Has Scotland's poor game vs England ruined their Lions hopes?

Reading through all the online/newspaper articles at work this morning I couldn't help but notice Stuart Hogg was the only Scot in every pundit/writers Lions starting XV. One Pundit even had Kearney instead of Hogg and no Scot's at all (No disrespect to Kearney he is a brilliant player).

Throughout the tournament there were several Lions XV with 2 or 3 Scots starting but since Scotland's poor showing at Twickenham it feels like their 3 wins and close loss to France away count for nothing.

Has nothing changed?

Thoughts?

I suspect that the answer to your question is yes, which would be neither fair nor proportionate, but them's the breaks, sadly.

Think the Twickenham disaster will have put a line through the hopes of Dunbar and Russell, put into question those of the Gray brothers and Watson, all of whom would have been strong possibilities for the tour. I imagine that Jonny Gray will still go and would also think that Seymour and Hogg have done more than enough to get on the plane, of course. I think that Huw Jones and Watson would be particularly unlucky to get the cold shoulder because of one game. With Russell it's slightly different - had he not also endured a bit of a 'mare against France, I think that Twickers might have been written off as a bad day at the office. 3 excellent days and 2 very bad ones may be looked on as inconsistency and a luxury that can't be afforded in New Zealand.

Nothings changed.

Hogg is the only scot who is clearly better than other candidates in their position.

J Gray for example - a fantastic player ( although not at his best the last couple of weeks) but against a lot of good locks with nothing much to choose between them. The scots players in contention also tend to be younger and less experienced than their rivals from other countries

The other factor is the way the scots play is not the way Gatland likes to play - so tactically they won't suit either. Russell would be in this category

I think Hogg will make the test team and a few others will be on the plane but I don't think we will get many at all and perhaps less than the results would suggest

bsando wrote:Reading through all the online/newspaper articles at work this morning I couldn't help but notice Stuart Hogg was the only Scot in every pundit/writers Lions starting XV. One Pundit even had Kearney instead of Hogg and no Scot's at all (No disrespect to Kearney he is a brilliant player).

Throughout the tournament there were several Lions XV with 2 or 3 Scots starting but since Scotland's poor showing at Twickenham it feels like their 3 wins and close loss to France away count for nothing.

Has nothing changed?

Thoughts?

It's a depressing state of affairs that players who have played well for Scotland have now been cast aside because of one poor game.

Ireland have had 2 poor games against Scotland and Wales.
Wales have had 3 poor games against Italy, Scotland and France.
England have had 2 poor games against Ireland and Italy.

The fact that we have had one poor game (and sadly conceded a horrendous ammount of points) has damaged our reputation considerably. It's not fair but thats the way this fickle lions selection policy seems to work. Gatland's selection policy is even worse!

What really boils my p!ss is he was sat there at Murrayfield looking all biscuit ersed while we did a number on both Ireland and Wales. Personally to travel I'd select (from the Scottish camp)

R Gray, J Gray, Watson, Russell, Seymour and Hogg. I know the lock and backrow positions are going to be hotly contested but have just one look at that schedule. You are gonna need a squad of 40+ IMO.

I think Wales/Ireland/Scotland should provide an equal split, as befitting their performances in this 6N. England should provide the bulk of the team.

I am grateful that some of the Scottish contingent have a chance to stake their claim again in that highly anticipated clash with the Saracens. Some key matchups will be played out in that game. Same as the Wasps vs Leinster and Munster vs Toulouse games.

To an extent yes, but there are a few individuals who should tour regardless. Watson and Hogg spring to mind as cert's.

Watson won't go. too many good back rows around many of whom are Gatlands favourites and also not the sort of player Gatland likes - he is too small for a gatland back!

Laidlaw would make a good dirttracker capain

It's not going to be easy to pick as you don't know what is going on in gatland's mind!

Players that should go:
Hogg, Seymour, Watson, Gray (either of)

But I've seen pundits picking halfpenny at 15! I mean WTF???

tigertattie wrote:It's not going to be easy to pick as you don't know what is going on in gatland's mind!

Players that should go:
Hogg, Seymour, Watson, Gray (either of)

But I've seen pundits picking halfpenny at 15! I mean WTF???

Don't get me started on that, he has been absolutely beans all tournament. Dropping high balls, coughing up possesion, being turned over. His worst 6N by a massive distance.

I like Halfpenny, he is a good player, but if he is Selected on the back of what Gatland thinks he can do and he ignores what players are currently doing, he might as well go all SCW and pick his welsh 6N champs from a couple of years ago.

TJ wrote:
The other factor is the way the scots play is not the way Gatland likes to play - so tactically they won't suit either.  Russell would be in this category

Change the record Tee. If Scottish players can't adapt to different styles of play then they're really poor players.

What really depressed me was the news that Graham Rowntree had been appointed to the Lions coaching staff.

The 'selection scene' in the last Lions DVD sticks in the memory, with Gatland suggesting various props and bringing up Ryan Grant, to which Rowntree simply says "No." in a particularly pr!ckish, uninterested manner. There's a long, awkward silence before Gatland quietly says "Umm... OK."

The refusal to bring Grant off the bench when Vunipola was practically on oxygen was a real mystery until I saw Rowntree's attitude.

I really hope I'm wrong, but I fear we'll see a pigheaded refusal to look at players not already on the coaches' radar.

What I think is deserved - from a year of good performances - including only losing to Australia by a point (where some teams who I expect will get more, lost to)

Hogg, Seymour, Jones, Gray (either of)

with a possibility of Maitland (who Gatland likes)

Injuries have done them in group (who I think had a chance to travel, but will now not)

Nel and Strauss

Outside chances (Who may have a chance, but not 100% even in my mind)

laidlaw and Russel



If Halfpenny goes, then it will say a millions things about the bias of the coach

And I agree - the sour face when Scotland beat ' Gatlands boys' also tells a tale

TJ wrote:Watson won't go.  too many good back rows around many of whom are Gatlands favourites and also not the sort of player Gatland likes - he is too small for a gatland back!

Laidlaw would make a good dirttracker capain

If Tips isn't too small then Watson isn't either. Back-row is competitive though.

R!skysports wrote:

If Halfpenny goes, then it will say a millions things about the bias of the coach

Good back-3 players that are also high rate goal-kickers are good tourists so it is likely he'll go. He shouldn't be in the test 23 on current form though.

In Gatland's defence, all comments I've read from him this time round vs last time have been noticeably more positive. He was impressed with Scotland's training session pre England, thought Russell played well vs France!?! I think he will pick more Scot's this time round, I really do.

I was just surprised to see so many pundits starting Lions XV with large ratios of England (deservedly), Ireland and Wales and only Hogg. My only thought is, Scotland's pumping by England where the Scottish defence was obliterated.

mikey_dragon wrote:

TJ wrote:
The other factor is the way the scots play is not the way Gatland likes to play - so tactically they won't suit either.  Russell would be in this category

Change the record Tee. If Scottish players can't adapt to different styles of play then they're really poor players.

Or if the coach can't adapt his tactics to the best players?  ;-)

I don't think Russell is the man for the lions anyway for a variety of reasons

mikey_dragon wrote:

If Tips isn't too small then Watson isn't either. Back-row is competitive though.

good point. Watson is an inch shorter and 4 lb heavier according to espn.

I wouldn't advocate taking someone as a potential dirt-tracker captain. If you don't have a genuine test hope you shouldn't be out there, it's one mistake Woodward made in 2005 with regards to having a midweek team and a test team.

I'd take Jonny Gray, Huw Jones, Tommy Seymour and Stuart Hogg. A couple of others could still break into the squad and a few would probably make the unofficial reserve list as cover for injuries.

I think there is a difference saying everyone had at least one bad game when you consider how bad Scotland were to lose by 40 points. If England can do that to that set of players, what could the All Blacks do?

TJ wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

TJ wrote:
The other factor is the way the scots play is not the way Gatland likes to play - so tactically they won't suit either.  Russell would be in this category

Change the record Tee. If Scottish players can't adapt to different styles of play then they're really poor players.

Or if the coach can't adapt his tactics to the best players?  ;-)

I don't think Russell is the man for the lions anyway for a variety of reasons

Perhaps more of a sign of a stubborn coach, rather than a poor one... With his successful coaching career I can see why he likes to stick to his ways though.

Russell has a chance at getting the third fly-half spot after Farrell and Sexton.

robbo277 wrote:I wouldn't advocate taking someone as a potential dirt-tracker captain. If you don't have a genuine test hope you shouldn't be out there, it's one mistake Woodward made in 2005 with regards to having a midweek team and a test team.

I'd take Jonny Gray, Huw Jones, Tommy Seymour and Stuart Hogg. A couple of others could still break into the squad and a few would probably make the unofficial reserve list as cover for injuries.

I think there is a difference saying everyone had at least one bad game when you consider how bad Scotland were to lose by 40 points. If England can do that to that set of players, what could the All Blacks do?

In fairness though. If any team had to play 2 x No 9 (from 20 mins) and ALSO 2 x No 10 in a game, the score will always be high

We would have lost - but I think that was a freak result in terms of score -

R!skysports wrote:

robbo277 wrote:I wouldn't advocate taking someone as a potential dirt-tracker captain. If you don't have a genuine test hope you shouldn't be out there, it's one mistake Woodward made in 2005 with regards to having a midweek team and a test team.

I'd take Jonny Gray, Huw Jones, Tommy Seymour and Stuart Hogg. A couple of others could still break into the squad and a few would probably make the unofficial reserve list as cover for injuries.

I think there is a difference saying everyone had at least one bad game when you consider how bad Scotland were to lose by 40 points. If England can do that to that set of players, what could the All Blacks do?

In fairness though. If any team had to play 2 x No 9 (from 20 mins) and ALSO 2 x No 10 in a game, the score will always be high

We would have lost - but I think that was a freak result in terms of score -

I take your point, but in the World Cup Wales beat us with 2x 9s, 2x 10s and Alex Cuthbert on the pitch, albeit the changes were all around the 60 minute mark.

robbo277 wrote:
I take your point, but in the World Cup Wales beat us with 2x 9s, 2x 10s and Alex Cuthbert on the pitch, albeit the changes were all around the 60 minute mark.

That puts it into perspective .

No Scotland are the second best team of the 4 Home nations on merit.  I think Wales deserve to suffer from their poor tournament.  It would be very unfair on Scotland if Wales took almost their full squad and Scotland were once again left with little representation.  

Alun Wyn Jones, Warburton, Tipuric, Webb, Halfpenny, Liam Williams and George North will probably be all Wales deserve to give to the Lions this time around.  Even then the latter two players will be touch and go in my opinion.  

North maybe better of being left at home and have the summer off as he doesn't look interested half the time.  I think 69 caps for Wales, 3 for the Lions at the age of 24 means he might be taking it all a bit for granted at the moment.  

As for Scotland quite a few pf their players deserve a chance for the Lions, so hopefully Gatland treats them fairly and they get to go on the tour.  I really think if Gatland does what Graham Henry did many years ago and pick Welsh players for the sake of it, it will lead to disunity, resentment and problems before the tour  has even started.

I think were basically looking at a mix of English and Scottish front 5. Certainly Welsh flankers and Stander at number 8. Webb is out in front at scrum half. Sexton or Ford at fly half. Hogg is nailed on for full back, though Halfpenny will probably be right wing because of his goal kicking prowess. So were looking for one wing from the rest. Centers are a muddle, Joseph will probably take one spot.

the England result was the result of a perfect storm of circumstances that all went against Scotland. without that we would have been beaten anyway I believe - but would have been comnpetative

Shifty - loopy liam had a good series I thought and would merit a place on the plane

TJ wrote:Shifty - loopy liam had a good series I thought and would merit a place on the plane

He's between Halfpenny and North on the list.

Shifty wrote:No Scotland are the second best team of the 4 Home nations on merit.  I think Wales deserve to suffer from their poor tournament.  It would be very unfair on Scotland if Wales took almost their full squad and Scotland were once again left with little representation.  

Alun Wyn Jones, Warburton, Tipuric, Webb, Halfpenny, Liam Williams and George North will probably be all Wales deserve to give to the Lions this time around.  Even then the latter two players will be touch and go in my opinion.  

North maybe better of being left at home and have the summer off as he doesn't look interested half the time.  I think 69 caps for Wales, 3 for the Lions at the age of 24 means he might be taking it all a bit for granted at the moment.  

As for Scotland quite a few pf their players deserve a chance for the Lions, so hopefully Gatland treats them fairly and they get to go on the tour.  I really think if Gatland does what Graham Henry did many years ago and pick Welsh players for the sake of it, it will lead to disunity, resentment and problems before the tour  has even started.

I think were basically looking at a mix of English and Scottish front 5.  Certainly Welsh flankers and Stander at number 8.  Webb is out in front at scrum half.  Sexton or Ford at fly half.  Hogg is nailed on for full back, though Halfpenny will probably be right wing because of his goal kicking prowess.  So were looking for one wing from the rest.  Centers are a muddle, Joseph will probably take one spot.  

I think that might be true if Six Nations form was the most important factor in selection. But I think Gatland will lean on proven quality over Six Nations form, because there's no guarantee someone who played well in March will play well in June.

Wales obviously have a lot of guys who went on the last tour and contributed strongly to the win. England obviously had the long winning run and Ireland beat the All Blacks in the Autumn. I think all three achievements are better than Scotland's 4th place in the Six Nations.

I think the tour might just be a year too early for some of Scotland's players. If they had a chance to back some of these performances up over the next 12 months then you could see a lot more going.

A number of the Glasgow players could force their way in if they can put in big performances in the European knock-out games, which will be close to test intensity. But there aren't that many with their seats booked already.

robbo277 wrote:

Shifty wrote:No Scotland are the second best team of the 4 Home nations on merit.  I think Wales deserve to suffer from their poor tournament.  It would be very unfair on Scotland if Wales took almost their full squad and Scotland were once again left with little representation.  

Alun Wyn Jones, Warburton, Tipuric, Webb, Halfpenny, Liam Williams and George North will probably be all Wales deserve to give to the Lions this time around.  Even then the latter two players will be touch and go in my opinion.  

North maybe better of being left at home and have the summer off as he doesn't look interested half the time.  I think 69 caps for Wales, 3 for the Lions at the age of 24 means he might be taking it all a bit for granted at the moment.  

As for Scotland quite a few pf their players deserve a chance for the Lions, so hopefully Gatland treats them fairly and they get to go on the tour.  I really think if Gatland does what Graham Henry did many years ago and pick Welsh players for the sake of it, it will lead to disunity, resentment and problems before the tour  has even started.

I think were basically looking at a mix of English and Scottish front 5.  Certainly Welsh flankers and Stander at number 8.  Webb is out in front at scrum half.  Sexton or Ford at fly half.  Hogg is nailed on for full back, though Halfpenny will probably be right wing because of his goal kicking prowess.  So were looking for one wing from the rest.  Centers are a muddle, Joseph will probably take one spot.  

I think that might be true if Six Nations form was the most important factor in selection. But I think Gatland will lean on proven quality over Six Nations form, because there's no guarantee someone who played well in March will play well in June.

Wales obviously have a lot of guys who went on the last tour and contributed strongly to the win. England obviously had the long winning run and Ireland beat the All Blacks in the Autumn. I think all three achievements are better than Scotland's 4th place in the Six Nations.

I think the tour might just be a year too early for some of Scotland's players. If they had a chance to back some of these performances up over the next 12 months then you could see a lot more going.

A number of the Glasgow players could force their way in if they can put in big performances in the European knock-out games, which will be close to test intensity. But there aren't that many with their seats booked already.

If you look back 12 months, that is what they have done. They have been playing well for 12 months now - although it is usually ignored in the press :-)

robbo277 wrote:I think that might be true if Six Nations form was the most important factor in selection. But I think Gatland will lean on proven quality over Six Nations form, because there's no guarantee someone who played well in March will play well in June.

Wales obviously have a lot of guys who went on the last tour and contributed strongly to the win. England obviously had the long winning run and Ireland beat the All Blacks in the Autumn. I think all three achievements are better than Scotland's 4th place in the Six Nations.

I think the tour might just be a year too early for some of Scotland's players. If they had a chance to back some of these performances up over the next 12 months then you could see a lot more going.

A number of the Glasgow players could force their way in if they can put in big performances in the European knock-out games, which will be close to test intensity. But there aren't that many with their seats booked already.

Yes Wales do, but lets be honest if we find the likes of Sampson Lee, Ken Owens, Jonathan Davies and Toby Faletau start sneaking in to the squad, then it's likely there will be calls of bias in Gatland's selection. Picking on previous reputation always fails look at Woodward in 2005.

robbo277 wrote:

Shifty wrote:No Scotland are the second best team of the 4 Home nations on merit.  I think Wales deserve to suffer from their poor tournament.  It would be very unfair on Scotland if Wales took almost their full squad and Scotland were once again left with little representation.  

Alun Wyn Jones, Warburton, Tipuric, Webb, Halfpenny, Liam Williams and George North will probably be all Wales deserve to give to the Lions this time around.  Even then the latter two players will be touch and go in my opinion.  

North maybe better of being left at home and have the summer off as he doesn't look interested half the time.  I think 69 caps for Wales, 3 for the Lions at the age of 24 means he might be taking it all a bit for granted at the moment.  

As for Scotland quite a few pf their players deserve a chance for the Lions, so hopefully Gatland treats them fairly and they get to go on the tour.  I really think if Gatland does what Graham Henry did many years ago and pick Welsh players for the sake of it, it will lead to disunity, resentment and problems before the tour  has even started.

I think were basically looking at a mix of English and Scottish front 5.  Certainly Welsh flankers and Stander at number 8.  Webb is out in front at scrum half.  Sexton or Ford at fly half.  Hogg is nailed on for full back, though Halfpenny will probably be right wing because of his goal kicking prowess.  So were looking for one wing from the rest.  Centers are a muddle, Joseph will probably take one spot.  

I think that might be true if Six Nations form was the most important factor in selection. But I think Gatland will lean on proven quality over Six Nations form, because there's no guarantee someone who played well in March will play well in June.

Wales obviously have a lot of guys who went on the last tour and contributed strongly to the win. England obviously had the long winning run and Ireland beat the All Blacks in the Autumn. I think all three achievements are better than Scotland's 4th place in the Six Nations.

I think the tour might just be a year too early for some of Scotland's players. If they had a chance to back some of these performances up over the next 12 months then you could see a lot more going.

A number of the Glasgow players could force their way in if they can put in big performances in the European knock-out games, which will be close to test intensity. But there aren't that many with their seats booked already.

You have to pick the players who are performing well, otherwise it's 2005 all over again. Scotland have had their best season of the professional era. To ignore that and pick your favourites will really damage the Lions reputation in my eyes.

I hope/think Gatland is better than that, although his face at Murrayfield when his boys were being dismantled my Scotland's lethal, accurate and clinical attack spoke volumes and could be used to support either viewpoint...

R!skysports wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Shifty wrote:No Scotland are the second best team of the 4 Home nations on merit.  I think Wales deserve to suffer from their poor tournament.  It would be very unfair on Scotland if Wales took almost their full squad and Scotland were once again left with little representation.  

Alun Wyn Jones, Warburton, Tipuric, Webb, Halfpenny, Liam Williams and George North will probably be all Wales deserve to give to the Lions this time around.  Even then the latter two players will be touch and go in my opinion.  

North maybe better of being left at home and have the summer off as he doesn't look interested half the time.  I think 69 caps for Wales, 3 for the Lions at the age of 24 means he might be taking it all a bit for granted at the moment.  

As for Scotland quite a few pf their players deserve a chance for the Lions, so hopefully Gatland treats them fairly and they get to go on the tour.  I really think if Gatland does what Graham Henry did many years ago and pick Welsh players for the sake of it, it will lead to disunity, resentment and problems before the tour  has even started.

I think were basically looking at a mix of English and Scottish front 5.  Certainly Welsh flankers and Stander at number 8.  Webb is out in front at scrum half.  Sexton or Ford at fly half.  Hogg is nailed on for full back, though Halfpenny will probably be right wing because of his goal kicking prowess.  So were looking for one wing from the rest.  Centers are a muddle, Joseph will probably take one spot.  

I think that might be true if Six Nations form was the most important factor in selection. But I think Gatland will lean on proven quality over Six Nations form, because there's no guarantee someone who played well in March will play well in June.

Wales obviously have a lot of guys who went on the last tour and contributed strongly to the win. England obviously had the long winning run and Ireland beat the All Blacks in the Autumn. I think all three achievements are better than Scotland's 4th place in the Six Nations.

I think the tour might just be a year too early for some of Scotland's players. If they had a chance to back some of these performances up over the next 12 months then you could see a lot more going.

A number of the Glasgow players could force their way in if they can put in big performances in the European knock-out games, which will be close to test intensity. But there aren't that many with their seats booked already.

If you look back 12 months, that is what they have done. They have been playing well for 12 months now - although it is usually ignored in the press :-)

In 2016, Scotland beat France (H), Italy (A), Japan (A) x2, Georgia (H), Argentina (H). Scotland are playing better and are good to watch, but before this tournament they didn't have many big wins.

Winning their 3 home games was a great effort, but they had a huge loss against England in there, haven't done much away and have lost a couple of close ones against Australia.

I think there's some exciting talent but I don't think the players are proven enough at the very top level. And I think Gatland is less likely to gamble on form as opposed to players who have that experience in winning big games.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Scotland have had their best season of the professional era. To ignore that and pick your favourites will really damage the Lions reputation in my eyes.

Really? How does this season stack up next to the one where you finished third in the 6N?

mikey_dragon wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Scotland have had their best season of the professional era. To ignore that and pick your favourites will really damage the Lions reputation in my eyes.

Really? How does this season stack up next to the one where you finished third in the 6N?

Far better, you only have to look at what our backline have been able to do. 14 tries as opposed to the 4 tries we scored when we finished 3rd and relied on solid kicking.

We have also won 3 games in the tournament, and it's not just that figure that's important it was the nature of the game and in 2 cases the quality of the opposition.

Finally we nilled italy, we haven't nilled a team since Gavin Hastings was at full back. So yeah this is the best performance of the professional era IMO.

mikey_dragon wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Scotland have had their best season of the professional era. To ignore that and pick your favourites will really damage the Lions reputation in my eyes.

Really? How does this season stack up next to the one where you finished third in the 6N?

That happened in 2002, 2006 and 2013, so let's deal with each in turn.

In 2001 Scotland came third, but only won two matches in the Six Nations. In the preceding autumn tests, Scotland thrashed USA and lost by 21 points to Australia.

In 2006 Scotland came third and won three matches; in the preceding autumn Scotland beat Samoa but lost to Argentina by 4 and New Zealand by 19.

In 2013 Scotland came third, but only won two matches; in the preceding autumn Scotland lost to Tonga, South Africa (by 11) and New Zealand by 29.

So compared to that, 2016-17 looks pretty good! Scotland came fourth but beat Wales, Ireland and Italy, and pushed France very close in Paris. In the autumn Scotland thrashed Georgia, beat Argentina and lost to Australia by a single point. Quite clearly our best season since at least 1999. It was the closeness of the other teams (England beating Wales, who beat Ireland, who beat England, for example) and the loss at Twickenham that damaged Scotland's standing in the table.

Ah well that clears it up then. It's been a good season for Scotland and I kinda forgot that they're scoring more tries this season which IMO is an important factor. Ending a loss-drought against Wales was also pretty good.

IanBru wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Scotland have had their best season of the professional era. To ignore that and pick your favourites will really damage the Lions reputation in my eyes.

Really? How does this season stack up next to the one where you finished third in the 6N?

That happened in 2002, 2006 and 2013, so let's deal with each in turn.

In 2001 Scotland came third, but only won two matches in the Six Nations. In the preceding autumn tests, Scotland thrashed USA and lost by 21 points to Australia.

In 2006 Scotland came third and won three matches; in the preceding autumn Scotland beat Samoa but lost to Argentina by 4 and New Zealand by 19.

In 2013 Scotland came third, but only won two matches; in the preceding autumn Scotland lost to Tonga, South Africa (by 11) and New Zealand by 29.

So compared to that, 2016-17 looks pretty good! Scotland came fourth but beat Wales, Ireland and Italy, and pushed France very close in Paris. In the autumn Scotland thrashed Georgia, beat Argentina and lost to Australia by a single point. Quite clearly our best season since at least 1999. It was the closeness of the other teams (England beating Wales, who beat Ireland, who beat England, for example) and the loss at Twickenham that damaged Scotland's standing in the table.

And I got a new TV to watch the games - best season EVER

mikey_dragon wrote:Ah well that clears it up then. It's been a good season for Scotland and I kinda forgot that they're scoring more tries this season which IMO is an important factor. Ending a loss-drought against Wales was also pretty good.

But how did it happen? we don't lose to Scotland....
We don't lose to France either...
And we lost to England in Cardiff...

Then some how we beat Ireland in Cardiff?

Shifty - some odd results in a paper rock scissors sort of way

Shifty wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Ah well that clears it up then. It's been a good season for Scotland and I kinda forgot that they're scoring more tries this season which IMO is an important factor. Ending a loss-drought against Wales was also pretty good.

But how did it happen? we don't lose to Scotland....
We don't lose to France either...
And we lost to England in Cardiff...

Then some how we beat Ireland in Cardiff?  

Two words for you. Howley McBryde. If we had somehow finished second/third then it wouldn't be a reality check. Hopefully a deserved fifth place finish is just that.

It's been a funny old tournament as I've already said Scotland convincingly beat Wales who convincingly beat Ireland who convincingly beat England who convincingly beat Scotland.

No Lions selection team has been perfect, they have all played well in patches and worse in others. It should be a pretty balanced selection.

A balanced selection across 3 of the teams whilst England should provide around 15 players.

After years of Scotland's individual players (regardless of their ability) being tarred by the teams performance

I expect no Welsh to tour

R!skysports wrote:After years of Scotland's individual players (regardless of their ability) being tarred by the teams performance

I expect no Welsh to tour

I think I'd rather have the majority with the Scotland team touring Oz.  one thing we know for sure if we have very little depth.  take out Hogg, Gray etc and we're going to struggle.

Sure it's nice for the players to go and for their sake I hope quite a few make it, but I won't be gutted if we end up with a strong squad for Toonie to take to Oz.

R!skysports wrote:After years of Scotland's individual players (regardless of their ability) being tarred by the teams performance

I expect no Welsh to tour

It would be in team Wales' best interests for them not to tour. It would be in the Lions best interests for Howley not to tour...

I think it's important to come back to this thread because I think yes.

That one game vs England I feel will have an important factor on Lions selection.

Scotland still has a job to do promoting their players.

Getting smashed by England doesn't help. England are a good side but over 60 points is something that you don't even see often at club level let alone international level.

As harsh as it sounds - yes I think it deserves to hurt Scotland's chances. No side should be losing by that amount even with a bad day at the office.

Not even as if Scotland were down to 14 or 13 men as a mitigating circumstances.

When England had bad games in the 6 nations they either won or narrowly lost away by 4 points.


ruggerradge sorry but a 4 point loss isn't comparable to a 40 point one.

For balance, look at it the other way. Would you really advocate significantly more Scots on tour because of 2 good results? I personally think this 6N has come too late for Scotland in the Lions cycle.

This is not an attempt to denigrate Scotlands performances this 6N so please don't take it as such. I do not like the notion that you pick a Lions squad based on form over 1 tournament. The first test is months after that tournament ends. There's plenty of time for form to be rediscovered or evaporate. I would always favour picking a squad that is full of players that have demonstrated time and time again that they are capable of producing at the highest level. Once you've picked your squad, what they do on tour will dictate the XV. For that reason I also think it's pointless picking a test XV now, who knows what will happen on tour!

To take it back to Scotland, they might look at one loss and feel hard done by if they are not represented by more than 1 or 2 players. But if you look over a wider timeframe (which I think the coaches will) then I don't think they could really feel hard done by.

cascough I agree and that comes back to my point about promoting players.

Scotland haven't done as much of that. Wales have the numerous players who have been around for years. Ditto Ireland.

England have been building credibility after a poor RWC with the 18 game unbeaten run till Ireland ended it.

Hogg has been receiving much fanfare and praise, J.Gray some but the other Scotland players in general have been less high profile.

Beating Australia instead of losing would have helped - both occasions.

Wales are lower in the rankings than Scotland but still benefit from the successful tour to Australia and their previous successes in the 6 nations.

If Scotland can back up this year's 6 nations with another good 6 nations then there will be more respect.

You could say they are similar to Glasgow, could say both had a breakthrough season - 1st quarter final for Glasgow but work to be done.

Scotland also beat Argentina (okay a tired Argentina), lost narrowly to Australia (okay at home) and beat Japan twice away.

I don't think it's just 6 Nations results, I think there has been a general improvement.

beshocked wrote:cascough I agree and that comes back to my point about promoting players.

Scotland haven't done as much of that.

Maybe they could pay for advertising space on Itoje's shirt?

IanBru wrote:What really depressed me was the news that Graham Rowntree had been appointed to the Lions coaching staff.

The 'selection scene' in the last Lions DVD sticks in the memory, with Gatland suggesting various props and bringing up Ryan Grant, to which Rowntree simply says "No." in a particularly pr!ckish, uninterested manner. There's a long, awkward silence before Gatland quietly says "Umm... OK."

The refusal to bring Grant off the bench when Vunipola was practically on oxygen was a real mystery until I saw Rowntree's attitude.

I really hope I'm wrong, but I fear we'll see a pigheaded refusal to look at players not already on the coaches' radar.

I recall that scene as well. Showing those selection meetings on DvD is compelling viewing but has severe limitations. They must heavily edit those scenes and I suspect the coaches are told not to be specific about players' weaknesses or be too damning in their assessment. In fact I suspect there's probably a "for show" meeting and then a no holds barred mud slinging fest immediately afterwards.

Still, to go on such a tour and have a forwards coach with serious reservations as to your abilities is/was a rather pointless exercise. Grant's career has fallen away rapidly, but back then he was playing well and on good form. It would have been nice to hear a reasoned explanation, particularly with Mako's technique being beyond hopeless back then.