Rugby - The Game They Play In Heaven II

[kittenOFchaos]

I bet on Exeter to take down Tigers - Exeter don't lose out during the 6 Nations and they're a pretty decent outfit. I haven't checked my accumulators though as I'm pretty sure I got the London Irish wrong (it was looking so good otherwise as I avoided betting on Edinburgh Vs Ospreys which I'd have got wrong).

You can't very well blame CH for the backline, once Youngs was off and Dickson on the pace went up and CH was firing lots of beautiful passes to hand and inroads were being made. The Saracen boys are doing well. Barrett carried the ball far more this game and but for an intercepted pass there would have been another try (probably). Poor Foden, he had a crazy 2 minutes!

England Vs Wales will be a very interesting test.

[finbar]

John Kirwan - in his fluent Italian with a thuck Kiwi accent - made a point about the danger of frozen pitches on the Sky Italy coverage. His theory was that Castro fell with the ball under him, no give in the pitch, the ball did the damage. Whatever, he looked in agony. Hopefully it's not serious.

CH actually has better distribution skills than Flood. Youngs has been pap in both games so far - what was he doing yesterday looking in the opposite direction when the ball came out? - so no 10 would have had it easy. He looks like he needs a break from rugby altogether. CH did the best anyone could under the circumstances yesterday, put players into gaps, but Lancaster will probably prefer Flood when fit. I'm on record as thinking Flood isn't a great 10. Fine goal kicker, unpredictable kicking from hand, but doesn't seem to think beyond the moment.

I'm not convinced by the Sarries midfield. Farrell kicks superbly under pressure but the combination with Barritt is never going to light up a game. As it doesn't with Sarries. Still, if Dickson starts, and plays with the fizz he's shown on both occasions, getting everyone onto the front foot, things might be entirely different.

I'd tipped Exeter too. Even with Flood and Co back Tigers were still missing too many players, and it's not as if they're at the top of their form. Irish let me down - how does Toby Booth keep his job? - and so did Edinburgh. Bustards!

[Havak]

And there you go kOc it is all subjective, Finbar rates CH above Floody and I still disagree with both of you.

You can’t read inflection or tone from text unless the writer is very talented like a certain Italo-Australian of our acquaintance. I lack that talent and I think sometimes my comments read too harshly. It will be hard for Lancaster to drop Charlie but I still would. Maybe I have never forgiven him for 2006?

However I do side with Finbar elsewhere. As admirable as Barritts work rate is it would be very ill considered to retain him ahead of a fit Manu Tuilagi I think. You lose little in work rate or defence with Manu (except when he rushes up out the line?) and gain a much more potent attacking threat. One of Manu’s big supplementary talents is to draw defenders attention and he does pull extra men in. In fact England have the making of a decent backline – all it needs now is a gameplan that gets ball to them through the hands a bit more.

I quite like Exeter – but I would like them more if we didn’t play club games during internationals. The Premiership runs a bizarre handicap system that leaves big question marks over the merit of league placing. Eight clubs are getting a huge leg up they do not deserve IMO

[finbar]

I think Flood and CH both have their limitations. CH's distribution is better, Flood's defence is better. But yesterday, for the first half, and last week, for just about the whole match, CH was playing deep. He doesn't play deep for Sarries, didn't for Sale. He does his best work flat. Yesterday, things changed when Dickson appeared. CH was much flatter. The service was better. He was vastly more efective. Just sayin'.

Definitely Manu in front of Barritt. And I wouldn't want Farrell at 10. Too pedestrian.

[Havak]

And so the eternal search for an English fly half continues into another generation.

I have just watched how well the young 13 Benvenuti took that interception try Finbar - a good call for your "one to watch" there I believe.

And now to don my (metaphorical) kilt for the afternoon...

[finbar]

Very enjoyable contest, but cripes, talk about rugby suicide. Scotland only needed ten minutes to shoot themselves comprehensively in the foot. Much better second half, but they've done this before. When they're well behind, when they're going hell for leather, they actually find some fluency, run crazy angles, make line breaks. Moral: take the field with the attitude that you're 20 points behind. Hogg missed a tackle - heck, a man twice his size wouldn't have stopped that Welsh monster - but he's got plenty of talent. Yet another black mark against Turnip the selector that he's overlooked the kid.

Wales have stepped up this season in terms of cashing in on opportunities. In the past they've created opportunities but let them slip.

[Havak]

I thought Laidlaw fell off the tackle on Cuthbert?

That kid Hogg has something - and how unlucky to have a knock on given, some juggling certainly but did he lose control?

Sadly my words to kOc proved all too true - Scotland do have more to worry about than England.

Wales? Well their season stands or falls on the next fixture. And their seven qualifies for Wales only because he played cricket for Glamorgan apparently?

[kittenOFchaos]

I don't know what Robinson says to our team at half-time.

Last week we committed suicide right after the break and this week we did the same and compounded the problem.

2 years ago Scotland were far ahead of Wales and in the second half lost 2 players to the bin and the game. At the RWC, we had England and Argentina on toast - a few subs and a team talk and we're beaten.

Whatever Robinson does with our team at half-time he needs to stop.

Scotland once again tried hard but found the break down and the rush defence quite a nightmare to deal with. I'm not a back, but I do wonder whether a few chips could have helped us out abit. More than anything else we just need abit of luck. End of the first half we didn't knock on, but had a Welshist on the deck grab it resulting in the ball coming loose - a more observant referee and it'd have been at least a penalty, maybe more. Into the second, having the referee not even wanting to go to the TMO. Then again, abit of luck and Cusiter wouldn't have dealt so poorly with the kick-off.

Scotland will get there and it is good to see how committed they are time and again.

Wales...they are performing very well at the breakdown (and getting away with stuff) and have a wonderful backline that will give most teams trouble. Can't wait for England Vs Wales it will tell us so much about the qualities of both teams.

[kittenOFchaos]

I thought Laidlaw fell off the tackle on Cuthbert?

That kid Hogg has something - and how unlucky to have a knock on given, some juggling certainly but did he lose control?

Sadly my words to kOc proved all too true - Scotland do have more to worry about than England.

Wales? Well their season stands or falls on the next fixture. And their seven qualifies for Wales only because he played cricket for Glamorgan apparently?

Scotland were in contention against Wales and threw it away. It remains to be seen what England will make of Wales.

As for Laidlaw missing a tackle on Cuthbert - so? Laidlaw does alot right, but being wee 12 stone bloke, he really isn't designed for taking on a colossus like Cuthbert - typically he wouldn't have to. No. 10 isn't a position that requires big hitters as typically they are protected by other players - at least in any team with sense.

Edit: Ah, I see Finbar said Hogg missed the tackle and you corrected him. My bad.

[kittenOFchaos]

I quite like Exeter – but I would like them more if we didn’t play club games during internationals. The Premiership runs a bizarre handicap system that leaves big question marks over the merit of league placing. Eight clubs are getting a huge leg up they do not deserve IMO

Something on which we both agree.

[kittenOFchaos]

Eugh, London Irish not winning cost me winning a few thousand now that I look at it.

[finbar]

Sorry, it was Laidlaw. I had Hogg on the brain. Both talented young blokes. Turnip strikes again.

Scotland once again tried hard but found the break down and the rush defence quite a nightmare to deal with. I'm not a back, but I do wonder whether a few chips could have helped us out abit.

Exactly. That's the sort of variety Scotland need. A neat chip over the top or grubber through is the only way to combat that rush defence. It's beyond me why it doesn't happen.

[finbar]

Eugh, London Irish not winning cost me winning a few thousand now that I look at it.

As I say, how does Toby Booth keep his job? Irish have gone from a promising team that always threatened to utter dross.

[Havak]

Yes I definitely wasn't criticising Laidlaw kOc, I can fully understand why he fell off the tackle. And it's nice we can agree on something.

Toby Booth may have a sacking clause Finbar. The board, seeing the season as a dead loss, might be content to let him serve his term and quietly not renew a deal. Either that or they see some long term master plan?

Scotland will get there and it is good to see how committed they are time and again.

I'm not looking to argue with you, and I have praised their commitment and endeavour repeatedly, but I have to say the first part of this sentence is somewhat debatable. I'm not sure that under the current regime they will get there.

The coach far too often reacts like a petulant child and fire salvos in all directions except his own after the games. It is what he did with England - everything was someone elses fault and we were always "making progress" but never actually did.

Obviously I found your assertion that they had England and Argentina on toast at the RWC an interesting one. I can only repeat that work rate and endeavour does not win games - points on the board does. And that is largely where Scotland's problems lay.

But obviously the opinions of an englishman are not pertinent - I would welcome Finbar's perspective on whether Scotland are getting there under the moaning Turnip? I think the man might be a decent number two - but as a head coach I simply am not convinced at all.

[finbar]

Turnip remains the same Turnip who coached England. He hasn't grown as a person, and, at this stage, you'd have to say it's unlikely he ever will. I think his treatment of Dan Parks sums him up - a scapegoat merchant, always looking to distribute blame when he should be looking closer to home. It's not unknown for head coaches to be blind to reality - J**** was classic - but Turnip lashes out, laying blame, rather than suffering simple blindness. I gather he's a decent forwards coach. I think that's probably his level. I don't think he has the balanced personality to be head coach. He's also, crucially, a rubbish selector. Still a rubbish selector, as poor as he was when England coach. That's telling.

There's no doubt Scotland are committed. But it's not enough. The reality is that they have a great set of forwards - Rennie gets better and better, here's hoping he stays fit - with the perennial problem of not scoring tries. The first half against Wales was classic - terrific defence, powerful in the forwards, but they couldn't break through. At one point they went through 10 phases around the halfway line, losing ground each time. Then there were the 21 phases - with Wales effectively a man down, with George North out of action on the right - and no one seemed to notice their numerical advantage. The fatties kept at it. Someone knocked on. End of story.

This sort of naivety in attack has dogged Scotland for eons and it's what holds them back and will continue to hold them back. kOc asked why they don't/didn't chip over the top or grubber through to thwart the rush defence. Classic question. Why indeed? They threatened more in the second half when they were 20+ points down, had nothing to lose, and ran from everywhere. Not terribly scientifically, but it was as though the mental shackles were off. And maybe that's one of the keys.

I suspect Townsend is on borrowed time - I have no idea what role Scott Johnson will play, a coach who continues to live on a reputation based on who knows what - but Townsend isn't the first Scotland attack coach to fail to produce tries. The truly telling thing is that Turnip, the selector, has only selected seriously bright young talent - Hogg, Laidlaw - when his hand was forced.

Someone will unlock Scotland's potential. I don't think it will be Turnip.

Oh, and he needs to watch his back with Scott Johnson in the camp. Johnson is famous for being a players' man, mixing with them, and using the relationships as a short cut to the top job.