The Official Scottish Rugby Thread

[Big D]

It just occurs to me, though, that Ollie Smith or Kinghorn for Hogg might be sensible...

I don't really see it. You have to consider the squad will all have tremendous faith in Hogg, they'll all be (hopefully, I have my doubts based on the last two years) super focused on the match Vs Wales. To drop Hogg for a younger high potential player in Smith, or the guy they now believe to be back up flyhalf in Kinghorn I don't think is the right move mentally.

Or playing, I like Smith but not yet at this level. I like Kinghorn but he's not played 15 regularly for some time and I still think Blair and Toonie moved him to 10 because he was in a serious rut at 15 with cockers.

I honestly view Hogg as Scotland's greatest ever player, or at least joint. He has looked a bit off in the last few games but he was also just coming back from a few weeks off on Saturday. That of course doesn't mean he can never be dropped, but he is still a game changer and I'd have him every week. Have a feeling he is going to be special on Saturday, if not injured.

One of the few jackal turnovers too :)

They aren't dropping him in his 100th test at home in a must win game.

[Slick]

I don't really see it. You have to consider the squad will all have tremendous faith in Hogg, they'll all be (hopefully, I have my doubts based on the last two years) super focused on the match Vs Wales. To drop Hogg for a younger high potential player in Smith, or the guy they now believe to be back up flyhalf in Kinghorn I don't think is the right move mentally.

Or playing, I like Smith but not yet at this level. I like Kinghorn but he's not played 15 regularly for some time and I still think Blair and Toonie moved him to 10 because he was in a serious rut at 15 with cockers.

I honestly view Hogg as Scotland's greatest ever player, or at least joint. He has looked a bit off in the last few games but he was also just coming back from a few weeks off on Saturday. That of course doesn't mean he can never be dropped, but he is still a game changer and I'd have him every week. Have a feeling he is going to be special on Saturday, if not injured.

One of the few jackal turnovers too :)

They aren't dropping him in his 100th test at home in a must win game.

I thought his 100 was coming against Ireland - he'll reach 100 test caps this weekend including BIL caps

[charltom]

It just occurs to me, though, that Ollie Smith or Kinghorn for Hogg might be sensible...

I don't really see it. You have to consider the squad will all have tremendous faith in Hogg, they'll all be (hopefully, I have my doubts based on the last two years) super focused on the match Vs Wales. To drop Hogg for a younger high potential player in Smith, or the guy they now believe to be back up flyhalf in Kinghorn I don't think is the right move mentally.

Or playing, I like Smith but not yet at this level. I like Kinghorn but he's not played 15 regularly for some time and I still think Blair and Toonie moved him to 10 because he was in a serious rut at 15 with cockers.

I honestly view Hogg as Scotland's greatest ever player, or at least joint. He has looked a bit off in the last few games but he was also just coming back from a few weeks off on Saturday. That of course doesn't mean he can never be dropped, but he is still a game changer and I'd have him every week. Have a feeling he is going to be special on Saturday, if not injured.

I think I've seen him as a former game changer for a while. He's been solid but not spectacular lately IMO.

It being potentially his 100th cap isn't a reason to pick him, in a team game for professionals.

[Big D]

I honestly view Hogg as Scotland's greatest ever player, or at least joint. He has looked a bit off in the last few games but he was also just coming back from a few weeks off on Saturday. That of course doesn't mean he can never be dropped, but he is still a game changer and I'd have him every week. Have a feeling he is going to be special on Saturday, if not injured.

One of the few jackal turnovers too :)

They aren't dropping him in his 100th test at home in a must win game.

I thought his 100 was coming against Ireland - he'll reach 100 test caps this weekend including BIL caps

Yes that's why I said 100th test.

[Slick]

One of the few jackal turnovers too :)

They aren't dropping him in his 100th test at home in a must win game.

I thought his 100 was coming against Ireland - he'll reach 100 test caps this weekend including BIL caps

Yes that's why I said 100th test.

So you did

[Big D]

I don't really see it. You have to consider the squad will all have tremendous faith in Hogg, they'll all be (hopefully, I have my doubts based on the last two years) super focused on the match Vs Wales. To drop Hogg for a younger high potential player in Smith, or the guy they now believe to be back up flyhalf in Kinghorn I don't think is the right move mentally.

Or playing, I like Smith but not yet at this level. I like Kinghorn but he's not played 15 regularly for some time and I still think Blair and Toonie moved him to 10 because he was in a serious rut at 15 with cockers.

I honestly view Hogg as Scotland's greatest ever player, or at least joint. He has looked a bit off in the last few games but he was also just coming back from a few weeks off on Saturday. That of course doesn't mean he can never be dropped, but he is still a game changer and I'd have him every week. Have a feeling he is going to be special on Saturday, if not injured.

I think I've seen him as a former game changer for a while. He's been solid but not spectacular lately IMO.

It being potentially his 100th cap isn't a reason to pick him, in a team game for professionals.

It is a game for professionals. That's why you pick the best option for a must win game. Whereas if it was Georgia in a WC warm up they probably would be willing to rotate him out.

Hogg is still pretty central to how Scotland want to set up and control games.

[LenCohen]

To suggest not picking Hogg if he is fit is bizarre

[I like neeps]

I don't really see it. You have to consider the squad will all have tremendous faith in Hogg, they'll all be (hopefully, I have my doubts based on the last two years) super focused on the match Vs Wales. To drop Hogg for a younger high potential player in Smith, or the guy they now believe to be back up flyhalf in Kinghorn I don't think is the right move mentally.

Or playing, I like Smith but not yet at this level. I like Kinghorn but he's not played 15 regularly for some time and I still think Blair and Toonie moved him to 10 because he was in a serious rut at 15 with cockers.

I honestly view Hogg as Scotland's greatest ever player, or at least joint. He has looked a bit off in the last few games but he was also just coming back from a few weeks off on Saturday. That of course doesn't mean he can never be dropped, but he is still a game changer and I'd have him every week. Have a feeling he is going to be special on Saturday, if not injured.

I think I've seen him as a former game changer for a while. He's been solid but not spectacular lately IMO.

It being potentially his 100th cap isn't a reason to pick him, in a team game for professionals.

But to say he should be dropped for Kinghorn off the back of Kinghorn playing a good 15 minutes would be bizarre. Kinghorn maybe suits the bench well as he can come out when the game is breaking up. He's not started 15 for about 18 months I think. I don't see the logic there.

If we were saying Ollie Smith who has played well week in week out at fullback I'd understand more (and still disagree).

Hogg didn't play badly, he hasn't played badly for Scotland in a long time. It's not Hogg of 10 years ago when he was the only good player so looked better. But I really can't see why we'd drop him for Kinghorn.

[Big D]

I hadn't realised this before but why is Welsh referee Andrew Brace getting to referee a Wales match? I get that he is working for the IRFU but there are enough refs out there for this not to happen.

[Monk]

To suggest not picking Hogg if he is fit is bizarre

Weird weird weird

[Jock42]

I'd like to join the pile on and voice my disgust at dropping Hogg.

I'd be happy enough to see Fagerson come on to the bench and maybe Healy for Harrris but likewise would be happy with the same 23

[OomStruisbaai]

Where it all started

After finishing his schooling at Millfield in Somerset, the Edinburgh-born Huw Jones moved to South Africa for his gap year - where he played club rugby for False Bay in 2013. After the club's Director of Rugby, Kevin Musikanth, was appointed as coach of the UCT Ikey Tigers Varsity Cup side, Jones followed Musikanth by enrolling at the University of Cape Town for 2014. That was followed by being capped by Western Province and the Stormers, before joining Glasgow Warriors in 2017. However, in May 2016, Jones was called up to the Scotland squad and made his Test debut during their 2016 mid-year tour of Japan.

[JM2K6]

Always good to read of a failed poach attempt by the grasping Southern Hemisphere sides

[Yr Alban]

Yep. You can’t touch Jones. Authentically born in Scotland, and we are reminded that birthplace is all that matters when the squads are analysed at every RWC.

[Biffer]

I honestly view Hogg as Scotland's greatest ever player, or at least joint. He has looked a bit off in the last few games but he was also just coming back from a few weeks off on Saturday. That of course doesn't mean he can never be dropped, but he is still a game changer and I'd have him every week. Have a feeling he is going to be special on Saturday, if not injured.

I think I've seen him as a former game changer for a while. He's been solid but not spectacular lately IMO.

It being potentially his 100th cap isn't a reason to pick him, in a team game for professionals.

But to say he should be dropped for Kinghorn off the back of Kinghorn playing a good 15 minutes would be bizarre. Kinghorn maybe suits the bench well as he can come out when the game is breaking up. He's not started 15 for about 18 months I think. I don't see the logic there.

If we were saying Ollie Smith who has played well week in week out at fullback I'd understand more (and still disagree).

Hogg didn't play badly, he hasn't played badly for Scotland in a long time. It's not Hogg of 10 years ago when he was the only good player so looked better. But I really can't see why we'd drop him for Kinghorn.

The thing that marks out both Hogg and Russell as top level players is that over the missile period of their careers they've brought the areas of the game they could be poor at up to being above average. They didnt just practice what they were good at. So now people say they've had a poor game when they've been solid but unspectacular, rather than making monumental brain farts. So a solid game is now considered poor.

Dropping Hogg would be fucking stupid.

[Yr Alban]

I think I've seen him as a former game changer for a while. He's been solid but not spectacular lately IMO.

It being potentially his 100th cap isn't a reason to pick him, in a team game for professionals.

But to say he should be dropped for Kinghorn off the back of Kinghorn playing a good 15 minutes would be bizarre. Kinghorn maybe suits the bench well as he can come out when the game is breaking up. He's not started 15 for about 18 months I think. I don't see the logic there.

If we were saying Ollie Smith who has played well week in week out at fullback I'd understand more (and still disagree).

Hogg didn't play badly, he hasn't played badly for Scotland in a long time. It's not Hogg of 10 years ago when he was the only good player so looked better. But I really can't see why we'd drop him for Kinghorn.

The thing that marks out both Hogg and Russell as top level players is that over the missile period of their careers they've brought the areas of the game they could be poor at up to being above average. They didnt just practice what they were good at. So now people say they've had a poor game when they've been solid but unspectacular, rather than making monumental brain farts. So a solid game is now considered poor.

Dropping Hogg would be fucking stupid.

The only way Hogg doesn’t start on Saturday is if he isn’t fit.

[Slick]

I think we’ve managed almost a whole page of arguing about something we all agree on

[charltom]

I hope you're all right and I'm wrong!

[fishfoodie]

I think we’ve managed almost a whole page of arguing about something we all agree on

Pfffff. Amateurs


If we had a few more of the swarm over here, we'd already be up to 4k pages on the Irish thread, beating to death whether or not Ulster Winger A, is 0.00001% better than Munster Winger B

.....

and eventually coming to the conclusion they're both shite.

Up your Game !

... and bloody well done at the weekend

[Simian]

To suggest not picking Hogg if he is fit is bizarre

It’s legit crazy shit

[Simian]

I'm still struggling with Kyle Steyn getting an assist for Duhan's first try.

Try scoring pass

I’d def give him one for the second tho, so it evens out (unless you’re a bookie!)

[Simian]

On Hogg a lot over the years has been made of his one on one tackling...

... Steward is hailed as some uber solid robot and he missed three one on ones leading to scores at the weekend. Not saying he's bad, just how hard it is to tackle 1vs1 at 15

The ‘Hogg can’t tackle’ thing is stupid.

[OomStruisbaai]

Always good to read of a failed poach attempt by the grasping Southern Hemisphere sides

South Africa is to poor to poach from other countries. Maybe the odd one from Zimbabwe.

But we have an excellent schoolboy foundation to spit out and developing young rugby talent. Specially in Stormers country.

Now with the URC we get more a look at our players plying their trade in the competition for other countries and those available to us.

Was lekker to see them helping Scotland to beat England at HQ

[Big D]

Always good to read of a failed poach attempt by the grasping Southern Hemisphere sides

South Africa is to poor to poach from other countries. Maybe the odd one from Zimbabwe.

But we have an excellent schoolboy foundation to spit out and developing young rugby talent. Specially in Stormers country.

Now with the URC we get more a look at our players plying their trade in the competition for other countries and those available to us.

Was lekker to see them helping Scotland to beat England at HQ

All kidding aside, Duhan was on the scrap heap at Montpellier. I'm glad Cockerill was so forceful in signing him even after a failed medical. Talents like that deserve to be on the big stage.

[clydecloggie]

To suggest not picking Hogg if he is fit is bizarre

It’s legit crazy shit

Thanks to the timely reminder from the One-man Swarm I'll keep the non-discussion going. The Hogg-Russell kicking/running axis is possibly the defining feature of the Scotland game plan. They work together exceptionally well and generally know when to kick and when to initiate ball-in-hand phase play. Separating them is madness. Whether it's talk of dropping Hogg or not selecting Russell - it's madness.

[I like neeps]

Always good to read of a failed poach attempt by the grasping Southern Hemisphere sides

South Africa is to poor to poach from other countries. Maybe the odd one from Zimbabwe.

But we have an excellent schoolboy foundation to spit out and developing young rugby talent. Specially in Stormers country.

Now with the URC we get more a look at our players plying their trade in the competition for other countries and those available to us.

Was lekker to see them helping Scotland to beat England at HQ

All kidding aside, Duhan was on the scrap heap at Montpellier. I'm glad Cockerill was so forceful in signing him even after a failed medical. Talents like that deserve to be on the big stage.

Also when it became obvious how good he was South Africa should've called him up. Whilst Schoeman and Nel are class and maybe worth a cap or two. VdM would start every game even for the Boks.

[dpedin]

Isn't it great we are in a position to be arguing about dropping a world class FB like Hogg for an equally capable Kinghorn or a rising star in Smith? How many times have we been in the position to have 2 or 3 top class players for almost every position? I dont mind having a debate about the positives of each of these players, they all bring something slightly different and exciting to the team. Would we rather have 'missed tackles' Steward or 'never fit veteran' Halfpenny at 15? It's not that long ago we were lucky to have one fit and able player for each position or even having to convert SH to play 10 as we were bereft of talent there. Of course we can't get carried away but we are growing that strength in depth we always wanted to have!

[dpedin]

Always good to read of a failed poach attempt by the grasping Southern Hemisphere sides

South Africa is to poor to poach from other countries. Maybe the odd one from Zimbabwe.

But we have an excellent schoolboy foundation to spit out and developing young rugby talent. Specially in Stormers country.

Now with the URC we get more a look at our players plying their trade in the competition for other countries and those available to us.

Was lekker to see them helping Scotland to beat England at HQ

All kidding aside, Duhan was on the scrap heap at Montpellier. I'm glad Cockerill was so forceful in signing him even after a failed medical. Talents like that deserve to be on the big stage.

Agreed. Before he left to join Worcester I am sure there was an interview when Duhan expressed how much he owed Embra and SRU for saving his career. I remember being at an Embra game when we used to play at Myreside and I was walking in front of the stand chatting to my son. Next thing I knew I bounced off someone and turned to say something only to be confronted by this huge mountain of a man and realised it was VdM. Even though I know his stats I honestly couldn't believe how big and solid he was in the flesh, just feckin enormous! Good luck to anyone trying to stop him whilst he is running full pelt with the white line in view, suicidal!

[clydecloggie]

Isn't it great we are in a position to be arguing about dropping a world class FB like Hogg for an equally capable Kinghorn or a rising star in Smith? How many times have we been in the position to have 2 or 3 top class players for almost every position? I dont mind having a debate about the positives of each of these players, they all bring something slightly different and exciting to the team. Would we rather have 'missed tackles' Steward or 'never fit veteran' Halfpenny at 15? It's not that long ago we were lucky to have one fit and able player for each position or even having to convert SH to play 10 as we were bereft of talent there. Of course we can't get carried away but we are growing that strength in depth we always wanted to have!

But is it luck or good systems?

Controversially, the part of the SRU strategy that seems to be working best is identifying Scots-qualified or project talent and getting them through to full Scottish honours. Tuipolotu being a case in point. And with Scotland performing well, more SQ players may now be thinking seriously about the thistle, even if it is as a plan B - see Dempsey, Healy, Cooney, Forbes. They may not necessarily be first XV material but they do deepen the pool.

I am not convinced the youth system within Scotland itself will provide international-standard players in sufficient numbers to sustain the current wave.

[dpedin]

Isn't it great we are in a position to be arguing about dropping a world class FB like Hogg for an equally capable Kinghorn or a rising star in Smith? How many times have we been in the position to have 2 or 3 top class players for almost every position? I dont mind having a debate about the positives of each of these players, they all bring something slightly different and exciting to the team. Would we rather have 'missed tackles' Steward or 'never fit veteran' Halfpenny at 15? It's not that long ago we were lucky to have one fit and able player for each position or even having to convert SH to play 10 as we were bereft of talent there. Of course we can't get carried away but we are growing that strength in depth we always wanted to have!

But is it luck or good systems?

Controversially, the part of the SRU strategy that seems to be working best is identifying Scots-qualified or project talent and getting them through to full Scottish honours. Tuipolotu being a case in point. And with Scotland performing well, more SQ players may now be thinking seriously about the thistle, even if it is as a plan B - see Dempsey, Healy, Cooney, Forbes. They may not necessarily be first XV material but they do deepen the pool.

I am not convinced the youth system within Scotland itself will provide international-standard players in sufficient numbers to sustain the current wave.

Another debate for another day? My view for what it is worth is it is a bit of both given how thin our playing numbers in Scotland are for a whole lot of reasons. We seem to have a good mix of home grown talent and project players - the likes of Fagerson x 2, Gray x2, Ritchie, Horne x 2, Smith, Russell, Kinghorn, Brown, Turner, Cherry, GC, Crosbie, Hogg, Bhatti et al are a solid core of home grown but the likes of Nel, Schoo, Skinner, Dempsey, Tups, Jones, Steyn and VdM bring something extra to the pool. Many of these we brought in very early in their careers, invested in them and developed them to the level they are at now. For example VdM was badly injured and struggling to play in France - we brought him in, got him fit and developed him from a big but rough winger into one of the best. Every team does it including NZ so as long as we remain within the rules I have no problem with our strategy.

[I like neeps]

Isn't it great we are in a position to be arguing about dropping a world class FB like Hogg for an equally capable Kinghorn or a rising star in Smith? How many times have we been in the position to have 2 or 3 top class players for almost every position? I dont mind having a debate about the positives of each of these players, they all bring something slightly different and exciting to the team. Would we rather have 'missed tackles' Steward or 'never fit veteran' Halfpenny at 15? It's not that long ago we were lucky to have one fit and able player for each position or even having to convert SH to play 10 as we were bereft of talent there. Of course we can't get carried away but we are growing that strength in depth we always wanted to have!

But is it luck or good systems?

Controversially, the part of the SRU strategy that seems to be working best is identifying Scots-qualified or project talent and getting them through to full Scottish honours. Tuipolotu being a case in point. And with Scotland performing well, more SQ players may now be thinking seriously about the thistle, even if it is as a plan B - see Dempsey, Healy, Cooney, Forbes. They may not necessarily be first XV material but they do deepen the pool.

I am not convinced the youth system within Scotland itself will provide international-standard players in sufficient numbers to sustain the current wave.

Another debate for another day? My view for what it is worth is it is a bit of both given how thin our playing numbers in Scotland are for a whole lot of reasons. We seem to have a good mix of home grown talent and project players - the likes of Fagerson x 2, Gray x2, Ritchie, Horne x 2, Smith, Russell, Kinghorn, Brown, Turner, Cherry, GC, Crosbie, Hogg, Bhatti et al are a solid core of home grown but the likes of Nel, Schoo, Skinner, Dempsey, Tups, Jones, Steyn and VdM bring something extra to the pool. Many of these we brought in very early in their careers, invested in them and developed them to the level they are at now. For example VdM was badly injured and struggling to play in France - we brought him in, got him fit and developed him from a big but rough winger into one of the best. Every team does it including NZ so as long as we remain within the rules I have no problem with our strategy.

Fwiw on the project players discussion last week I listened to Jim Hamilton and Greig Laidlaw discuss it and neither of them really like it happening. You could tell it annoyed Greig more as Jim wasn't always Scotland til he dies. I think playing it down as an issue is a bit questionable as it's not how to build a team. Having a thriving development pathway ourselves would be the sign of a healthy domestic game.

I also think there is an issue with how Scotland are developing player pools only with props where the strategy clearly is naturalise or find SQs with pro experience as the coaches won't risk giving Scottish developed players those games. Bringing in a freak at wing, or unfancied centre e.g. Tuipolotu is sensible. But relying on others to develop props for you isn't smart. But, I don't think it'll change anytime soon because the SRU try everything apart from giving props a chance in matches.

I also think a lot of players will be interested in even a bad Scotland side as a way to play international rugby. Maitland was a fairly hot prospect when he joined one of the worst teams we've had in 20 years.

[clydecloggie]

Isn't it great we are in a position to be arguing about dropping a world class FB like Hogg for an equally capable Kinghorn or a rising star in Smith? How many times have we been in the position to have 2 or 3 top class players for almost every position? I dont mind having a debate about the positives of each of these players, they all bring something slightly different and exciting to the team. Would we rather have 'missed tackles' Steward or 'never fit veteran' Halfpenny at 15? It's not that long ago we were lucky to have one fit and able player for each position or even having to convert SH to play 10 as we were bereft of talent there. Of course we can't get carried away but we are growing that strength in depth we always wanted to have!

But is it luck or good systems?

Controversially, the part of the SRU strategy that seems to be working best is identifying Scots-qualified or project talent and getting them through to full Scottish honours. Tuipolotu being a case in point. And with Scotland performing well, more SQ players may now be thinking seriously about the thistle, even if it is as a plan B - see Dempsey, Healy, Cooney, Forbes. They may not necessarily be first XV material but they do deepen the pool.

I am not convinced the youth system within Scotland itself will provide international-standard players in sufficient numbers to sustain the current wave.

Another debate for another day? My view for what it is worth is it is a bit of both given how thin our playing numbers in Scotland are for a whole lot of reasons. We seem to have a good mix of home grown talent and project players - the likes of Fagerson x 2, Gray x2, Ritchie, Horne x 2, Smith, Russell, Kinghorn, Brown, Turner, Cherry, GC, Crosbie, Hogg, Bhatti et al are a solid core of home grown but the likes of Nel, Schoo, Skinner, Dempsey, Tups, Jones, Steyn and VdM bring something extra to the pool. Many of these we brought in very early in their careers, invested in them and developed them to the level they are at now. For example VdM was badly injured and struggling to play in France - we brought him in, got him fit and developed him from a big but rough winger into one of the best. Every team does it including NZ so as long as we remain within the rules I have no problem with our strategy.

Oh, I absolutely have no problem with the strategy. I think the fact that we have players from far and wide playing for Scotland actually reflects the way of the Scots - they're everywhere. I'm sure if the USA were a rugby powerhouse, Americans would make up half the Ireland team and it would be a fair reflection of where the Irish ended up in the world as well. No issue at all with that.

I just hope we are in the early years of a sustained role for Scotland at the top table, much like the IRFU have managed to do - but I'm worried the domestic setup is just below par for that to happen.

Anyways, here's to thumping Wales on the weekend, 2 from 2, a misfiring France in Paris next, 3 from 3, a diverted green bus to Murrayfield in week 4 and then it's Slam time & haggis pizza in week 5. Happy days.

[KingBlairhorn]

But is it luck or good systems?

Controversially, the part of the SRU strategy that seems to be working best is identifying Scots-qualified or project talent and getting them through to full Scottish honours. Tuipolotu being a case in point. And with Scotland performing well, more SQ players may now be thinking seriously about the thistle, even if it is as a plan B - see Dempsey, Healy, Cooney, Forbes. They may not necessarily be first XV material but they do deepen the pool.

I am not convinced the youth system within Scotland itself will provide international-standard players in sufficient numbers to sustain the current wave.

Another debate for another day? My view for what it is worth is it is a bit of both given how thin our playing numbers in Scotland are for a whole lot of reasons. We seem to have a good mix of home grown talent and project players - the likes of Fagerson x 2, Gray x2, Ritchie, Horne x 2, Smith, Russell, Kinghorn, Brown, Turner, Cherry, GC, Crosbie, Hogg, Bhatti et al are a solid core of home grown but the likes of Nel, Schoo, Skinner, Dempsey, Tups, Jones, Steyn and VdM bring something extra to the pool. Many of these we brought in very early in their careers, invested in them and developed them to the level they are at now. For example VdM was badly injured and struggling to play in France - we brought him in, got him fit and developed him from a big but rough winger into one of the best. Every team does it including NZ so as long as we remain within the rules I have no problem with our strategy.

Oh, I absolutely have no problem with the strategy. I think the fact that we have players from far and wide playing for Scotland actually reflects the way of the Scots - they're everywhere. I'm sure if the USA were a rugby powerhouse, Americans would make up half the Ireland team and it would be a fair reflection of where the Irish ended up in the world as well. No issue at all with that.

I just hope we are in the early years of a sustained role for Scotland at the top table, much like the IRFU have managed to do - but I'm worried the domestic setup is just below par for that to happen.

Anyways, here's to thumping Wales on the weekend, 2 from 2, a misfiring France in Paris next, 3 from 3, a diverted green bus to Murrayfield in week 4 and then it's Slam time & haggis pizza in week 5. Happy days.

Success breeds success. If we have a sustained period of good performances at both club and international level then absolutely the game should grow here. Unfortunately it is growing from such a tiny starting point that even huge percentage increases in participation are unlikely to make any notable impact on the elite player pool through sheer luck alone. What is needed is a clear and coherent performance strategy that is developed on the principle of converting that small player pool into 3 or 4 international standard players every year (assuming you need 30-40 players in the pool minimum and that each player has a roughly 10 year professional career). That is going to take huge investment and sustained effort to achieve.

[I like neeps]

Really good digital content from the SRU here. They've been getting much better recently

[Yr Alban]

Another debate for another day? My view for what it is worth is it is a bit of both given how thin our playing numbers in Scotland are for a whole lot of reasons. We seem to have a good mix of home grown talent and project players - the likes of Fagerson x 2, Gray x2, Ritchie, Horne x 2, Smith, Russell, Kinghorn, Brown, Turner, Cherry, GC, Crosbie, Hogg, Bhatti et al are a solid core of home grown but the likes of Nel, Schoo, Skinner, Dempsey, Tups, Jones, Steyn and VdM bring something extra to the pool. Many of these we brought in very early in their careers, invested in them and developed them to the level they are at now. For example VdM was badly injured and struggling to play in France - we brought him in, got him fit and developed him from a big but rough winger into one of the best. Every team does it including NZ so as long as we remain within the rules I have no problem with our strategy.

Oh, I absolutely have no problem with the strategy. I think the fact that we have players from far and wide playing for Scotland actually reflects the way of the Scots - they're everywhere. I'm sure if the USA were a rugby powerhouse, Americans would make up half the Ireland team and it would be a fair reflection of where the Irish ended up in the world as well. No issue at all with that.

I just hope we are in the early years of a sustained role for Scotland at the top table, much like the IRFU have managed to do - but I'm worried the domestic setup is just below par for that to happen.

Anyways, here's to thumping Wales on the weekend, 2 from 2, a misfiring France in Paris next, 3 from 3, a diverted green bus to Murrayfield in week 4 and then it's Slam time & haggis pizza in week 5. Happy days.

Success breeds success. If we have a sustained period of good performances at both club and international level then absolutely the game should grow here. Unfortunately it is growing from such a tiny starting point that even huge percentage increases in participation are unlikely to make any notable impact on the elite player pool through sheer luck alone. What is needed is a clear and coherent performance strategy that is developed on the principle of converting that small player pool into 3 or 4 international standard players every year (assuming you need 30-40 players in the pool minimum and that each player has a roughly 10 year professional career). That is going to take huge investment and sustained effort to achieve.

It’s very difficult. The SRU essentially have the impossible task of trying to increase our player numbers and develop our own talent, but at the same time maintaining a competitive team on the park. If the team goes to shit again, the public lose interest and it all becomes yet harder. We need a third pro team, but we all know the problems with that.

I think that, by and large, they have done a decent job. We have incorporated some ‘project’ players into the team if they were particularly good or we needed more depth, but we have always retained an authentically Scottish spine and I don’t think we have ever been at risk of losing our identity. A lot of the imported players increase the depth of the pool, but don’t actually end up getting more than a handful of caps.

I agree with the comments about props, but then again, we have three born-and-bred looseheads in and around the squad, one of whom is a Test Lion. It’s at tighthead we have the issue (plus perhaps the fact that all the looseheads are a similar age). (EDIT - my bad. D’Arcy Rae is a tighthead. I got confused).

[Slick]

But is it luck or good systems?

Controversially, the part of the SRU strategy that seems to be working best is identifying Scots-qualified or project talent and getting them through to full Scottish honours. Tuipolotu being a case in point. And with Scotland performing well, more SQ players may now be thinking seriously about the thistle, even if it is as a plan B - see Dempsey, Healy, Cooney, Forbes. They may not necessarily be first XV material but they do deepen the pool.

I am not convinced the youth system within Scotland itself will provide international-standard players in sufficient numbers to sustain the current wave.

Another debate for another day? My view for what it is worth is it is a bit of both given how thin our playing numbers in Scotland are for a whole lot of reasons. We seem to have a good mix of home grown talent and project players - the likes of Fagerson x 2, Gray x2, Ritchie, Horne x 2, Smith, Russell, Kinghorn, Brown, Turner, Cherry, GC, Crosbie, Hogg, Bhatti et al are a solid core of home grown but the likes of Nel, Schoo, Skinner, Dempsey, Tups, Jones, Steyn and VdM bring something extra to the pool. Many of these we brought in very early in their careers, invested in them and developed them to the level they are at now. For example VdM was badly injured and struggling to play in France - we brought him in, got him fit and developed him from a big but rough winger into one of the best. Every team does it including NZ so as long as we remain within the rules I have no problem with our strategy.

Oh, I absolutely have no problem with the strategy. I think the fact that we have players from far and wide playing for Scotland actually reflects the way of the Scots - they're everywhere. I'm sure if the USA were a rugby powerhouse, Americans would make up half the Ireland team and it would be a fair reflection of where the Irish ended up in the world as well. No issue at all with that.

I just hope we are in the early years of a sustained role for Scotland at the top table, much like the IRFU have managed to do - but I'm worried the domestic setup is just below par for that to happen.

Anyways, here's to thumping Wales on the weekend, 2 from 2, a misfiring France in Paris next, 3 from 3, a diverted green bus to Murrayfield in week 4 and then it's Slam time & haggis pizza in week 5. Happy days.

At least once an hour I'm running through the route to the GS, it's not healthy for a grown man.

[Yr Alban]

Was just thinking. What would we think if we fielded this team?
1. Sutherland
2. Turner
3. Z Fagerson
4. R Gray
5. Gilchrist
6. Ritchie
7. Crosbie
8. M Fagerson
9. Horne
10. Russell
11. Kinghorn
12. Jones
13. Bennett
14. Graham
15. Hogg

Bench: Bhatti, Brown, Walker, J Gray, Darge, Steele, Hastings, Smith

OK, the centre pairing is untried, though Jones has been playing 12 for Glasgow, but that’s a 23 of players who were all (to my knowledge) born in Scotland. And I wouldn’t say it looked weak. You could add in Cherry, Rae, Cummings, Bradbury, Dobie, Thompson, McDowall…

[dpedin]

Was just thinking. What would we think if we fielded this team?
1. Sutherland
2. Turner
3. Z Fagerson
4. R Gray
5. Gilchrist
6. Ritchie
7. Crosbie
8. M Fagerson
9. Horne
10. Russell
11. Kinghorn
12. Jones
13. Bennett
14. Graham
15. Hogg

Bench: Bhatti, Brown, Walker, J Gray, Darge, Steele, Hastings, Smith

OK, the centre pairing is untried, though Jones has been playing 12 for Glasgow, but that’s a 23 of players who were all (to my knowledge) born in Scotland. And I wouldn’t say it looked weak. You could add in Cherry, Rae, Cummings, Bradbury, Dobie, Thompson, McDowall…

I would have McDowell at 12 and Jones at 13 but apart from that not a bad home grown team!

[clydecloggie]

Was just thinking. What would we think if we fielded this team?
1. Sutherland
2. Turner
3. Z Fagerson
4. R Gray
5. Gilchrist
6. Ritchie
7. Crosbie
8. M Fagerson
9. Horne
10. Russell
11. Kinghorn
12. Jones
13. Bennett
14. Graham
15. Hogg

Bench: Bhatti, Brown, Walker, J Gray, Darge, Steele, Hastings, Smith

OK, the centre pairing is untried, though Jones has been playing 12 for Glasgow, but that’s a 23 of players who were all (to my knowledge) born in Scotland. And I wouldn’t say it looked weak. You could add in Cherry, Rae, Cummings, Bradbury, Dobie, Thompson, McDowall…

I would have McDowell at 12 and Jones at 13 but apart from that not a bad home grown team!

Yer average pundit/punter would still call it South Africa A or United Nations XV, would point at Huw Jones developing in Cape Town and Russell coming of age in Paris. Once a narrative sets in, facts don't matter anymore.

[Yr Alban]

Was just thinking. What would we think if we fielded this team?
1. Sutherland
2. Turner
3. Z Fagerson
4. R Gray
5. Gilchrist
6. Ritchie
7. Crosbie
8. M Fagerson
9. Horne
10. Russell
11. Kinghorn
12. Jones
13. Bennett
14. Graham
15. Hogg

Bench: Bhatti, Brown, Walker, J Gray, Darge, Steele, Hastings, Smith

OK, the centre pairing is untried, though Jones has been playing 12 for Glasgow, but that’s a 23 of players who were all (to my knowledge) born in Scotland. And I wouldn’t say it looked weak. You could add in Cherry, Rae, Cummings, Bradbury, Dobie, Thompson, McDowall…

I would have McDowell at 12 and Jones at 13 but apart from that not a bad home grown team!

Yer average pundit/punter would still call it South Africa A or United Nations XV, would point at Huw Jones developing in Cape Town and Russell coming of age in Paris. Once a narrative sets in, facts don't matter anymore.

Oh, I know. When they analyse the World Cup squads then it’s all about how many players were born in the country. But some people want to discount players even when they were, on the basis of ‘where they learned their rugby’. Strangely, this only works one way round - if a player like Ali Price graduates from the Scottish Rugby Academy, all that matters is where he was born.