The Official Scottish Rugby Thread

[Slick]

The majority of you have been ridiculously thin skinned. Sometimes you have to accept that your guy hasn't done well and move on.

I have to say, this coming from an Irishman has cheered me up no end

[Slick]

The majority of you have been ridiculously thin skinned. Sometimes you have to accept that your guy hasn't done well and move on.

I have to say, this coming from an Irishman has cheered me up no end

[Yr Alban]

The majority of you have been ridiculously thin skinned. Sometimes you have to accept that your guy hasn't done well and move on.

Seriously, WTAF?

For the benefit of those who apparently cannot read: WE AGREE THAT HOGG AND VDM PLAYED POORLY. We have said this literally over and over again on multiple threads. I haven’t seen a single Scottish poster claim otherwise. What is pissing us off is that those two players have come in for ten times the criticism levelled at any other player, despite the fact that not one Lions player could honestly put their hand up and claim to have played well. The Lions didn’t lose that game just because of Hogg and VDM, but you’d be forgiven for thinking they did from some of the shite being spouted on here and on SM.

[dpedin]

The majority of you have been ridiculously thin skinned. Sometimes you have to accept that your guy hasn't done well and move on.

Seriously, WTAF?

For the benefit of those who apparently cannot read: WE AGREE THAT HOGG AND VDM PLAYED POORLY. We have said this literally over and over again on multiple threads. I haven’t seen a single Scottish poster claim otherwise. What is pissing us off is that those two players have come in for ten times the criticism levelled at any other player, despite the fact that not one Lions player could honestly put their hand up and claim to have played well. The Lions didn’t lose that game just because of Hogg and VDM, but you’d be forgiven for thinking they did from some of the shite being spouted on here and on SM.

This!

We should actually be focusing more on the performance of our 9 and 10, which is the fulcrum of the team and tend to determine how teams play. Murray was glacial in his movement and passing, pretty slow to get to the breakdown and his kicking wasn't very accurate. Biggar passed the ball 3 times in the whole match and wasted whatever ball we had with kicking it away and losing momentum and territory most of the time. Without any momentum from our half backs we were never going to win the game. Their slow ball was meat and drink to the SA rush defence. I don't think Murray worried their fringe defence all that much either. If we stand any chance of winning the 3rd test we need to speed up play and get our back 3, whoever is picked, into the game and that means we need to replace Murray and Biggar - Price and Russell would be worth the chance.

[Jockaline]

JM2K6 is spot on if you ask me and doesn't come across as having an agenda.

Hogg was over nervous under the high ball, but he was getting little protection, he's also a bit try hard when the chips are down. I'd have no complaints if he didn't play the last test.

VDM can have no complaints if he is dropped too, that kick was one of the most stupid things I've seen on a pitch, what was he thinking.

Watson also crap as was most of the rest of the team, but I think his errors probably stood out less, and not in a Hogg type leadership role, kept his discipline. Can you really drop the whole of the back three, probably not.

I've just booked tickets to the South African game at Murrayfield, that's an opportunity to show the Welsh/Irish the Scots are good enough, as is the next 6N when we stuff them at home. Let's do our taking on the pitch, who cares what some idiots say on SM.

Other changes:
AWJ needs a rest, he isn't all that, I don't get the how he's been rated so highly. Maybe Lawes too, as you can't flog people three weeks in a row. Need Itoje the best player of the series for me, and play the other locks. I think Watson deserves a chance to start, Curry isn't exactly lighting it up. Sinkler will presumably not play, which if clear on the day would have been red, not sure he's getting the same kind of abuse as VDM, but does it really matter.

May seem like too many changes, but the BOKS have played themselves fit, and the same players will play the same way, and we'll come second best again. Bigger passing just 3 times!! go for broke Russel/Smith too even just from the bench, but early enough to make a difference, and obviously Price starting.

Did we leave a good eight at home, not a Scot as we don't really have one, neither of the Lions options have impressed.

[charltom]

The only way the Lions win the last test is with the extra range (including variety of kicking) of Finn Russell. Ideally his introduction would come as a late surprise to the Boks; and any decent coach would have prepared for that eventuality. Price and Russell are the changes needed amongst the backs, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Adams in for VdM even though the half-backs would suit Duhan. I'm less bothered about the possibility of Hogg missing out than either of the half-backs.

Wyn Jones will be in for Sutherland if fit, and Hamish Watson should also be starting, with Curry or Beirne at 6 and the other on the bench. It's a shame there's no great eight though.

[Begbie]

Getting quite spicy in here

[I like neeps]

JM2K6 is spot on if you ask me and doesn't come across as having an agenda.

Hogg was over nervous under the high ball, but he was getting little protection, he's also a bit try hard when the chips are down. I'd have no complaints if he didn't play the last test.

VDM can have no complaints if he is dropped too, that kick was one of the most stupid things I've seen on a pitch, what was he thinking.

Watson also crap as was most of the rest of the team, but I think his errors probably stood out less, and not in a Hogg type leadership role, kept his discipline. Can you really drop the whole of the back three, probably not.

I've just booked tickets to the South African game at Murrayfield, that's an opportunity to show the Welsh/Irish the Scots are good enough, as is the next 6N when we stuff them at home. Let's do our taking on the pitch, who cares what some idiots say on SM.

Other changes:
AWJ needs a rest, he isn't all that, I don't get the how he's been rated so highly. Maybe Lawes too, as you can't flog people three weeks in a row. Need Itoje the best player of the series for me, and play the other locks. I think Watson deserves a chance to start, Curry isn't exactly lighting it up. Sinkler will presumably not play, which if clear on the day would have been red, not sure he's getting the same kind of abuse as VDM, but does it really matter.

May seem like too many changes, but the BOKS have played themselves fit, and the same players will play the same way, and we'll come second best again. Bigger passing just 3 times!! go for broke Russel/Smith too even just from the bench, but early enough to make a difference, and obviously Price starting.

Did we leave a good eight at home, not a Scot as we don't really have one, neither of the Lions options have impressed.

I do think this is true. On social media and my Scottish supporting friends have been getting really wound up by the criticism of Scottish players (even though we're all also criticising them). And a lot of talk of biases and narratives. Whereas my friends who support England and Ireland don't care at all if their players are criticised (as they're also criticising them too). Fortunately, I don't have any Welsh friends so can't comment there. I don't really even think there's an anti Scottish narrative. But any anti Scottish sentiment coming from Welsh or Irish press/commenters on social (if any!) is likely driven by us beating both like 2 times the last decade. They have every right not to highly rate players they beat yearly in my opinion.

[Jockaline]

JM2K6 is spot on if you ask me and doesn't come across as having an agenda.

Hogg was over nervous under the high ball, but he was getting little protection, he's also a bit try hard when the chips are down. I'd have no complaints if he didn't play the last test.

VDM can have no complaints if he is dropped too, that kick was one of the most stupid things I've seen on a pitch, what was he thinking.

Watson also crap as was most of the rest of the team, but I think his errors probably stood out less, and not in a Hogg type leadership role, kept his discipline. Can you really drop the whole of the back three, probably not.

I've just booked tickets to the South African game at Murrayfield, that's an opportunity to show the Welsh/Irish the Scots are good enough, as is the next 6N when we stuff them at home. Let's do our taking on the pitch, who cares what some idiots say on SM.

Other changes:
AWJ needs a rest, he isn't all that, I don't get the how he's been rated so highly. Maybe Lawes too, as you can't flog people three weeks in a row. Need Itoje the best player of the series for me, and play the other locks. I think Watson deserves a chance to start, Curry isn't exactly lighting it up. Sinkler will presumably not play, which if clear on the day would have been red, not sure he's getting the same kind of abuse as VDM, but does it really matter.

May seem like too many changes, but the BOKS have played themselves fit, and the same players will play the same way, and we'll come second best again. Bigger passing just 3 times!! go for broke Russel/Smith too even just from the bench, but early enough to make a difference, and obviously Price starting.

Did we leave a good eight at home, not a Scot as we don't really have one, neither of the Lions options have impressed.

I do think this is true. On social media and my Scottish supporting friends have been getting really wound up by the criticism of Scottish players (even though we're all also criticising them). And a lot of talk of biases and narratives. Whereas my friends who support England and Ireland don't care at all if their players are criticised (as they're also criticising them too). Fortunately, I don't have any Welsh friends so can't comment there. I don't really even think there's an anti Scottish narrative. But any anti Scottish sentiment coming from Welsh or Irish press/commenters on social (if any!) is likely driven by us beating both like 2 times the last decade. They have every right not to highly rate players they beat yearly in my opinion.

I take back what I said re: JM2K6, seen some of his other posts now.

[Tichtheid]

I was reminded of this game earlier, it was the last time Scotland played SA.

It was a different world only two and a half years ago - look at the crowd.

I'm still raging about the penalty against Nel, what a nonsense. There are some good tries here though.

oh and the game is different, I recall at the time thinking that the card against Willie Le Roux was harsh, now it seems such an easy decision.

[JM2K6]

JM2K6 is spot on if you ask me and doesn't come across as having an agenda.

Hogg was over nervous under the high ball, but he was getting little protection, he's also a bit try hard when the chips are down. I'd have no complaints if he didn't play the last test.

VDM can have no complaints if he is dropped too, that kick was one of the most stupid things I've seen on a pitch, what was he thinking.

Watson also crap as was most of the rest of the team, but I think his errors probably stood out less, and not in a Hogg type leadership role, kept his discipline. Can you really drop the whole of the back three, probably not.

I've just booked tickets to the South African game at Murrayfield, that's an opportunity to show the Welsh/Irish the Scots are good enough, as is the next 6N when we stuff them at home. Let's do our taking on the pitch, who cares what some idiots say on SM.

Other changes:
AWJ needs a rest, he isn't all that, I don't get the how he's been rated so highly. Maybe Lawes too, as you can't flog people three weeks in a row. Need Itoje the best player of the series for me, and play the other locks. I think Watson deserves a chance to start, Curry isn't exactly lighting it up. Sinkler will presumably not play, which if clear on the day would have been red, not sure he's getting the same kind of abuse as VDM, but does it really matter.

May seem like too many changes, but the BOKS have played themselves fit, and the same players will play the same way, and we'll come second best again. Bigger passing just 3 times!! go for broke Russel/Smith too even just from the bench, but early enough to make a difference, and obviously Price starting.

Did we leave a good eight at home, not a Scot as we don't really have one, neither of the Lions options have impressed.

I do think this is true. On social media and my Scottish supporting friends have been getting really wound up by the criticism of Scottish players (even though we're all also criticising them). And a lot of talk of biases and narratives. Whereas my friends who support England and Ireland don't care at all if their players are criticised (as they're also criticising them too). Fortunately, I don't have any Welsh friends so can't comment there. I don't really even think there's an anti Scottish narrative. But any anti Scottish sentiment coming from Welsh or Irish press/commenters on social (if any!) is likely driven by us beating both like 2 times the last decade. They have every right not to highly rate players they beat yearly in my opinion.

I take back what I said re: JM2K6, seen some of his other posts now.

Eh... which?

[Jockaline]

I do think this is true. On social media and my Scottish supporting friends have been getting really wound up by the criticism of Scottish players (even though we're all also criticising them). And a lot of talk of biases and narratives. Whereas my friends who support England and Ireland don't care at all if their players are criticised (as they're also criticising them too). Fortunately, I don't have any Welsh friends so can't comment there. I don't really even think there's an anti Scottish narrative. But any anti Scottish sentiment coming from Welsh or Irish press/commenters on social (if any!) is likely driven by us beating both like 2 times the last decade. They have every right not to highly rate players they beat yearly in my opinion.

I take back what I said re: JM2K6, seen some of his other posts now.

Eh... which?

The worst, was another poster, my bad.

Although while I generally agree with some of your posts - see above, some it is a bit OTT and seems critisism is exclusively reserved for Scots players when the whole team didn't perform, with individual errors of others not mentioned. You even pick out Harris who did nothing wrong, something you seem to have accepted by caveating/waking back on in the very same post. Yes he maybe didn't do much but who did. Henderson failed to score a gimme when all he had to do was find a blade of grass, Murray posted missing at rucks, other props giving up penalties, but only Sutherland mentioned. Bigger missing the posts, his primary job. Sinclair biting probably the worst of the lot, but it is on Scots you seem to single out.

[JM2K6]

I take back what I said re: JM2K6, seen some of his other posts now.

Eh... which?

The worst, was another poster, my bad.

Although while I generally agree with some of your posts - see above, some it is a bit OTT and seems critisism is exclusively reserved for Scots players when the whole team didn't perform, with individual errors of others not mentioned. You even pick out Harris who did nothing wrong, something you seem to have accepted by caveating/waking back on in the very same post. Yes he maybe didn't do much but who did. Henderson failed to score a gimme when all he had to do was find a blade of grass, Murray posted missing at rucks, other props giving up penalties, but only Sutherland mentioned. Bigger missing the posts, his primary job. Sinclair biting probably the worst of the lot, but it is on Scots you seem to single out.

All I said about Harris was that I didn't understand the praise I was reading for him as he didn't really do anything at all, the game passed him by. Generally if I walk something back in the same post, the entire post contains my opinion rather than part of it! :) I don't think there's any agenda in play, or me being OTT, if I point out that I find it strange that someone who had no impact on the game is being heralded, particularly when one back (Henshaw) actually did have some impact. That's all, I didn't make a big song and dance about it (this paragraph is already more words than I said on Harris in total). The only time I've been at all needle-y about a Scot was when dpedin did a dpedin, he can be pretty one-eyed!

Generally I've been involved in these sort of meta-conversations, particularly in this thread, where the topic is already about Scottish players being singled out, hence talking about the Scottish players' performances and trying to give reasons why the wider public have been singling them out. That's the topic of conversation - I criticised other players but there's little point repeating it if everyone agrees, right? Like, pointing out that Ken Owens was absolute shite is a waste of time, everyone already knows this.

though maybe someone should've pointed it out to Gatland

[Biffer]

Eh... which?

The worst, was another poster, my bad.

Although while I generally agree with some of your posts - see above, some it is a bit OTT and seems critisism is exclusively reserved for Scots players when the whole team didn't perform, with individual errors of others not mentioned. You even pick out Harris who did nothing wrong, something you seem to have accepted by caveating/waking back on in the very same post. Yes he maybe didn't do much but who did. Henderson failed to score a gimme when all he had to do was find a blade of grass, Murray posted missing at rucks, other props giving up penalties, but only Sutherland mentioned. Bigger missing the posts, his primary job. Sinclair biting probably the worst of the lot, but it is on Scots you seem to single out.

All I said about Harris was that I didn't understand the praise I was reading for him as he didn't really do anything at all, the game passed him by. Generally if I walk something back in the same post, the entire post contains my opinion rather than part of it! :) I don't think there's any agenda in play, or me being OTT, if I point out that I find it strange that someone who had no impact on the game is being heralded, particularly when one back (Henshaw) actually did have some impact. That's all, I didn't make a big song and dance about it (this paragraph is already more words than I said on Harris in total). The only time I've been at all needle-y about a Scot was when dpedin did a dpedin, he can be pretty one-eyed!

Generally I've been involved in these sort of meta-conversations, particularly in this thread, where the topic is already about Scottish players being singled out, hence talking about the Scottish players' performances and trying to give reasons why the wider public have been singling them out. That's the topic of conversation - I criticised other players but there's little point repeating it if everyone agrees, right? Like, pointing out that Ken Owens was absolute shite is a waste of time, everyone already knows this.

though maybe someone should've pointed it out to Gatland

Wow. We're talking about the Scottish players, with a Scottish slant, in the Scottish thread.

I'm shocked. Shocked.

Somebody think of the children.

[charltom]

I take back what I said re: JM2K6, seen some of his other posts now.

Eh... which?

The worst, was another poster, my bad.

Although while I generally agree with some of your posts - see above, some it is a bit OTT and seems critisism is exclusively reserved for Scots players when the whole team didn't perform, with individual errors of others not mentioned. You even pick out Harris who did nothing wrong, something you seem to have accepted by caveating/waking back on in the very same post. Yes he maybe didn't do much but who did. Henderson failed to score a gimme when all he had to do was find a blade of grass, Murray posted missing at rucks, other props giving up penalties, but only Sutherland mentioned. Bigger missing the posts, his primary job. Sinclair biting probably the worst of the lot, but it is on Scots you seem to single out.

That's probably because he's coming into the Scots thread to post the comments.

[JM2K6]

The worst, was another poster, my bad.

Although while I generally agree with some of your posts - see above, some it is a bit OTT and seems critisism is exclusively reserved for Scots players when the whole team didn't perform, with individual errors of others not mentioned. You even pick out Harris who did nothing wrong, something you seem to have accepted by caveating/waking back on in the very same post. Yes he maybe didn't do much but who did. Henderson failed to score a gimme when all he had to do was find a blade of grass, Murray posted missing at rucks, other props giving up penalties, but only Sutherland mentioned. Bigger missing the posts, his primary job. Sinclair biting probably the worst of the lot, but it is on Scots you seem to single out.

All I said about Harris was that I didn't understand the praise I was reading for him as he didn't really do anything at all, the game passed him by. Generally if I walk something back in the same post, the entire post contains my opinion rather than part of it! :) I don't think there's any agenda in play, or me being OTT, if I point out that I find it strange that someone who had no impact on the game is being heralded, particularly when one back (Henshaw) actually did have some impact. That's all, I didn't make a big song and dance about it (this paragraph is already more words than I said on Harris in total). The only time I've been at all needle-y about a Scot was when dpedin did a dpedin, he can be pretty one-eyed!

Generally I've been involved in these sort of meta-conversations, particularly in this thread, where the topic is already about Scottish players being singled out, hence talking about the Scottish players' performances and trying to give reasons why the wider public have been singling them out. That's the topic of conversation - I criticised other players but there's little point repeating it if everyone agrees, right? Like, pointing out that Ken Owens was absolute shite is a waste of time, everyone already knows this.

though maybe someone should've pointed it out to Gatland

Wow. We're talking about the Scottish players, with a Scottish slant, in the Scottish thread.

I'm shocked. Shocked.

Somebody think of the children.

Y...yes? That's my point. He questioned why I was seemingly only talking about the Scottish players. I was explaining why. I'm not complaining that you guys talk about the Scottish players! I've enjoyed the conversations and have appreciated the viewpoints! I think you may have misunderstood my post :(

(Note that my nonplussed post about Harris was in the selection thread rather than this one...)

[JM2K6]

Sinclair biting probably the worst of the lot, but it is on Scots you seem to single out.

Just to come back to this, here's what I said about Sinckler once I'd heard about it, days after the Test:

On Sinckler - sadly I think it's probably true, he's unlikely to have been cited off the back of no evidence and his track record is no defence whatsoever. Unbelievably stupid if true.

but it's one of those things where given you couldn't see shit, it's best to wait before piling in too much. As it is, he's been cleared, so he goes from "probably the worst of the lot" to nothing at all - and even if he had bitten someone, it had absolutely no impact on the match itself as it wasn't penalised at the time.

I also didn't know it was basically an automatic citing if someone complains to the ref at the time, hence me thinking it was likely to be true

[Jock42]

Harris and Watson unlucky I think, and VDM maybe a bit lucky. Finntastic to come on 10 down and win the series.

[Yr Alban]

Is there something in this selection for everyone to hate?

As far as our guys are concerned, the mixed messages are coming thick and fast.

Price starts test 1, is inexplicably dropped, and then brought back for test 3. Harris the opposite - brought in for test 2 and then binned again for no apparent reason.

Hogg dropped and VDM stays, thereby annoying both Scots and non-Scots. If I’d been going to drop one of them, it would have been VDM - not only did he have a worse game than Hogg, he is entirely the wrong sort of player for what seems to be the Lions gameplan. I could see the argument for dropping VDM or dropping both, but not this.

Russell on the bench - great, but as Price is starting, he’ll likely have mostly glacial service from Murray, which will negate any influence he might have had.

Fine with Sutherland going out of the 23 now Jones is fit.

Why are most of the changes in the backs, when the Lions completely lost the forward battle?

[dpedin]

Harris and Watson unlucky I think, and VDM maybe a bit lucky. Finntastic to come on 10 down and win the series.

Agree but on the other hand Kolbe has barely had a look in down his wing.

I can't believe Gatland has started the same back row for the 3rd test, they lost the battle in the last game and I honestly can't see them doing much better this time round. Curry has been pretty anonymous in both games and I would have started Watson to see what he could do instead. Still don't think AWJ is fit enough for this level now and perhaps Henderson or even Beard should have started instead. Not sure what Aki brings to the game and no doubt will see a YC within 30 mins?

[JM2K6]

Tbf, AWJ put a huge shift in - 15 tackles is 5 more than the nearest Lion, and 8 carries puts him near the top end too.

If nothing else the back row needed freshening up after two brutal games.

[I like neeps]

Is there something in this selection for everyone to hate?

As far as our guys are concerned, the mixed messages are coming thick and fast.

Price starts test 1, is inexplicably dropped, and then brought back for test 3. Harris the opposite - brought in for test 2 and then binned again for no apparent reason.

Hogg dropped and VDM stays, thereby annoying both Scots and non-Scots. If I’d been going to drop one of them, it would have been VDM - not only did he have a worse game than Hogg, he is entirely the wrong sort of player for what seems to be the Lions gameplan. I could see the argument for dropping VDM or dropping both, but not this.

Russell on the bench - great, but as Price is starting, he’ll likely have mostly glacial service from Murray, which will negate any influence he might have had.

Fine with Sutherland going out of the 23 now Jones is fit.

Why are most of the changes in the backs, when the Lions completely lost the forward battle?

The Price call was an odd one but Murray was interim tour captain so it's clear Gatland rates him. He's now made the correct decision as Price has been hugely more influential.

The Harris decision is quite straightforward I think. The Lions are going to be a wee bit more expansive (hard not to) and Aki/Henshaw are your punchy carriers. SA will continue their kicking and so a great defender in the 13 channel isn't needed. Let's be honest also big tackle on Am aside Harris did nothing. There's no point in picking a defensive 13 if you don't do any defending outside of kick chase.

Liam Williams is a world class fullback. Yes he could play on the wing but he's not as good there. I really don't think there's much between them. I wouldn't swap Hogg for Liam Williams but I do sometimes think Liam Williams is the better player. But there can't have been much between them in Gatland's thinking for the first test.

[Yr Alban]

Is there something in this selection for everyone to hate?

As far as our guys are concerned, the mixed messages are coming thick and fast.

Price starts test 1, is inexplicably dropped, and then brought back for test 3. Harris the opposite - brought in for test 2 and then binned again for no apparent reason.

Hogg dropped and VDM stays, thereby annoying both Scots and non-Scots. If I’d been going to drop one of them, it would have been VDM - not only did he have a worse game than Hogg, he is entirely the wrong sort of player for what seems to be the Lions gameplan. I could see the argument for dropping VDM or dropping both, but not this.

Russell on the bench - great, but as Price is starting, he’ll likely have mostly glacial service from Murray, which will negate any influence he might have had.

Fine with Sutherland going out of the 23 now Jones is fit.

Why are most of the changes in the backs, when the Lions completely lost the forward battle?

The Price call was an odd one but Murray was interim tour captain so it's clear Gatland rates him. He's now made the correct decision as Price has been hugely more influential.

The Harris decision is quite straightforward I think. The Lions are going to be a wee bit more expansive (hard not to) and Aki/Henshaw are your punchy carriers. SA will continue their kicking and so a great defender in the 13 channel isn't needed. Let's be honest also big tackle on Am aside Harris did nothing. There's no point in picking a defensive 13 if you don't do any defending outside of kick chase.

Liam Williams is a world class fullback. Yes he could play on the wing but he's not as good there. I really don't think there's much between them. I wouldn't swap Hogg for Liam Williams but I do sometimes think Liam Williams is the better player. But there can't have been much between them in Gatland's thinking for the first test.

Obviously Gatland rates Murray, fair enough, but then why start Price in Test 1, and then drop him after the Lions win?

Harris actually made sense after I realised Henshaw had moved to 13.

I’m not arguing that Williams isn’t a good player, and I’m fine with Hogg losing out to him after having a poor game. But why drop Hogg and Watson and keep VDM? The game plan doesn’t okay to his strengths at all.

[S/Lt_Phillips]

Assuming Russell gets on at some point, then 7 out of the 8 Scottish lions will get a test cap. Only Fagerson hasn't made a test 23. Not a bad return really, given everyone was a bit surprised at how many Scots were selected for the tour (and therefore assumed a good proportion would only be dirt-trackers).

[Yr Alban]

Assuming Russell gets on at some point, then 7 out of the 8 Scottish lions will get a test cap. Only Fagerson hasn't made a test 23. Not a bad return really, given everyone was a bit surprised at how many Scots were selected for the tour (and therefore assumed a good proportion would only be dirt-trackers).

Was thinking this. Not a bad return at all, though it seems only Price will be getting pass marks from everyone else. Assuming he doesn’t do anything daft in Test 3, that is.

[I like neeps]

Is there something in this selection for everyone to hate?

As far as our guys are concerned, the mixed messages are coming thick and fast.

Price starts test 1, is inexplicably dropped, and then brought back for test 3. Harris the opposite - brought in for test 2 and then binned again for no apparent reason.

Hogg dropped and VDM stays, thereby annoying both Scots and non-Scots. If I’d been going to drop one of them, it would have been VDM - not only did he have a worse game than Hogg, he is entirely the wrong sort of player for what seems to be the Lions gameplan. I could see the argument for dropping VDM or dropping both, but not this.

Russell on the bench - great, but as Price is starting, he’ll likely have mostly glacial service from Murray, which will negate any influence he might have had.

Fine with Sutherland going out of the 23 now Jones is fit.

Why are most of the changes in the backs, when the Lions completely lost the forward battle?

The Price call was an odd one but Murray was interim tour captain so it's clear Gatland rates him. He's now made the correct decision as Price has been hugely more influential.

The Harris decision is quite straightforward I think. The Lions are going to be a wee bit more expansive (hard not to) and Aki/Henshaw are your punchy carriers. SA will continue their kicking and so a great defender in the 13 channel isn't needed. Let's be honest also big tackle on Am aside Harris did nothing. There's no point in picking a defensive 13 if you don't do any defending outside of kick chase.

Liam Williams is a world class fullback. Yes he could play on the wing but he's not as good there. I really don't think there's much between them. I wouldn't swap Hogg for Liam Williams but I do sometimes think Liam Williams is the better player. But there can't have been much between them in Gatland's thinking for the first test.

Obviously Gatland rates Murray, fair enough, but then why start Price in Test 1, and then drop him after the Lions win?

Harris actually made sense after I realised Henshaw had moved to 13.

I’m not arguing that Williams isn’t a good player, and I’m fine with Hogg losing out to him after having a poor game. But why drop Hogg and Watson and keep VDM? The game plan doesn’t okay to his strengths at all.

The gameplan doesn't suit VdM necessarily - did fine with Cockerill's very similar gameplan but I accept the vastly different level - but who would you want on the end of the one or two chances you get? Out of everyone the Lions have I'm saying Duhan.

[Yr Alban]

The Price call was an odd one but Murray was interim tour captain so it's clear Gatland rates him. He's now made the correct decision as Price has been hugely more influential.

The Harris decision is quite straightforward I think. The Lions are going to be a wee bit more expansive (hard not to) and Aki/Henshaw are your punchy carriers. SA will continue their kicking and so a great defender in the 13 channel isn't needed. Let's be honest also big tackle on Am aside Harris did nothing. There's no point in picking a defensive 13 if you don't do any defending outside of kick chase.

Liam Williams is a world class fullback. Yes he could play on the wing but he's not as good there. I really don't think there's much between them. I wouldn't swap Hogg for Liam Williams but I do sometimes think Liam Williams is the better player. But there can't have been much between them in Gatland's thinking for the first test.

Obviously Gatland rates Murray, fair enough, but then why start Price in Test 1, and then drop him after the Lions win?

Harris actually made sense after I realised Henshaw had moved to 13.

I’m not arguing that Williams isn’t a good player, and I’m fine with Hogg losing out to him after having a poor game. But why drop Hogg and Watson and keep VDM? The game plan doesn’t okay to his strengths at all.

The gameplan doesn't suit VdM necessarily - did fine with Cockerill's very similar gameplan but I accept the vastly different level - but who would you want on the end of the one or two chances you get? Out of everyone the Lions have I'm saying Duhan.

Fair enough, but there won’t even be one or two if Biggar never passes the damn ball…

[robmatic]

The Price call was an odd one but Murray was interim tour captain so it's clear Gatland rates him. He's now made the correct decision as Price has been hugely more influential.

The Harris decision is quite straightforward I think. The Lions are going to be a wee bit more expansive (hard not to) and Aki/Henshaw are your punchy carriers. SA will continue their kicking and so a great defender in the 13 channel isn't needed. Let's be honest also big tackle on Am aside Harris did nothing. There's no point in picking a defensive 13 if you don't do any defending outside of kick chase.

Liam Williams is a world class fullback. Yes he could play on the wing but he's not as good there. I really don't think there's much between them. I wouldn't swap Hogg for Liam Williams but I do sometimes think Liam Williams is the better player. But there can't have been much between them in Gatland's thinking for the first test.

Obviously Gatland rates Murray, fair enough, but then why start Price in Test 1, and then drop him after the Lions win?

Harris actually made sense after I realised Henshaw had moved to 13.

I’m not arguing that Williams isn’t a good player, and I’m fine with Hogg losing out to him after having a poor game. But why drop Hogg and Watson and keep VDM? The game plan doesn’t okay to his strengths at all.

The gameplan doesn't suit VdM necessarily - did fine with Cockerill's very similar gameplan but I accept the vastly different level - but who would you want on the end of the one or two chances you get? Out of everyone the Lions have I'm saying Duhan.

Think you're doing a bit of a disservice to Cockerill, the back play was limited but the one idea was generally to try and shovel the ball out to Duhan on the wing.

[S/Lt_Phillips]

Assuming Russell gets on at some point, then 7 out of the 8 Scottish lions will get a test cap. Only Fagerson hasn't made a test 23. Not a bad return really, given everyone was a bit surprised at how many Scots were selected for the tour (and therefore assumed a good proportion would only be dirt-trackers).

Was thinking this. Not a bad return at all, though it seems only Price will be getting pass marks from everyone else. Assuming he doesn’t do anything daft in Test 3, that is.

I'm not sure there's many on the tour (who have been involved in the tests) will be getting pass marks. Certainly Owens, Farrell, Murray, Falatau, A Watson, Daly have all been roundly criticised. Vunipola has been mixed, LCD the same, I'm not sure AWJ has been that effective, Lawes was good in the first test but not the second, Curry hasn't lived up to the expectation, nor Beirne. Conan a bit anonymous. Furlong, Itoje and Price might be the only test players who have performed.

At least almost all the Scots have had a chance to play the tests. When you think that Henderson, Hill, LRZ, Navidi, Kelleher, George & Davies won't get test caps (nor Smith), it's certainly much better than I expected at the beginning of the tour (okay, Hill should never have been touring). And Simmons, Adams & Beard only get a shot in test 3 (along with Russell & Wyn Jones due to injury).

I have to say though, that while I'm pleased that there are Scots on tour and in the test squads, the tests themselves have been murder to watch (especially the second). The least entertaining kind of rugby.

[I like neeps]

https://amp.rugbypass.com/news/why-duha ... ssion=true

This is a good breakdown on VdM. The Boks haven't caught one defensive ball when he has been competing for it.

[Begbie]

https://amp.rugbypass.com/news/why-duha ... ssion=true

This is a good breakdown on VdM. The Boks haven't caught one defensive ball when he has been competing for it.

Just came in to post that. I've stuck it in the Lions bitching thread. Interesting reading.

[westport]

The majority of you have been ridiculously thin skinned. Sometimes you have to accept that your guy hasn't done well and move on.

You must be living in a different time dimension from the rest of us and I think you will have to quote where people have said they have all played great, because I have seen plenty of us criticise "our" players.

[dpedin]

https://amp.rugbypass.com/news/why-duha ... ssion=true

This is a good breakdown on VdM. The Boks haven't caught one defensive ball when he has been competing for it.

Just came in to post that. I've stuck it in the Lions bitching thread. Interesting reading.

This!

Interesting that article also points out that Watson has made little or no impact on his wing yet folk are desperate for VdM to be dropped yet Watson deserves another chance! Kolbe hasn't done much in the Tests up against VdM and it's clear SA are shitting themselves when VdM goes up for a ball, chases a kick or runs at them. Problem has been the Lions haven't been able or tried to get him into the game, made worse when Murray was at 9 his kicks down VdM's wing were too erratic.

I have said in previous posts that the Lions should be concentrating on their own game and taking it to SA rather than trying to negate or match their tactics. We don't have the players to do it.

[JM2K6]

Because Watson did something with ball in hand, has a history of being pretty good under the high ball, has a kicking game, and didn't get into fights or boot an opponent into the air...

It's a good spot though, and probably goes some way to explaining why Gatland kept him in. I hope he works harder to get his hands on the ball because even in a slow game his size will make him a big threat. But I think it's kinda silly not to recognise that there were pretty good reasons to want VDM dropped!

[charltom]

Because Watson did something briefly with ball in hand but threw uncatchable passes, has historically been pretty good under the high ball albeit not this series, has been known for a kicking game, and didn't really get involved...

It's a good spot though, and probably goes a long way to explaining why Gatland kept him in, given the game plan. I hope he keeps working hard to get his hands on the ball (while also maintaining positional discipline as instructed) because even in a slow game his size will make him a big threat.

I think it's kinda silly not to recognise how big an asset VDM is, even if he's done some silly things that the likes of Farrell or Williams might have got away with!

Fixed

[dpedin]

Because Watson did something with ball in hand, has a history of being pretty good under the high ball, has a kicking game, and didn't get into fights or boot an opponent into the air...

It's a good spot though, and probably goes some way to explaining why Gatland kept him in. I hope he works harder to get his hands on the ball because even in a slow game his size will make him a big threat. But I think it's kinda silly not to recognise that there were pretty good reasons to want VDM dropped!

According to the article SA are 0/11 against VdM when Lions kick down his wing yet SA have caught almost everything when kicked down Watsons wing. VdM caught more balls than Watson defensively over first 2 tests. Defensively Watson had zero tackles in second test, missed one tackle and conceded 3 turnovers. Watson may have a history of being pretty good under the high ball yet hasn't shown that in 2 tests and I think his metres made with ball in hand have mostly been when in our own 22? VdM was stupid with the kick but I have no problem with a 6'3" winger fronting up if it kicks off on the pitch. Based on the article and the stats then it is pretty clear why Watson was dropped and VdM retained his place, particularly if Price is starting at 9 to kick left footed down his wing better than Murray was able to.

[KingBlairhorn]

Guys, I don’t want to alarm you all but I just read a piece in The Offside Line about the SRU annual accounts that wasn’t a total hatchet job. As far as I am aware this is one of the signs of the apocalypse.

https://www.theoffsideline.com/scottish ... onal-year/

The SRU managed a surplus of c. £10m last year, however there were a lot of exception items including around £17m in grants and funding plus £3m in furlow payments, deferred income of £4m booked for finishing the six nations in 20/21 financial year and £10m from CVC. I presume on that basis we can surmise the underlying figures would have shown a £20-30m loss? A bullet dodged through luck on behalf of the SRU, or exceptional governance in a crisis; you decide.

[robmatic]

Guys, I don’t want to alarm you all but I just read a piece in The Offside Line about the SRU annual accounts that wasn’t a total hatchet job. As far as I am aware this is one of the signs of the apocalypse.

Perhaps they have been hacked?

[Big D]

Guys, I don’t want to alarm you all but I just read a piece in The Offside Line about the SRU annual accounts that wasn’t a total hatchet job. As far as I am aware this is one of the signs of the apocalypse.

That is it, we are all fucked.

[Begbie]

Hodge is away.