The Official Scottish Rugby Thread

[Begbie]

IrnDu now has the record for most defenders beaten in a single tournament with 31. Breaking BOD's record of 30. Not bad, not bad at all.

Adopt whiney English/Welsh/Irish/Fat Kiwi accent “but he missed a tackle so not good enough for the lions”

Haha likewise for Watson because he was caught static and dragged back by 3 french forwards.

[Tichtheid]

IrnDu now has the record for most defenders beaten in a single tournament with 31. Breaking BOD's record of 30. Not bad, not bad at all.

Adopt whiney English/Welsh/Irish/Fat Kiwi accent “but he missed a tackle so not good enough for the lions”

Haha likewise for Watson because he was caught static and dragged back by 3 french forwards.

Sutherland due to breakable collarbones?

[Slick]

IrnDu now has the record for most defenders beaten in a single tournament with 31. Breaking BOD's record of 30. Not bad, not bad at all.

Adopt whiney English/Welsh/Irish/Fat Kiwi accent “but he missed a tackle so not good enough for the lions”

Haha likewise for Watson because he was caught static and dragged back by 3 french forwards.

I actually saw that exact argument on The Times comments this morning

[KingBlairhorn]

That was very enjoyable, at least it is in retrospect. I’m not sure I enjoyed it during the game! As someone else mentioned, we didn’t dominate them in the same way as we did England, but we found a way to win and it was through skill and determination, not sheer luck.

On Finn for the Lions, I’ve seen loads of people saying he had an average tournament, but to be honest I wonder if he had a ‘Gatland’ tournament. He kicked exceptionally well tactically in both twickenham and SDF, he was excellent in defence and he didn’t throw any high risk speculative passes. That is Gatland to a tee; structured, organised, solid. I think his tournament might have improved his chances more than one where he threw a half-dozen Hollywood passes but was also intercepted a couple of times.

[Biffer]

That was very enjoyable, at least it is in retrospect. I’m not sure I enjoyed it during the game! As someone else mentioned, we didn’t dominate them in the same way as we did England, but we found a way to win and it was through skill and determination, not sheer luck.

On Finn for the Lions, I’ve seen loads of people saying he had an average tournament, but to be honest I wonder if he had a ‘Gatland’ tournament. He kicked exceptionally well tactically in both twickenham and SDF, he was excellent in defence and he didn’t throw any high risk speculative passes. That is Gatland to a tee; structured, organised, solid. I think his tournament might have improved his chances more than one where he threw a half-dozen Hollywood passes but was also intercepted a couple of times.

It’s one of the things that never seems to be mentioned about Finn. His defence is really good. Unlike say Ford and Sexbunny, you don’t need to shuffle your defensive line to hide him. It’s also incredible to me that he’s the one with the red card given the cheap shots Farrell has got away with in the past.

[Slick]

That was very enjoyable, at least it is in retrospect. I’m not sure I enjoyed it during the game! As someone else mentioned, we didn’t dominate them in the same way as we did England, but we found a way to win and it was through skill and determination, not sheer luck.

On Finn for the Lions, I’ve seen loads of people saying he had an average tournament, but to be honest I wonder if he had a ‘Gatland’ tournament. He kicked exceptionally well tactically in both twickenham and SDF, he was excellent in defence and he didn’t throw any high risk speculative passes. That is Gatland to a tee; structured, organised, solid. I think his tournament might have improved his chances more than one where he threw a half-dozen Hollywood passes but was also intercepted a couple of times.

It’s one of the things that never seems to be mentioned about Finn. His defence is really good. Unlike say Ford and Sexbunny, you don’t need to shuffle your defensive line to hide him. It’s also incredible to me that he’s the one with the red card given the cheap shots Farrell has got away with in the past.

Yes, really good points.

I thought the red was very harsh, he actually connected first with his hand and his forearm followed. But if you do that you open yourself up so not complaining too loudly.

The Frenchie did go down like a sack of shit though

[Yr Alban]

Adopt whiney English/Welsh/Irish/Fat Kiwi accent “but he missed a tackle so not good enough for the lions”

Haha likewise for Watson because he was caught static and dragged back by 3 french forwards.

I actually saw that exact argument on The Times comments this morning

I saw a tweet saying ‘great player but not quite top end enough where it matters’ because he ‘didn’t dominate any of his collisions’. I replied that he must have been watching a different player. (Apparently he finished 7th in the list for dominant collisions, and a lot higher up for a number of other things).

[Yr Alban]

That was very enjoyable, at least it is in retrospect. I’m not sure I enjoyed it during the game! As someone else mentioned, we didn’t dominate them in the same way as we did England, but we found a way to win and it was through skill and determination, not sheer luck.

On Finn for the Lions, I’ve seen loads of people saying he had an average tournament, but to be honest I wonder if he had a ‘Gatland’ tournament. He kicked exceptionally well tactically in both twickenham and SDF, he was excellent in defence and he didn’t throw any high risk speculative passes. That is Gatland to a tee; structured, organised, solid. I think his tournament might have improved his chances more than one where he threw a half-dozen Hollywood passes but was also intercepted a couple of times.

It’s one of the things that never seems to be mentioned about Finn. His defence is really good. Unlike say Ford and Sexbunny, you don’t need to shuffle your defensive line to hide him. It’s also incredible to me that he’s the one with the red card given the cheap shots Farrell has got away with in the past.

Yes, really good points.

I thought the red was very harsh, he actually connected first with his hand and his forearm followed. But if you do that you open yourself up so not complaining too loudly.

The Frenchie did go down like a sack of shit though

I also thought that the initial contact made was with the upper chest.

The fact of the matter is that Zander’s red card was harsh, but we all said ‘what the hell was he thinking anyway’? In Finn’s case, the player came at him completely upright and he was simply trying to fend him off. It was entirely accidental. When you can now be red-carded for something that you didn’t even intend and wasn’t entirely your fault, there’s an issue.

[Yr Alban]

Haha likewise for Watson because he was caught static and dragged back by 3 french forwards.

I actually saw that exact argument on The Times comments this morning

I saw a tweet saying ‘great player but not quite top end enough where it matters’ because he ‘didn’t dominate any of his collisions’. I replied that he must have been watching a different player. (Apparently he finished 7th in the list for dominant collisions, and a lot higher up for a number of other things).

Does anyone have a link to Watson’s 6N stats and rankings? I know I’ve seen it somewhere. This guy on Twitter is really starting to annoy me, and I’d love to force feed him some reality.

[SaintK]

I actually saw that exact argument on The Times comments this morning

I saw a tweet saying ‘great player but not quite top end enough where it matters’ because he ‘didn’t dominate any of his collisions’. I replied that he must have been watching a different player. (Apparently he finished 7th in the list for dominant collisions, and a lot higher up for a number of other things).

Does anyone have a link to Watson’s 6N stats and rankings? I know I’ve seen it somewhere. This guy on Twitter is really starting to annoy me, and I’d love to force feed him some reality.

You might find something here
https://www.sixnationsrugby.com/statistics/

[JM2K6]

That was very enjoyable, at least it is in retrospect. I’m not sure I enjoyed it during the game! As someone else mentioned, we didn’t dominate them in the same way as we did England, but we found a way to win and it was through skill and determination, not sheer luck.

On Finn for the Lions, I’ve seen loads of people saying he had an average tournament, but to be honest I wonder if he had a ‘Gatland’ tournament. He kicked exceptionally well tactically in both twickenham and SDF, he was excellent in defence and he didn’t throw any high risk speculative passes. That is Gatland to a tee; structured, organised, solid. I think his tournament might have improved his chances more than one where he threw a half-dozen Hollywood passes but was also intercepted a couple of times.

It’s one of the things that never seems to be mentioned about Finn. His defence is really good. Unlike say Ford and Sexbunny, you don’t need to shuffle your defensive line to hide him. It’s also incredible to me that he’s the one with the red card given the cheap shots Farrell has got away with in the past.

E?? We don't hide Ford, we defend him at 10 and he makes his tackles.

vs
Italy (poor): 2/2
Wales: 6/0
Ireland: 4/0
France: 6/2

[Yr Alban]

I saw a tweet saying ‘great player but not quite top end enough where it matters’ because he ‘didn’t dominate any of his collisions’. I replied that he must have been watching a different player. (Apparently he finished 7th in the list for dominant collisions, and a lot higher up for a number of other things).

Does anyone have a link to Watson’s 6N stats and rankings? I know I’ve seen it somewhere. This guy on Twitter is really starting to annoy me, and I’d love to force feed him some reality.

You might find something here
https://www.sixnationsrugby.com/statistics/

Yeah, I went and looked it all up. Because I’m like a dog with a bone that way.

Watson played 386 minutes.
67 carries (2nd in 6N - Stander had 72)
321m made (4th placed forward)
14 tackles broken (top forward)
Made 55 tackles, missed 1 (98% completion rate, reckon this was best in 6N for anyone making >40)
5 dominant tackles (Curry best with 7, few guys on 6)
4 turnovers won
0 penalties conceded.

The guy who was arguing with me said Watson would be behind Curry and Underhill, probably Earl, with Botham an outside chance. Curry’s stats are nowhere near Watson’s apart from the dominant tackles. Underhill hasn’t played this 6N, and Earl and Botham have had cameos. Tipuric (who is bound to tour) is a tackle bot - he made 86 tackles with a similar completion rate - but his offensive stats are negligible.

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

[Yr Alban]

Does anyone have a link to Watson’s 6N stats and rankings? I know I’ve seen it somewhere. This guy on Twitter is really starting to annoy me, and I’d love to force feed him some reality.

You might find something here
https://www.sixnationsrugby.com/statistics/

Yeah, I went and looked it all up. Because I’m like a dog with a bone that way.

Watson played 386 minutes.
67 carries (2nd in 6N - Stander had 72)
321m made (4th placed forward)
14 tackles broken (top forward)
Made 55 tackles, missed 1 (98% completion rate, reckon this was best in 6N for anyone making >40)
5 dominant tackles (Curry best with 7, few guys on 6)
4 turnovers won
0 penalties conceded.

The guy who was arguing with me said Watson would be behind Curry and Underhill, probably Earl, with Botham an outside chance. Curry’s stats are nowhere near Watson’s apart from the dominant tackles. Underhill hasn’t played this 6N, and Earl and Botham have had cameos. Tipuric (who is bound to tour) is a tackle bot - he made 86 tackles with a similar completion rate - but his offensive stats are negligible.

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

Had to disengage from the Twitter convo. Predictably, the stats I was quoting were dismissed as meaningless, because Curry is ‘a far better player in every aspect’. Presumably every aspect apart from, well, all the ones that you can actually measure. Ah, the internet, where someone’s personal opinion outweighs any actual data.

[KingBlairhorn]

You might find something here
https://www.sixnationsrugby.com/statistics/

Yeah, I went and looked it all up. Because I’m like a dog with a bone that way.

Watson played 386 minutes.
67 carries (2nd in 6N - Stander had 72)
321m made (4th placed forward)
14 tackles broken (top forward)
Made 55 tackles, missed 1 (98% completion rate, reckon this was best in 6N for anyone making >40)
5 dominant tackles (Curry best with 7, few guys on 6)
4 turnovers won
0 penalties conceded.

The guy who was arguing with me said Watson would be behind Curry and Underhill, probably Earl, with Botham an outside chance. Curry’s stats are nowhere near Watson’s apart from the dominant tackles. Underhill hasn’t played this 6N, and Earl and Botham have had cameos. Tipuric (who is bound to tour) is a tackle bot - he made 86 tackles with a similar completion rate - but his offensive stats are negligible.

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

Had to disengage from the Twitter convo. Predictably, the stats I was quoting were dismissed as meaningless, because Curry is ‘a far better player in every aspect’. Presumably every aspect apart from, well, all the ones that you can actually measure. Ah, the internet, where someone’s personal opinion outweighs any actual data.

You’re probably debating a guy that watches 5 games a year, all England in the 6N. The quality of debate on Twitter is awful other than with ‘known’ accounts. There was an English guy arguing stats with OTOTM Kevin the other day ffs

[Big D]

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

I disagree. History has proven players earn the start when on tour. Watson has shown he deserves to tour.

Whether he earns a test start should be determined on how he performs on tour.

[JM2K6]

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

I disagree. History has proven players earn the start when on tour. Watson has shown he deserves to tour.

Whether he earns a test start should be determined on how he performs on tour.

Yes, agree with this. I think it's a little short sighted to write off curry's chances of starting based on the statistical head to head in this 6N.

[And 1 guest]

At least it should be a proper tour. Tom Smith would never have been considered in 97 before showing himself in the tour games.

I think a few are up for consideration. Starters are down to performance on tour.

[Slick]

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

I disagree. History has proven players earn the start when on tour. Watson has shown he deserves to tour.

Whether he earns a test start should be determined on how he performs on tour.

Wise words. Wise words, indeed

[Yr Alban]

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

I disagree. History has proven players earn the start when on tour. Watson has shown he deserves to tour.

Whether he earns a test start should be determined on how he performs on tour.

You’re right, of course. The trouble is that we all know Gatland picks his staring XV before the plane leaves!

I’d certainly agree in principle that the team should be picked according to who performs best on tour. I just don’t think it is any more.

[Slick]

I wish every night could be Scotland V France

[Tichtheid]

Grrrr, I can feel my party piece about Euan Murray could get an outing.

The short version is Victor Matfield was quoted in the press as saying they were delighted to see The Rev in the dirt tracker side on the Tuesday because they knew he wouldn't be playing in the first test, Murray had dismantled the Bok scrum at Murrayfield the previous November.

Murray had been doing the same on tour, taking apart the scrums put in front of him. He got injured in that dirt tracker game and had to go home, meanwhile Mtawarira gave Vickery, scrum coach Rowntree's mate, an absolute hiding in that first test.

That was the tour where I fell out of love with the Lions.

[I like neeps]

Watson is the most complete 7 currently playing in the 6N. He should be starting for the Lions. Whether he will is another question entirely, but I’m guessing Toony will be showing Gatland those stats when the time comes.

I disagree. History has proven players earn the start when on tour. Watson has shown he deserves to tour.

Whether he earns a test start should be determined on how he performs on tour.

Yes, agree with this. I think it's a little short sighted to write off curry's chances of starting based on the statistical head to head in this 6N.

I think the best way to think of it is would Watson be more effective than Curry at 7 for England? I think yes. Would Curry be more effective than Watson at 7 for Scotland? I think no.

Curry's great but Watson has been the best openside in the NH for at least 2 seasons now.

[Biffer]

Grrrr, I can feel my party piece about Euan Murray could get an outing.

The short version is Victor Matfield was quoted in the press as saying they were delighted to see The Rev in the dirt tracker side on the Tuesday because they knew he wouldn't be playing in the first test, Murray had dismantled the Bok scrum at Murrayfield the previous November.

Murray had been doing the same on tour, taking apart the scrums put in front of him. He got injured in that dirt tracker game and had to go home, meanwhile Mtawarira gave Vickery, scrum coach Rowntree's mate, an absolute hiding in that first test.

That was the tour where I fell out of love with the Lions.

You and me both

[Tichtheid]

South Africa's plans to demolish the Lions scrum, and so turn a perceived asset into a liability, started in earnest a week ago tomorrow when the tourists' team to face Southern Kings in Port Elizabeth was read out. There was one name the Springboks wanted to hear in the Lions' tight five for the first game of the tour that would involve a starting line-up of predominantly dirt-trackers. While much of the English media was demanding the inclusion of the England loose-head prop, Andrew Sheridan, South Africa were not bothered whether he was being saved for the Test match.

"There was one guy in the front five we were hoping would be playing on Tuesday," said the South Africa second row and vice-captain, Victor Matfield. "He was someone who had given us big problems during our tour to Europe the previous November. He had asked questions of our scrum and we did not come up with the answers. Euan Murray caused us a lot of trouble that afternoon and we were very surprised, and happy, when he was chosen to face Southern Kings because we knew that meant he would not be involved in the first Test and that we would get the edge up front."


https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/ ... m-analysis

[Yr Alban]

I wish every night could be Scotland V France

Yeah. Hearts proved my theory that they never win on the same weekend as Scotland.

[JM2K6]

I disagree. History has proven players earn the start when on tour. Watson has shown he deserves to tour.

Whether he earns a test start should be determined on how he performs on tour.

Yes, agree with this. I think it's a little short sighted to write off curry's chances of starting based on the statistical head to head in this 6N.

I think the best way to think of it is would Watson be more effective than Curry at 7 for England? I think yes. Would Curry be more effective than Watson at 7 for Scotland? I think no.

Curry's great but Watson has been the best openside in the NH for at least 2 seasons now.

Shrug. Curry kicked ass at the world cup. You like your players, we like ours. Watson will be a good tourist.

[Caley_Red]

Yes, agree with this. I think it's a little short sighted to write off curry's chances of starting based on the statistical head to head in this 6N.

I think the best way to think of it is would Watson be more effective than Curry at 7 for England? I think yes. Would Curry be more effective than Watson at 7 for Scotland? I think no.

Curry's great but Watson has been the best openside in the NH for at least 2 seasons now.

Shrug. Curry kicked ass at the world cup. You like your players, we like ours. Watson will be a good tourist.

Either way not a bad dilemma to have, though an irrelevant one: I fully expect gatland to start Tips in any case.

[Begbie]

From Jamie Lyalls Twitter:

Plenty folk are saying Hamish Watson is too small to mix it with South Africa's juggernauts.

Last time he played the Boks, in Nov '18, he made more metres and beat more defenders than any forward on the pitch, and didn't miss a tackle.

The guts of that SA team won the RWC.

[Caley_Red]

From Jamie Lyalls Twitter:

Plenty folk are saying Hamish Watson is too small to mix it with South Africa's juggernauts.

Last time he played the Boks, in Nov '18, he made more metres and beat more defenders than any forward on the pitch, and didn't miss a tackle.

The guts of that SA team won the RWC.

I completely understand a punter's myopic advancement of their own country's player (we all do it) but there always seems to be an additional layer when your advancing your own player against a Scot.

Usually falls into the team's performance (Scotland) rather than the individual merit but this year people need to dig a bit deeper to dismiss our relative claim versus their own.

[I like neeps]

From Jamie Lyalls Twitter:

Plenty folk are saying Hamish Watson is too small to mix it with South Africa's juggernauts.

Last time he played the Boks, in Nov '18, he made more metres and beat more defenders than any forward on the pitch, and didn't miss a tackle.

The guts of that SA team won the RWC.

I completely understand a punter's myopic advancement of their own country's player (we all do it) but there always seems to be an additional layer when your advancing your own player against a Scot.

Usually falls into the team's performance (Scotland) rather than the individual merit but this year people need to dig a bit deeper to dismiss our relative claim versus their own.

I think it's fair enough for other fans not to really rate Scotland and Scottish players because Scotland aren't great most of time. I think we've beaten Ireland once in 10 games and can't be much better against Wales. England less so as we've got a good recent record against them.

But to not see Watson being consistently excellent at 7 is just poor.

[Biffer]

I’m not sure what to think about this years six nations. I’m swinging between good progress and missed opportunity (of course it can be both). If someone had said to me before the tournament, you can have away wins in Paris and London, but you’ll lose close games at home to both Ireland and Wales, I’d probably have taken it, but a few points away from winning the whole thing isn’t a bad place to be. If a few key players are away on a winning Lions tour and some of that rubs off on them, as there’s some belief happened in 89(and 97), that could be a very good thing.

[dpedin]

I think the best way to think of it is would Watson be more effective than Curry at 7 for England? I think yes. Would Curry be more effective than Watson at 7 for Scotland? I think no.

Curry's great but Watson has been the best openside in the NH for at least 2 seasons now.

Shrug. Curry kicked ass at the world cup. You like your players, we like ours. Watson will be a good tourist.

Either way not a bad dilemma to have, though an irrelevant one: I fully expect gatland to start Tips in any case.

I suspect you are right about Tipuric! However Watson is easily the best 7 at the moment and I seemed to remember he got the best of Curry when we played England. I do like Curry and felt sorry for him in the English back row with Big 'sloth like' Billy and the mediocre Wilson as his back row mates, he had to do the work of three men!

[Yr Alban]

Yes, agree with this. I think it's a little short sighted to write off curry's chances of starting based on the statistical head to head in this 6N.

I think the best way to think of it is would Watson be more effective than Curry at 7 for England? I think yes. Would Curry be more effective than Watson at 7 for Scotland? I think no.

Curry's great but Watson has been the best openside in the NH for at least 2 seasons now.

Shrug. Curry kicked ass at the world cup. You like your players, we like ours. Watson will be a good tourist.

Granted, but that was two seasons ago. Watson has kicked more arse in this 6N.

You have to appreciate that the bar is set higher for Scotland players to make the Lions. Sorry, but it just is. If Watson posted the stats he does wearing a white, green or red jersey, he would be an unquestioned certainty to make the tour, and a front-runner to make the Test team. (If he posted them in a black jersey, he’d be rated best in the world.) But instead all anyone wants to talk about is his size. Never mind that he broke more tackles than any other forward in the 6N, and was 4th placed forward for metres gained ball in hand. It’s been decided that he came off 2nd best in collisions against France (based on one incident where he received the ball, stationary, and 3 defenders at the same time) and it’s going to stick.

We’ve seen this happen before. Chris Paterson was given an entirely unjustified reputation as a poor defender on the basis of one missed tackle v Ireland. He never got to tour once, which still makes me angry now. The same might well happen to Duhan Van der Merwe. The talk is all about the tackle he missed v France, not about the fact he is top 6N try-scorer, and that he missed 3 tackles all tournament, whereas LRZ, who seems to have been installed as a Test player already, missed 9.

[Big D]

I think the best way to think of it is would Watson be more effective than Curry at 7 for England? I think yes. Would Curry be more effective than Watson at 7 for Scotland? I think no.

Curry's great but Watson has been the best openside in the NH for at least 2 seasons now.

Shrug. Curry kicked ass at the world cup. You like your players, we like ours. Watson will be a good tourist.

Granted, but that was two seasons ago. Watson has kicked more arse in this 6N.

You have to appreciate that the bar is set higher for Scotland players to make the Lions. Sorry, but it just is. If Watson posted the stats he does wearing a white, green or red jersey, he would be an unquestioned certainty to make the tour, and a front-runner to make the Test team. (If he posted them in a black jersey, he’d be rated best in the world.) But instead all anyone wants to talk about is his size. Never mind that he broke more tackles than any other forward in the 6N, and was 4th placed forward for metres gained ball in hand. It’s been decided that he came off 2nd best in collisions against France (based on one incident where he received the ball, stationary, and 3 defenders at the same time) and it’s going to stick.

We’ve seen this happen before. Chris Paterson was given an entirely unjustified reputation as a poor defender on the basis of one missed tackle v Ireland. He never got to tour once, which still makes me angry now. The same might well happen to Duhan Van der Merwe. The talk is all about the tackle he missed v France, not about the fact he is top 6N try-scorer, and that he missed 3 tackles all tournament, whereas LRZ, who seems to have been installed as a Test player already, missed 9.

Patterson had.a poor defensive 6N that year (2005) from memory. He was poor in the England game too. The Lions had quality full backs that year (and Balshaw). IIRC I thought Jason White was our most unlucky Scot that year.

I think the perception is that 50/50s go against us because the numbers of Scots involved are so low. And more 50/50s will go against the people with no representation on the selection committee, that isn't surprising.

Last tour I thought Launchbury was more unlucky than any Scot not touring (other than Nel who would have toured IMO and Jones may have) but it doesn't look so bad when it was a 50/50 call between the same country.

[KingBlairhorn]

Having watched the Glasgow game yesterday and the Edinburgh game today (and the same over the last few months), I hope if this year teaches us anything at all about rugby, it should be that talented youngsters are more effective than journeymen professionals every day of the week. Young players may make mistakes on occasion, but they will and are quickly learning and cutting them out. Journeymen pros make the same mistakes week after week and will never improve.

Edinburgh were well out of it today, but the likes of Shiel, Currie and the 18 YO hooker who’s name I don’t know changed the game. Blain was also prominent and Conor Boyle was excellent when he came on.

[Jock42]

Having watched the Glasgow game yesterday and the Edinburgh game today (and the same over the last few months), I hope if this year teaches us anything at all about rugby, it should be that talented youngsters are more effective than journeymen professionals every day of the week. Young players may make mistakes on occasion, but they will and are quickly learning and cutting them out. Journeymen pros make the same mistakes week after week and will never improve.

Edinburgh were well out of it today, but the likes of Shiel, Currie and the 18 YO hooker who’s name I don’t know changed the game. Blain was also prominent and Conor Boyle was excellent when he came on.

Harrison.

Was good to see Shiel getting for more than 8 minutes at the end. I hope they use the Rainbow Cup to give some time to younger lads.

[JM2K6]

I think the best way to think of it is would Watson be more effective than Curry at 7 for England? I think yes. Would Curry be more effective than Watson at 7 for Scotland? I think no.

Curry's great but Watson has been the best openside in the NH for at least 2 seasons now.

Shrug. Curry kicked ass at the world cup. You like your players, we like ours. Watson will be a good tourist.

Granted, but that was two seasons ago. Watson has kicked more arse in this 6N.

You have to appreciate that the bar is set higher for Scotland players to make the Lions. Sorry, but it just is. If Watson posted the stats he does wearing a white, green or red jersey, he would be an unquestioned certainty to make the tour, and a front-runner to make the Test team. (If he posted them in a black jersey, he’d be rated best in the world.) But instead all anyone wants to talk about is his size. Never mind that he broke more tackles than any other forward in the 6N, and was 4th placed forward for metres gained ball in hand. It’s been decided that he came off 2nd best in collisions against France (based on one incident where he received the ball, stationary, and 3 defenders at the same time) and it’s going to stick.

We’ve seen this happen before. Chris Paterson was given an entirely unjustified reputation as a poor defender on the basis of one missed tackle v Ireland. He never got to tour once, which still makes me angry now. The same might well happen to Duhan Van der Merwe. The talk is all about the tackle he missed v France, not about the fact he is top 6N try-scorer, and that he missed 3 tackles all tournament, whereas LRZ, who seems to have been installed as a Test player already, missed 9.

I appreciate the point about Scottish players and have been banging the drum for Watson for most of his international career. (I don't think Paterson was very good, mind). Just saying that picking one of the guys most likely to tour and saying Watson will definitely start ahead of him and is the better player, when that other guy has been putting in huge performances as well, is a bit silly.

The world cup might have been 2019 but he performed excellently out of position in the following 6N (which we won, and when he had a better personal performance that Watson in that year's Calcutta Cup match) and then back at flanker in the autumn nations cup (which we won), and was usually one of our best players in a deeply misfiring team this 6N. I know you guys are understandably frustrated about Lions selection issues, particularly when one poor performance or a mediocre tournament seems to wipe out years of high-level peformances! It is fair to say, however, that the Underhill and Curry combo was at times the best in the world in the last few years (yes, including the world cup and afterwards) and the success backs it up. I think both of them will tour. I think Watson should tour as well, and he has an excellent chance of taking the starting shirt. There's even a good chance it'll be him at 7 and Curry at 6.

I saw some of the twitter discussion and, well, there wasn't much of it to talk about. The guy suggesting Ben Earl is a fucking idiot though. Earl might be a talent but his international career so far has been a litany of errors and penalties, and judging by the game he had at the weekend there's plenty more of that where it came from. IMO the argument should be about Ritchie; he's been impressive in the last season or two but I don't know if he's as likely as Watson to make it, and those are the selections Scotland always seem to get the rough end of the stick on.

My personal view on this is that because the bubble is such a pain in the arse to deal with when it comes to replacements, they'll take an extra large touring squad. Then the drama becomes about players being given a chance on tour as some players are definitely going to get judged on about 40 minutes of play, and we know Gatland likes to have a strong idea of his starting XV before they even leave for the tour...

[Yr Alban]

Yep, can’t argue with any of that. Apart from Paterson not being that good. He was an electric attacking FB in his prime, and should have been our 10 for years. Unfortunately, people now remember him at the end of his career, when he was shunted on to the wing in order to keep him in the side for his place kicking.

[Slick]

Yep, can’t argue with any of that. Apart from Paterson not being that good. He was an electric attacking FB in his prime, and should have been our 10 for years. Unfortunately, people now remember him at the end of his career, when he was shunted on to the wing in order to keep him in the side for his place kicking.

Yes, agree with JMK's post and this. Paterson was an excellent player who spent a large part of his career playing in very average Scotland teams and being shunted about to cover for the lack of strength in other areas. Had he been playing in this squad he would be remebered as one of our best IMO.

[Slick]

I’m not sure what to think about this years six nations. I’m swinging between good progress and missed opportunity (of course it can be both). If someone had said to me before the tournament, you can have away wins in Paris and London, but you’ll lose close games at home to both Ireland and Wales, I’d probably have taken it, but a few points away from winning the whole thing isn’t a bad place to be. If a few key players are away on a winning Lions tour and some of that rubs off on them, as there’s some belief happened in 89(and 97), that could be a very good thing.

Been wrangling with this all weekend.

I think we have to put it down as a good year. It's easy to forget how difficult it is to win a GS and that the 6N throws up 2 or 3 unpredictable results every year. Great tournament.

England were poor most of the tournament but they are still WC finalists and we beat them at their place which we never do. France are one of the best teams in the world and we beat them there. Wales was just annoying, Italy was never in doubt. Ireland play a game we just can't seem to counter very effectively and we had a really off day, but were still in it.

Our defence was sound, our attack scares the shit out of teams and even the games we lost we were within a score right at the end, that is progress without a doubt. Are we still frustrating? without a doubt. But we are not brittle like we have been for years. My only concern is that, rightly or wrongly, it feels as if time is slightly running out for this squad and we need to win something big over the next couple of years for it to be a truely succesful period.

I've said it lots before but I also really enjoy watching this team and I really like the fact we have genuine respect from around the rugby world. I hope we can lay off Toony for the next couple of years and just see where this takes us.