor imo.

Agree with that cronin missed his chance once again. I though that ryan, mccarthy and leamy all played very well. Trimble and kearney were the pick of the backs. I though wallace and mcfadden did well considering how little ball they got. Wallace was better but they both did well and mcfadden could have been pleased with his game except for the try.

Leamy was probably the best of the Irish team, I was actually surprised at how good he was. Ronan on the other hand, kicking the ball away after ryan forced the knock on by killing denton was one of the worst bits of play I've seen him do and thats saying something.

I didn't notice Ronan much to be honest, but that kick away was one black mark. To balance it up, though, he put in a lot of tackles and his steal on the deck just before half time on our own 5m was beautiful.

The BBC made a lot of the Sexton/Wallace channel being weak defensively, Wallace was the joint highest tackler along with McFadden.

greybeard wrote:

valjester wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:Rodders

I actually thought Trimble looked decent. Not much chance to get going but made the most of it. Fitz had a game of two halves. Looked excellent in the first and less so in the 2nd (still made some nice plays though). I thought McFadden was anonymous but i didnt think Paddy was great either. Cronin was poor imo.

Agree with that cronin missed his chance once again. I though that ryan, mccarthy and leamy all played very well. Trimble and kearney were the pick of the backs. I though wallace and mcfadden did well considering how little ball they got. Wallace was better but they both did well and mcfadden could have been pleased with his game except for the try.

Leamy was probably the best of the Irish team, I was actually surprised at how good he was. Ronan on the other hand, kicking the ball away after ryan forced the knock on by killing denton was one of the worst bits of play I've seen him do and thats saying something.

I didn't notice Ronan much to be honest, but that kick away was one black mark. To balance it up, though, he put in a lot of tackles and his steal on the deck just before half time on our own 5m was beautiful.

The BBC made a lot of the Sexton/Wallace channel being weak defensively, Wallace was the joint highest tackler along with McFadden.

Wallace and sexton are very good tacklers, but for some reason people have it in their heads that he can't and won't change their mind.
Ronan just made a lot of poor decisions but the worst thing about his play was his refusal to take contact when he got the ball. He kept shuffling off to players in worse positions than him.

Still stand by yesterday's comment, if we didn't win by 3 scores (15+ points) then the Irish would have done better than us. On the showing I would now seriously question taking Beattie, I would look at having Harley at 6 with Brown to 8. I'm also not as impressed with Lamont as some above, he did run very well but his lack of awareness meant several real opportunities simply went begging. We can only have one winger like that in the side so take your pick between him, Danielli and Walker.

Would really like to see Cairns given a go in the 3/4 line but don't think it'll happen.

Hamilton too did some good things but they didn't vary the lineouts enough and that was his call. Lawson's kicking was very poor today, I normally like him as a player but today - oh dear.

So the good, Rennie, Gray, Ansbro, & CP all played well, whilst Jackson, Cuthbert, and De Luca, were definitely positive. The rest were ok and no more.

Thought the Irish forwards battled at the breakdown and messed up our ball well. Their backs also looked dangerous and would have thrived I fear if they'd been given the supply of ball our backs got. Need a big improvement from the next side to feel positive for the RWC, that was not impressive.

Pleased we won, although the result meant more to us given we only have one more warm-up game, it was pretty clear that Ireland were going for the win more than trying out moves etc., so it's to our credit that we changed tack in the second half to nail down the win, and scored the try in the closing stages under pressure, and closed out the game after that without drama.

In terms of players performances;

Scotland

I thought the pack was generally good, strong carries, good scrum and decent possession. My picks were Cross, Gray, Strokosch and Rennie, who had excellent games, particularly the two flankers, who both worked extremely hard and made telling contributions. It's the best carrying game I've seen from Strokosch for a long time. Beattie looked a bit better than before, but caught out a little in terms of body position a couple of times. The workout will do him good though, and Denton was nothing more than solid coming on. Hall was poor when he came on, and Dickinson was average. Kellock made some telling takes in the lineout though, and a couple of decent tackles. Nothing we didn't already know.

The backs were quite interesting. Lawson got praised by Nicol but I thought he had a poor game, and missed a couple of opportunities to snipe around the fringes, took too long on several occasions to pass the ball, and his box kicking was mixed. Jackson had a good game, Morrison looked surprisingly sharp, Ansbro was decent and Lamont was excellent, despite missing a couple of opportunities to pass the ball rather than take contact. CP was solid at the back but didn't make a telling enough contribution in attack. Walker was decent before his injury, but Cuthbert was totally unremarkable. Poor kicking, poor workrate and showed little class. Too soon for him. Hopefully Danielli and Rory Lamont can be better in the next match.

Ireland

Second rows Cullen and Ryan were very good, and McCarthy and Leamy looked decent and physical. Buckley and Court probably lost out in the battle of the props at the scrum, but we expected that, and they were hardly humbled.

I think it's in the backs that Kidney may be slightly disappointed. Half backs and back three were pretty good, particularly Fitzgerald who looked really sharp, and Sexton who put in some good kicks, and Kidney will be pleased that Kearney went well. But the centres didn't function particularly well in attack, and Wallace was exposed in defence.

A few Irish posters on here have been telling us not to underestimate Wallace's defending. Well he was poor today, both postionally and physically. Morrison and Lamont pretty much owned him in contact, and McFadden (whose defence was very good) really had to help him out. McFadden should be given a chance at 12 in the warm-ups, Wallace was given a chance and didn't do anything like enough.

Stats like saying he was the joint highest tackler do not tell the story. He may have tackled quite a bit, but in most of those tackles he was being dragged over the advantage line, or his opposition man was offloading. You can't have a 12 being knocked back like that. Players like SBW, McCabe and Fourie will take metres off him everytime.

The evidence was there today. Keith Wood's analysis was spot on at half time.

funnyExiledScot wrote:... Wallace was exposed in defence.

A few Irish posters on here have been telling us not to underestimate Wallace's defending. Well he was poor today, both postionally and physically. Morrison and Lamont pretty much owned him in contact, and McFadden (whose defence was very good) really had to help him out. McFadden should be given a chance at 12 in the warm-ups, Wallace was given a chance and didn't do anything like enough.

Tackles made today, McFadden 13, Wallace... 13.

How can't they have the same stat, but entirely different reviews?

Boston Exile wrote:Still stand by yesterday's comment, if we didn't win by 3 scores (15+ points) then the Irish would have done better than us. On the showing I would now seriously question taking Beattie, I would look at having Harley at 6 with Brown to 8. I'm also not as impressed with Lamont as some above, he did run very well but his lack of awareness meant several real opportunities simply went begging. We can only have one winger like that in the side so take your pick between him, Danielli and Walker.

Would really like to see Cairns given a go in the 3/4 line but don't think it'll happen.

Hamilton too did some good things but they didn't vary the lineouts enough and that was his call. Lawson's kicking was very poor today, I normally like him as a player but today - oh dear.

So the good, Rennie, Gray, Ansbro, & CP all played well, whilst Jackson, Cuthbert, and De Luca, were definitely positive. The rest were ok and no more.

Thought the Irish forwards battled at the breakdown and messed up our ball well. Their backs also looked dangerous and would have thrived I fear if they'd been given the supply of ball our backs got. Need a big improvement from the next side to feel positive for the RWC, that was not impressive.

I forgot to mention De Luca. Very impressed with his work for the try. Very sharp and composed play. A balaced run with a lovely composed soft pass to release Ansbro, who finished nicely. De Luca did himself a big favour there, and I wonder whether Ansbro will be moved to the wing. I disagree with you on Cuthbert. His kicking from hand was agricultural, and when you play a game reliant on offloading and run lines, wingers need to work hard and look for the ball (like Lamont). Cuthbert didn't look hungry for the ball, and when he got it he tended to kick it away badly. The problem with being a new cap is that you need to take your opportunities. We were better off with Walker, and I'm sure Danielli and Rory Lamont won't be too worried about the marker left by Cuthbert.

I agree that Cairns would add something to this side, but both Ansbro and NDL were good today, so I think you're right, he's out of the picture now.

Have to say I am surprised about some of the positive write ups about the game - I thought it was a horrendous game of pretty poor quality! AMazing try from Scotland though

All that happened is we learnt exactly what we already know about that Scotland team:

Good things that we already knew:

We have a good defence and set piece
We have strength in depth in the 2nd row and back row

Bad things we are all to aware of:

We have absolutely no idea what to do with the ball
We struggle to score tries despite the amount of possession.

I am pretty sure in that first half we must have had 60-70% possession and we actually did nothing with it! Can anyone remember a genuine scoring chance other than the actual try?

Positives for me - Ross Rennie was superb and Lamont was very good. How come he is the only one that actually looks interested in the backline??

Wallace was solid in defence,think he missed one tackled and made well over 10. He was poor in attack as was McF.

greybeard wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:... Wallace was exposed in defence.

A few Irish posters on here have been telling us not to underestimate Wallace's defending. Well he was poor today, both postionally and physically. Morrison and Lamont pretty much owned him in contact, and McFadden (whose defence was very good) really had to help him out. McFadden should be given a chance at 12 in the warm-ups, Wallace was given a chance and didn't do anything like enough.

Tackles made today, McFadden 13, Wallace... 13.

How can't they have the same stat, but entirely different reviews?

When?

They targeted him and they got past him once. That was a missed tackle. Apart from that he made every tackle against bigger guys. For all you saw they 'owned' him they didn't get past him or through him. As much as they tried.

Woods analysis was drivel.

Also what did people make of Morrison's role in the try? Should it have been given? McFadden was at fault all the same.

greybeard wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:... Wallace was exposed in defence.

A few Irish posters on here have been telling us not to underestimate Wallace's defending. Well he was poor today, both postionally and physically. Morrison and Lamont pretty much owned him in contact, and McFadden (whose defence was very good) really had to help him out. McFadden should be given a chance at 12 in the warm-ups, Wallace was given a chance and didn't do anything like enough.

Tackles made today, McFadden 13, Wallace... 13.

How can't they have the same stat, but entirely different reviews?

Are you new to rugby?

Let me explain. Tackle number one stops the attacker dead on the advantage line, stopping the attacking teams momentum and allowing the defending flankers to compete for the ball. Tackle number two is made from a poor position at a poor body angle with insufficient force. The attacking side carries the tackler across the advantage line and presents the ball perfectly for the scrum half to carry on the momentum.

They are both tackles according to the stats.

And tackle number three goes high and prevents the offload, holds the player up for support to arrive and slow the ball down completely. Wallace was given his role in defence and performed it very well.

His role was to go high and scrag the ball carrier and creagte a situation where a gang tackle can take place. This has been a strategy ireland have used many times in defence.

Ok - clearly there were two different games going on here. I was watching Scotland vs Ireland and am referring to Paddy Wallace. Both Andy Nicol and Keith Wood made the comment that Paddy Wallace was struggling in defence, and I agree.

Clearly there was some other game going on with some other fellow called Wallace at 12, who produced some form of defensive masterclass. Whoever he is, if he's Irish, you should pick him. The Wallace I saw had a poor game both in attack and defence.

Yeah, but they were both wrong

You appear to be a little bit confused between a strategy of deliberately going high to slow down the ball, and insufficient power in the tackle.

And your argument isn't helped by the fact that not a single attacking move designed to target Wallace in defence resulted in anything like an opportunity. Mainly because when they did run at him, they a) didn't break the tackle and b) didn't get quick ball. Tackle was completed, and most importantly, momentum was not maintained by the attacking side.

The least you could say about Wallace is he was very effective today in defence.

Notch wrote:And tackle number three goes high and prevents the offload, holds the player up for support to arrive and slow the ball down completely. Wallace was given his role in defence and performed it very well.

His role was to go high and scrag the ball carrier and creagte a situation where a gang tackle can take place. This has been a strategy ireland have used many times in defence.

I think you can give Leamy and Ryan credit for those tackles, which worked a couple of time but personally I wouldn't say it was a complete triumph. I'm sorry but just look at how many times Wallace was the first tackler to make contact and the ball ends up metres behind the advantage line with a Scottish ruck.

If that's the strategy, then Kidney is making an tactical error in my view. The Irish defence was exposed a few times, and only bungling from the Scottish backs saved you on at least two occasions. Australia will not be so forgiving. Wallace needs to stop his man, not scrag him and get dragged.

The other side to his game which I do generally rate, his side step and distribution, also didn't show up. I'm sure he'll be disappointed with his showing, because he's a better player than that.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Are you new to rugby?

Oh please don't. We're all doing well.

Notch - we're getting nowhere. If you reckon Wallace was "very effective in defence", then our opinions are too far apart to reconcile.

Well if you disagree with a strategy that's one thing. But a player can only play to a strategy he's given.

And whilst Scotland did create some opportunities the ball they got back after rucks had formed with these tackles was not quick, productive ball. Indeed we often disrupted them at ruck time.

greybeard wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Are you new to rugby?

Oh please don't. We're all doing well.

I apologise, got a touch of the Nottins there. I just thought your question on the stats was a little obvious.

I don't think it's obvious at all. I think a blanket statement about how two players had entirely different defensive performance when the stats show they were equally effective isn't fair.

It suggests every tackle by McFadden was type 1 and every tackle by Wallace was type 2, which isn't the case.

And for the record, if I was doing my job as a Leinster fan I'd be on your side and whupping Notches Ulster bottom with a virtual riding crop, but in this instance I can't see any truth to it.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Notch - we're getting nowhere. If you reckon Wallace was "very effective in defence", then our opinions are too far apart to reconcile.

Point me to an instance where Scotland got quick, threatening ball after he made a tackle and I could see your point of view. There was one drive by Morrison, but he did his job in that when we got players around him the drive was stopped and the ball slowed down. The point is he's gone high there to scrag him and wait for support because that is what our backs being coached to do, for better or worse. He's not gone into stop the runner, he's gone to stop the offload. You can say that's a bad strategy, but its the strategy not the player.

It just didn't happen in this game. They made a strategy of targeting him and the net gain of that strategy was zero points on the board and zero opportunities created. So he was nothing if not effective.

Notch wrote:Well if you disagree with a strategy that's one thing. But a player can only play to a strategy he's given.

And whilst Scotland did create some opportunities the ball they got back after rucks had formed with these tackles was not quick, productive ball. Indeed we often disrupted them at ruck time.

I agree with that last point, Cullen and Ryan in particular were a complete menace at the ruck, and TOL outplayed Lawson in that area. The ref could have pinged the Irish a couple of times for making their way back onside rather slowly and getting in the way, but then again, Morrison's run was rather obstructive to say the least for the winning try.

It's something we need to improve on against Italy. We need to get better body angles going into contact, and we need to clear out rucks more effectively. Quicker service from the scrum half would greatly help here. Hopefully Cusiter will be fit for the next game.

Notch, quick ball may have been averted on several occasions, but the advantage line was more often than not breached when Wallace was targeted, and on most occasions possession was retained. Yes, often that possession was slow, and yes, we mucked up several chances, but the fact is Wallace needs to be assisted and compensated for in defence by his colleagues, where most top 12's don't need to be.

If it is the strategy for Wallace to tackles high and be carried back, then fair enough, Wallace certainly achieved that. But that will not be a successful strategy against sides that can covert possession into points, something which Scotland certainly didn't do today.

Nah, he doesn't. Not if he goes a bit lower and looks to stop the runner and not the offload. This is the way they're coaching them in defence.

Take it up with Les Kiss then!

I'm sure Keith Wood will!

Anyway, you guys at least have more opportunities to get things going. I'm not sure 80 minutes against Italy is going to suffice to teach our backs to carry the ball in two hands and open their eyes.

Still, at least we made some breaks and scored a try. In the perspective of the last few years, I ought to be happy.

Keith Wood is beginning to lose it. TOL passed to Cronins toes and Cronin knocked on, Wood blamed Cronin for 'a lazy line'.

Maybe that's an old hooker being hard on someone he want's to see do well in his old position and believes in a 'cruel to be kind' approach, but it wasn't realistic.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'm not sure 80 minutes against Italy is going to suffice to teach our backs to carry the ball in two hands and open their eyes.

Not really, but I think you'll be ok after your first two games. You've got a nice build up to Argentina and England without overdoing it.

I'm sure he will fes, I'm sure he'll be on the phone.

No... I fear for Scotland against Argentina after that match to be honest. I think it shows an organised defence and a spoiling game can get you a long way against Scotland if you don't give away cheap penalties.

I think they'll provide both of those things plus a much, much more fearsome scrum and a much more settled pack.

It's going to be a tough ask for you guys if you don't start creating opportunities. I think the most dangerous offload of the day was provided by Richie Gray...

With England obviously going to be a tough match as well, you'll need significant improvements to get out of your group. Hope to God I'm wrong about that, I'd love to put one over on the Auld Enemy

Ha ha it looks like we were all watching different games!!

I though Leamy was very poor Val. He offered nothing as a ball carrier. He really just doesn't look top class any more.

Ronin did ok. He made one really good turnover that I can remember. A good 7 will try and avoid contact which is why he looked to offload. McCaw does the same.

Wallace defence was excellent. I don't know what game you were watching Radge. Morrison ran at him all day and only crossed the advantage line once. His quick hand created out only line break by Trimble.

Stand. I thought Trimble had a good game but he forced the pass a bit. It's understandable considering he's been out for a while. I though Fitzgerald was more impressive though in attack an defence.

McFadden was pretty disappointing considering the hype. Didn't do much in attack and caught out for the try. He did ok but that might be his WC chance gone unless D'arcy fails to recover. I think we'll need to look at Earls again in the centre because the balance between him and Wallace didn't quite work.

roddersm wrote:Ha ha it looks like we were all watching different games!!

I though Leamy was very poor Val. He offered nothing as a ball carrier. He really just doesn't look top class any more.

Ronin did ok. He made one really good turnover that I can remember. A good 7 will try and avoid contact which is why he looked to offload. McCaw does the same.

Wallace defence was excellent. I don't know what game you were watching Radge. Morrison ran at him all day and only crossed the advantage line once. His quick hand created out only line break by Trimble.

Stand. I thought Trimble had a good game but he forced the pass a bit. It's understandable considering he's been out for a while. I though Fitzgerald was more impressive though in attack an defence.

McFadden was pretty disappointing considering the hype. Didn't do much in attack and caught out for the try. He did ok but that might be his WC chance gone unless D'arcy fails to recover. I think we'll need to look at Earls again in the centre because the balance between him and Wallace didn't quite work.

I thought leamy was the best Irish player by a good bit. He doesn't have the aggression and power he used to but he made his tackles and was a nuisance at the breakdown. The pack struggled today because we had no carriers there.

In regards to ronan, a good seven should do all that but what he was doing was shoveling it off to players in worst position than himself because he didn't want to take contact.

To be fair Notch, an organised defence and a spoiling game will get you a long way against anyone. Scotland's problem is that we don't generate quick ball. This mean the defence is always setup, organised and waiting for us to do something from the base of the ruck.

We need to speed up the ball and our decision making if we are to break down defences, like Ireland's today

Scotland's problem is that they look to bash it up the middle rather than put it through the hands. We saw what they could do in the last few minutes.

Hello there...... Just got in after a nice meal in town.

To be honest not as positive with our performance as most on here, I was expecting some fluid movement but there was little to write home about, recycling was non existant, and very little width . Walkers' break in the 5th minute should have produced a try, might have been an entirely different game then.

Looking at the positives
Great movement by De Luca and Ansbro combined well for a great try

Excellent Performances
Cross, Rennie
Good Performances
Walker looked sharp from the start
Lamont had a very good game we have got to look at Schlong starting at 12, Stroko, Jackson, Laidlaw all held their hands up.

Apart from that we seemed a tad rusty at best

We needed that 3rd warm up game

This result is a good result for Scotland and a real kick in the teeth for Kieth Woods.

He was realy bigging Ireland up before the game started.

Well played Scotland a sluggish game but a win is a win, and well played for the win.

To be fair it was largely Ireland's second team with a few 3rd choices.

Can anyone tell me how many first choice Irish were not in the squad?