Scotland.

The six Nations have now completed 3 rounds of matches and I thought it might be interesting if I gave a neutral’s perspective from what I have seen so far and my opinion on each of the teams.

Scotland

At home Scotland can be a handful and really should not have lost to England, the try that was never awarded is a shame as I think it would have given them a big boost. Once again against France they led the way and only fell apart during the second half.

There are some very exciting players in the Scottish pack, Rennie, Denton, Gray et all will provide them with a very mobile pack in the years to come, and Hogg certainly looks the business.

I honestly don’t think Laidlaw is up to standard for international rugby and the only real brilliance I have seen from him was when he played the odd ruck at half back, he slows down when he gets the ball, he telegraphs his passes and puts the receiver under pressure as the defence knows who to target.

Blair looked lively and dangerous until he got injured in the France match and Jones in the back sure does have some pace.

I think the most frustrating thing for Scotland is to find 15 international class players to be on the pitch at any given time. The Scottish pack looked great in their first match, but then fell apart against France, the back line couldn’t buy a try in the world cup last year and it seemed they would struggle to score during the beginning of the Six Nations, yet they seem to have improved their try scoring by virtue of some new blood in the back line.

The problem for Scotland seems they simply just don’t have the recourses and player depth to challenge for the six Nations, it is often their determination that sees them beat teams such as SA and Australia at home, something even Wales struggles to do.

Reasonable comments Bil. Don't agree with everything you say though. You are right when you say Scotland don't have the the player depth to challenge the SH giants on regular basis, but we have shown we can upset them at home. Aus in 2009 and the Boks in 2010.

Our lack of player depth puts even more pressure on the coach to pick the best players, something AR has failed to do by his own accord. The "new Blood" you mention only got their chances due to Andy's favourites getting injured or retiring.

Scotland I think would benefit more from a manager willing to take risks than the conservative coah we currently have in place.

Laidlaw at 10 is a conundrum. At the moment he is the best 10 we have on offer, despite being more natural at 9. If you watch him and Mike Blair play at Edinburgh you'll get an idea of what he and Mike Blair are trying to achive for Scotland. I still think Laidlaw will be our long term scrum half but currently he is playing better at 10 than Jackson or Weir who will eventually play at Stand Off for Scotland.

Biltong, great post and thanks, it's always good to get outside comments from informed posters bout your nation's prospects, particularly when their nation is not involved in the current competition. You are right on Laidlaw - he is a 9, but also a very intelligent player that can do a job for us at 10 while the youngsters (Weir, Leonard, Javkson, A Blair, etc.) develop

Cheers ASBO

biltongbek wrote: it is often their determination that sees them beat teams such as SA and Australia at home, something even Wales struggles to do.

SA aside, do they actually have a better record against them or any other team than Wales?

Yes, Laidlaw will surely shift back to 9 once one of the genuine 10's step up. His kicking brings Jackson back into the equation, which is a bonus.

I'm pretty optimistic about Scotland going forward. The next step is to nail down a midfield with ball players and get some balance there, but there is some real talent coming through.

Fes

You have got to be Jackson's mum! Why on earth should he be in the team as it is at present? I can only think as a back up to Weir.

I assume Blair is out the picture in the next 2 years as he is nearly 32 ish, What we really need then is a No 9 soon.

With the likes of Rennie, Denton, Gray and Ford becoming core players in the Scottish pack, they could end up having the best set of forwards in the world. I genuinely believe that.

Hmm, we need to develop some young props first, Rory, and pronto

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Hmm, we need to develop some young props first, Rory, and pronto

I don't have a clue about any young scottish props to be honest. So I guess my comment was a bit premature

There are a few (Low, Welsh, Grant, Shiells, etc), but to be a quality international side, I think we will need all of them to continue their progress

we just need to replace about half of the team IMO. Some have definitely kept their place unjustifiably! *cough* euan murray, allan jacobsen, sean lamont, graeme morrison (although he apparently played okay last sunday, don't know, I was in US time with a hangover so no chance of catching france!), chris cusiter, rory lamont (now out anyway)

Morrison did actually play quite well. I was shocked to see him go over the gain line. SLamont isn’t finished with Scotland. He is still one of our best players, the problem is he’s not playing where he should be. Keep him on the wing and he’s guaranteed to make ground with ball in hand. A backline of Hogg Jones SLamont will do me fine. Cusiter was playing well when he came back from the WC, but has dropped off in recent weeks. I’m not sure why but he still has a lot to offer Scotland. Especially since the other option is Lawson and the young guys aren’t getting much game time at their clubs. I like Ramont but he’s too prone to injury. I’, happy with the rest leaving.

From an English view, I think you've a somewhat better team than the results have shown - a few individual errors and Laidlaw's lack of power in the defensive line have seen momentum swings in your games.

OK, so you need to find some new props, but Ford has been the outstanding hooker so far, Hamilton has done well but has been comprehensively out-shone by Richie Gray (definite Lion, future captain for both Scotland and the Lions), while Rennie and Denton have been outstanding in the back row. Other than at prop, the only position in the forwards which is currently causing trouble is 6, where Brown's injury has been the big problem.

The backs is something of a different problem - you've plenty of good 9s, but it's clearly an issue when you have to pick a 9 at 10 (where Laidlaw has been goodish other than in one on one defence). How long has the 12 jersey been a problem for Scotland? Morrison is solid but limited, and his (or S Lamont's) lack of passing from there has been an issue for years. 13 is slightly less troublesome - De Luca is finally looking like a guy not totally out of his depth at international level.

A back 3 of S Lamont, Hogg and Lee Jones may not be the most defensively solid, but certainly has plenty of speed and power.

Overall, I think there are some signs of development, and at least you got a couple of quality tries in your last game which should help rebuild some confidence - as I made the point after the England game, it is hard to understand why players can execute basic skills in club or region games but fail to do the same in Internationals. Has to be at least in part confidence and perhaps in part familiarity with the tactics being employed.

123skelm wrote:Fes

You have got to be Jackson's mum! Why on earth should he be in the team as it is at present? I can only think as a back up to Weir.

I said "bring him back into the equation", not that I would pick him ahead of Weir. Without Laidlaw's ability to play 9 and kick you absolutely cannot pick Jackson at 10, his kicking will lose us games. So Laidlaw's kicking gives us options, which is a bonus.

Robinson has selection Jackson as first choice cover. I disagree but it's not a game changer for me.

We've been - once again - infuriatingly brave losers. The England game this year was arguably the most frustrating game Ive watched as a fan.

Now, I should point out that I am only 18, so the vast majority of Scotland teams I have known have been average at best, and appalling at worst. But for the first time in a long time, Scotland have showed real enterprise and spark in the backs, largely thanks to the introduction of Hogg and Jones, and return to form of Mike Blair, who I personally hold in extremely high regard.

Against England, the final piece of the puzzle was once again missing. The priceless ability to turn sustained pressure into points, and capitalise on the many line breaks we made eluded us, and it was always going to be telling. I think we have the nucleus of a very successful pack, provided we shore up the front row - Ed Kalman in particular is just not up to scratch, and he was badly found wanting by the French pack. The backs, I believe, will also come good, just as the likes of Hogg/Jones/Laidlaw are doing regularly for their regions in the Rabo. For the first time in a long time, Scotland's backline have a threatening look. The look of a backline with lots of tries in them, rather than a toothless outfit of underachievers. With players like the Lamont brothers, Evans brothers, Walker, Paterson and Ansbro in recent years, try-scoring should never have been such a problem.

I disagree with Bil's comment's re Laidlaw - for me, he's livened up the backs a lot, isn't afraid to attack the line himself, and has a fantastic rugby brain. I think we're finally in a position where we have three stand offs with genuine international potential. Personally, I think Laidlaw's number 1 just now, but Weir is a more robust player, and a better kicker, and Jackson has the edge on kicking and top level experience.
Where Laidlaw has been found wanting to Scotland's cost is in defence, where his smaller stature/physique has led to him being run over on two occasions, both of which led to tries. One may forgive him for allowing the rampaging 6 foot 5 Alex Cuthbert to best him physically, but at international level being steamrolled by Francois Trinh-Duc isnt really acceptable.
Curiously, he is of similar dimensions to Leigh Halfpenny, and yet the difference in their respective physiques is quite worrying. How often do you see Halfpenny miss a tackle or get brushed aside by larger opponents? Shane Williams recently likened LH to Schwarzenegger, and I think Laidlaw would benefit from really trying to bulk up. He risks being targetted by hefty opposition strike runners if not.
I would also like to see him work more on his kicking, both from hand and at goal, as this is another relative weakness, and we no longer have the safety blanket of Parks/Paterson to step up and take the points. I think the SRU would do well to recruit either of these two to help our three young stand offs work on this.

Morgannwg wrote:

biltongbek wrote: it is often their determination that sees them beat teams such as SA and Australia at home, something even Wales struggles to do.

SA aside, do they actually have a better record against them or any other team than Wales?

Scotland has a better home record against SA and Australia than wales have.

Appreciate your thoughts Biltong.

I think that we are three positions away (wing, inside and outside centre) from having an international quality backline where specialists fill these roles and this could be fixed over the next few years with the arrival of Visser (11), Scott (12) and Bennett (13).

Most Scotland fans will tell you, thought, that the problem is almost less about having the players and more about having a coach that has the stones to pick them.

They are a couple of good players the George. Just how old is Tim Visser though?

George when you look at the stats Maesteg has presented on another thread of the six nations so far, it just shows in the loine breaks that Scotland is definitely playing the game, and as you say one or two more gamebreakers and Scotland will be a handful for a number of teams.

eirebilly wrote:They are a couple of good players the George. Just how old is Tim Visser though?

He's just 24 billy

biltongbek wrote:George when you look at the stats Maesteg has presented on another thread of the six nations so far, it just shows in the loine breaks that Scotland is definitely playing the game, and as you say one or two more gamebreakers and Scotland will be a handful for a number of teams.

bil, have you got a link to that thread? Genuinely can't find it, not just being a lazy get (this time!)

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

eirebilly wrote:They are a couple of good players the George. Just how old is Tim Visser though?

He's just 24 billy

ASBO - sorry you are terribly wrong here - he is actually minus 3 months, as he will be re-born as a fully fledged Scotsman then

ASBO - https://www.606v2.com/t25317-six-nations-stats-so-far

Lovely, cheers, bud

biltongbek wrote:

Morgannwg wrote:

biltongbek wrote: it is often their determination that sees them beat teams such as SA and Australia at home, something even Wales struggles to do.

SA aside, do they actually have a better record against them or any other team than Wales?

Scotland has a better home record against SA and Australia than wales have.

Where are the stats for this claim if you would be so kind as to show, Biltong? Btw, I brought this up because it was pointless. The thread is about Scotland rugby, the title says Scotland and you have gone on to mention Wales. I feel this kind of degenerated the discussion. Perhaps you should stay on topic (Scotland).

Morgannwg

As far as i can recall without bothering to actually look it up, Scotland have only beaten SA twice (2002 and 2010) and Australia once (2009) at home in recent times. They were all low-scoring affairs where Scotland choked the life out of the opposition and defended superbly. We did manage to get two tries against SA in 02, but from memory both were dodgy and awarded by video ref, and SA that day were horrendous.

I would imagine Wales have a better record than this, but a quick google search will probably tell you for sure.

I knew of those games JL, I thought there may have been more. We've beaten SA once at home (and once in history), Aus twice with one draw and I think 4 losses at Millenium Stadium? Could be wrong though. Is that really much of a better ratio? Interesting anyway but my original 'beef' with Biltong was why would he mention us on a Scotland rugby thread.

JLyall wrote:Morgannwg

As far as i can recall without bothering to actually look it up, Scotland have only beaten SA twice (2002 and 2010) and Australia once (2009) at home in recent times. They were all low-scoring affairs where Scotland choked the life out of the opposition and defended superbly. We did manage to get two tries against SA in 02, but from memory both were dodgy and awarded by video ref, and SA that day were horrendous.

I would imagine Wales have a better record than this

In terms of, er, what? Moral superiority?

George Carlin wrote:

JLyall wrote:Morgannwg

As far as i can recall without bothering to actually look it up, Scotland have only beaten SA twice (2002 and 2010) and Australia once (2009) at home in recent times. They were all low-scoring affairs where Scotland choked the life out of the opposition and defended superbly. We did manage to get two tries against SA in 02, but from memory both were dodgy and awarded by video ref, and SA that day were horrendous.

I would imagine Wales have a better record than this

In terms of, er, what? Moral superiority?

In terms of results, clearly. Sadly, Wales have consistently been a better side than Scotland in the last 10 years.

I was just giving my appraisal of those victories and recalling one of my favourite matches at Murrayfield, nothing more. We don't beat South Africa very often, but we played them off the park that day, and as a 9 year old watching on, it has stuck with me.

Morgannwg wrote:I knew of those games JL, I thought there may have been more. We've beaten SA once at home (and once in history), Aus twice with one draw and I think 4 losses at Millenium Stadium? Could be wrong though. Is that really much of a better ratio? Interesting anyway but my original 'beef' with Biltong was why would he mention us on a Scotland rugby thread.

Morgan this is my thread, I am the op and if I reference a deemed "superior team" that happens to be wales it is my right to do so. You really need to get to grips with the fact that any poster complimenting a team also has the right to criticise or reference to negative of inferior aspects of their records and or performances.

Scotland has beatn SA 5 times at home, where Wales have beaten us only once. I can't remember the record for Wales at home vs Australia now and I don't care to look it up.

In future if you can only accpet the positives I post on Wales but not the negatives, refrain from reading them.

But biltong, I still don't see the point for drawing comparison between Wales and Scotland playing just the two teams at home? It is a restricted comparison which does not really show anything about the quality between the two teams over a decade or more.

Please, point out some negatives and perhaps some suggestions on how you think Wales rugby can be improved. I welcome them, but on a WALES thread.

P.S. do you think Scotland might actually have some higher aspirations than being like the Wales team? We are good at the moment, but not great...

Morgan Wales is currently the form team in the six nations, you would agree on that.

I was pointing out the challenges facing Scotland in players depth and resources, from what I have read on a number of threads is that scotland rugby is struggling with getting spectators to games, with the number of professional teams they have and the player depth at their disposal.

If I decide to use their home record as a way to illustrate their resilience and determination in spite of those challenges and compare it to a team who is currently leading the six nations, then why is that a problem for you?

I am not discussing Wales here, I purposely wrote an article on each of the home nations, if you would like to read my opinion on Wales then please find that thread, and leave any comments you would like me to explain in more detail.

The problem is Biltong is that it is a restricted comparison. It is like us saying we are great because our record against Argentina is good which makes us better than Les Bleus as their's is not so good. Although I now see why you pointed it out, even if your execution was bad, i:e; use France next time seeing as they are the ones to set the benchmark for the NH against the SH big 3 home and away.

I did not see your Home Nations thread:Wales. I thought you were yet to do this one.

You are being a bit precious here Morgan.

Morgan with all due respect, I will use comparisons in my threads as I see fit.

We are here to debate issues not crit each other on who we should compare and why, that is the perogative of each poster. You do have the right to dispute and disprove any opinion or fact another poster provides though.

biltong, I was just trying to advise you. Heed Morg's advice because unusually on this occassion, it is free of charge .

Morgannwg wrote:biltong, I was just trying to advise you. Heed Morg's advice because unusually on this occassion, it is free of charge .

Did you just refer to yourself in the third person?

George, you really haven't been paying much attention to this site since the 6 Nations opening round have you?

Can we get back on topic please. So bil mentioned Wales as a comparison. So what? He compared Scotland to a better team. Big deal.

This year is going to be very important for Scotland as the WC seedings will be determined after the autumn internationals. We need to climb 3 places to make it into the top 8 and secure that 2nd seed that we missed out on last time. We have a heap of young guys coming through the ranks that I think are ready to make the step up to international level. There are a few that’ll move on after the 6N. The future of Scottish rugby looks bright for the first time in ages. We’ve had times where we’ve been excited about a player here or there but now we have the likes of Welsh, Harley, Scott, Leonard, Bennet, Visser, Samson coming through at club level and teetering on the edge of the international scene. Not to mention the youngsters who have already made an impact. We seem to have been in a transition period for years now, and I can finally see an end to it.

Scot Abroad wrote:Can we get back on topic please. So bil mentioned Wales as a restricted comparison. So therefore a poor comparison. He compared Scotland to a better team. Big deal.

I corrected that for you.

Morgan what is your issue with the comparison?

Morgannwg wrote:

Scot Abroad wrote:Can we get back on topic please. So bil mentioned Wales as a restricted comparison. So therefore a poor comparison. He compared Scotland to a better team. Big deal.

I corrected that for you.

Mate you need to let it go, no comparison is going to be 100% acceptable to either party. This is a thread about Scotland and there is no need for you to pull it off topic so much.

Aii, it is unimportant. But not to me. Biltong is prone to some pro-scot bias and anti-welsh bias on the odd occassion, such as when the two face each other, right Bil?

Anyway there has actually been some good discussion. I'll leave it now. I am certain the thread will be back to full flow in a few hours. And I only just noticed you have turned blue Biltongbek, so congratulations on your promotion. The blue suits you better than dark green...