The Official Scottish Rugby Thread

[fishfoodie]

Scottish rugby needs to get real and have coaches limited to the amount of NSQs they can have.

Who is the High Performance Director in the SRU ?

One appointment in the Irish setup, that was controversial at the time, but brilliant in retrospect was David Nucifora. He came from outside, so had no provincial allegiance, & he was the one who veto'd NIQ players, if the depth across the provinces wasn't deep enough.

He also facilitated the moves of players between provinces, so that players got game time, & all four could be competitive

Because Scotland only has two teams they should never be allowed to get to a position where NSQs are blocking qualified players from getting contracts.

The SRU needs to grow a pair, & let the clubs know who's funding them.

[topofthemoon]

Going by Wiki, I count 7 NSQ at Edinburgh and 8 at Glasgow.

Edinburgh:
- DeBruin (out of contract this year from what I can find)
- Venter (2026)
- Nield - short/1 year deal to cover during RWC and Muncaster got a knee injury
- Sweil - short term cover, possibly kept on after Kinghorn left
- Mata (going)
- Boffelli (2025)
- Goosen (unclear if 2 (2024) or 3 (2025) contract)

Mata and Boffelli are both world class and will have helped raise the level of those around.

The props is a bit chicken and egg. Are we not developing props because they are not getting senior game time or are they just not very good and would cause significant detriment to the team by playing?

I can see sense in the Goosen signing given there will be times that all the senior experienced back 3 players would be unavailable. Paterson was injured for large parts of 2023 too.

Given Mata is leaving, and two are short term deals Edinburgh might be carrying fewer NSQ next season.

Neil and Sweil are both left a few weeks ago so Edinburgh’s NSQ tally is 5 out of 42 in the full-time squad which seems reasonable.

Glasgow have 10 out of 46 which feels a bit too high. Jordan only has 8 months or so to go before he is SQ and there 2 or 3 others who will probably leave at the end of the season. 1 NSQ already confirmed coming in but I'd still expect Glasgow’s NSQ to be lower next season.

Across the two teams, 4 of the NSQ are props (1 LH and 3 THs) and 5 are back 3 players which maybe shows the positions where player development has struggled the most.

[Yr Alban]

Someone help me feel better here. Can anyone recall a match Scotland actually won thanks to a clear refereeing-related miscarriage of justice? Because I can’t right now. I’m sure it must have happened at some point? I can think of one game we won thanks to outrageous good fortune (France in Paris in 2021) but that was thanks to Dulin not kicking the ball dead, not the officials.

I’d like to think that these things even out. I’m just not convinced it is true.

[charltom]

Someone help me feel better here. Can anyone recall a match Scotland actually won thanks to a clear refereeing-related miscarriage of justice? Because I can’t right now. I’m sure it must have happened at some point? I can think of one game we won thanks to outrageous good fortune (France in Paris in 2021) but that was thanks to Dulin not kicking the ball dead, not the officials.

I’d like to think that these things even out. I’m just not convinced it is true.

It never happens. We are always the ones who don't get the rub of the green.

I hope that the powers that be at SRU make formal representations each time these things unfairly go against us, but they are all so well educated that I expect they are the only nation in rugby that just accepts it, as we were always taught we should, when things go against us.

If World Rugby were to do the right thing, it would look at the video, conclude the same as everyone else, change the result and clarify to the referees how the process *should* work to ensure justice is served. But that will never happen.

Remember this follows on from the 14 consecutive penalties vs Wales last week, from the multitude of poor decisions (incl Keenan deemed inbound while standing on the line) against Ireland at the RWC, and from no red card (or even yellow or penalty) for Jesse Kriel vs SA at the RWC.

Each was a big deal. All together make it virtually impossible for Scotland's players to achieve what they should.

On the plus side, if Scotland can learn to overcome all these and still prosper, then the 2027 RWC is ours for the taking...!

Yes I know that sounds insane.

[I like neeps]

Going by Wiki, I count 7 NSQ at Edinburgh and 8 at Glasgow.

Edinburgh:
- DeBruin (out of contract this year from what I can find)
- Venter (2026)
- Nield - short/1 year deal to cover during RWC and Muncaster got a knee injury
- Sweil - short term cover, possibly kept on after Kinghorn left
- Mata (going)
- Boffelli (2025)
- Goosen (unclear if 2 (2024) or 3 (2025) contract)

Mata and Boffelli are both world class and will have helped raise the level of those around.

The props is a bit chicken and egg. Are we not developing props because they are not getting senior game time or are they just not very good and would cause significant detriment to the team by playing?

I can see sense in the Goosen signing given there will be times that all the senior experienced back 3 players would be unavailable. Paterson was injured for large parts of 2023 too.

Given Mata is leaving, and two are short term deals Edinburgh might be carrying fewer NSQ next season.

So exactly and these players mostly show why the NSQ policy is structured with either wrong long term assumptions or incredibly short termist.

Venter, de Bruin, Schoeman - all signed as project players. We cannot with 5 year windows outsource the development of front row. Examples of failed long term assumptions.

Nield, Swiel - needless depth signings as they're known to the SRU (Nield) or the HC (Swiel). You have McConnell training with the squad, ear marked as a beast, really good in the super6, u20s standout. Why are we wasting time with Nield? Swiel - see Scott, Cammy. There's been times he's played 15 I'm sure. Short termist, unacceptable.

Goosen - really good player, there are so few games during international windows that's not an excuse that washes I'm afraid. Edinburgh don't need back 3. Short termist, good players being available doesn't mean we should sign them.

Bofelli/Mara - world class player becomes available, okay that's fine. And I appreciate Mata was a bit of a "rugby risk" but I don't mind them. None of the above are risks.

And that's just this year - you had times when Edinburgh were running out Immelmann, Bofelli, Moyano - that was just wrong.

See also - Glasgow and props, Glasgow when they were allowed to go a year with TJ Ioane and Lokotui with Darge/Boyle holding tackle bags at Edinburgh.

It's also not good enough Glasgow have average to below average players like Peterson and Henco Venter playing over young Scots.

[I like neeps]

Scottish rugby needs to get real and have coaches limited to the amount of NSQs they can have.

Who is the High Performance Director in the SRU ?

One appointment in the Irish setup, that was controversial at the time, but brilliant in retrospect was David Nucifora. He came from outside, so had no provincial allegiance, & he was the one who veto'd NIQ players, if the depth across the provinces wasn't deep enough.

He also facilitated the moves of players between provinces, so that players got game time, & all four could be competitive

Because Scotland only has two teams they should never be allowed to get to a position where NSQs are blocking qualified players from getting contracts.

The SRU needs to grow a pair, & let the clubs know who's funding them.

It was Mallinder, don't know now.

I agree with the point about Nucifora, having joined up recruitment where development of Irish players is the priority is essential.

For Scotland winning pro clubs is the priority but they don't win much anyway.

[topofthemoon]

Going by Wiki, I count 7 NSQ at Edinburgh and 8 at Glasgow.

Edinburgh:
- DeBruin (out of contract this year from what I can find)
- Venter (2026)
- Nield - short/1 year deal to cover during RWC and Muncaster got a knee injury
- Sweil - short term cover, possibly kept on after Kinghorn left
- Mata (going)
- Boffelli (2025)
- Goosen (unclear if 2 (2024) or 3 (2025) contract)

Mata and Boffelli are both world class and will have helped raise the level of those around.

The props is a bit chicken and egg. Are we not developing props because they are not getting senior game time or are they just not very good and would cause significant detriment to the team by playing?

I can see sense in the Goosen signing given there will be times that all the senior experienced back 3 players would be unavailable. Paterson was injured for large parts of 2023 too.

Given Mata is leaving, and two are short term deals Edinburgh might be carrying fewer NSQ next season.

So exactly and these players mostly show why the NSQ policy is structured with either wrong long term assumptions or incredibly short termist.

Venter, de Bruin, Schoeman - all signed as project players. We cannot with 5 year windows outsource the development of front row. Examples of failed long term assumptions.

Nield, Swiel - needless depth signings as they're known to the SRU (Nield) or the HC (Swiel). You have McConnell training with the squad, ear marked as a beast, really good in the super6, u20s standout. Why are we wasting time with Nield? Swiel - see Scott, Cammy. There's been times he's played 15 I'm sure. Short termist, unacceptable.

Goosen - really good player, there are so few games during international windows that's not an excuse that washes I'm afraid. Edinburgh don't need back 3. Short termist, good players being available doesn't mean we should sign them.

Bofelli/Mara - world class player becomes available, okay that's fine. And I appreciate Mata was a bit of a "rugby risk" but I don't mind them. None of the above are risks.

And that's just this year - you had times when Edinburgh were running out Immelmann, Bofelli, Moyano - that was just wrong.

See also - Glasgow and props, Glasgow when they were allowed to go a year with TJ Ioane and Lokotui with Darge/Boyle holding tackle bags at Edinburgh.

It's also not good enough Glasgow have average to below average players like Peterson and Henco Venter playing over young Scots.

de Bruin is captured by South Africa due to games he played for their u20 side in 2013 so can't qualify on residency. Schoeman I think his profile and level of play probably would have meant residency qualification factored into the decision to sign him. It was expected to be 5 years for him though so it would have been a relatively lower priority than Edinburgh’s needs for the 3 years of his first contract.

Venter I don't think residency would have been much of a consideration in his initial signing but it will increase his chances on contract renewals as he gets closer to that status.

The short term signings plug gaps. I don't think too many young Scottish players cope well with a sink or swim approach. There's also managing their physical development - these guys need to keep getting stronger / faster/ bigger during the season which is difficult to do while playing week in, week out.

Peterson being in for the short term (definitely not a below average performer by the way) allowed Franco Smith to manage game time for Max Williamson and Alex Samuel through the first half of the season while keeping the size and power of the Glasgow pack at a high level.

Venter was a specific request from Franco to fill a leadership role in the squad. His performances for Glasgow have also not been below average.

[I like neeps]

Going by Wiki, I count 7 NSQ at Edinburgh and 8 at Glasgow.

Edinburgh:
- DeBruin (out of contract this year from what I can find)
- Venter (2026)
- Nield - short/1 year deal to cover during RWC and Muncaster got a knee injury
- Sweil - short term cover, possibly kept on after Kinghorn left
- Mata (going)
- Boffelli (2025)
- Goosen (unclear if 2 (2024) or 3 (2025) contract)

Mata and Boffelli are both world class and will have helped raise the level of those around.

The props is a bit chicken and egg. Are we not developing props because they are not getting senior game time or are they just not very good and would cause significant detriment to the team by playing?

I can see sense in the Goosen signing given there will be times that all the senior experienced back 3 players would be unavailable. Paterson was injured for large parts of 2023 too.

Given Mata is leaving, and two are short term deals Edinburgh might be carrying fewer NSQ next season.

So exactly and these players mostly show why the NSQ policy is structured with either wrong long term assumptions or incredibly short termist.

Venter, de Bruin, Schoeman - all signed as project players. We cannot with 5 year windows outsource the development of front row. Examples of failed long term assumptions.

Nield, Swiel - needless depth signings as they're known to the SRU (Nield) or the HC (Swiel). You have McConnell training with the squad, ear marked as a beast, really good in the super6, u20s standout. Why are we wasting time with Nield? Swiel - see Scott, Cammy. There's been times he's played 15 I'm sure. Short termist, unacceptable.

Goosen - really good player, there are so few games during international windows that's not an excuse that washes I'm afraid. Edinburgh don't need back 3. Short termist, good players being available doesn't mean we should sign them.

Bofelli/Mara - world class player becomes available, okay that's fine. And I appreciate Mata was a bit of a "rugby risk" but I don't mind them. None of the above are risks.

And that's just this year - you had times when Edinburgh were running out Immelmann, Bofelli, Moyano - that was just wrong.

See also - Glasgow and props, Glasgow when they were allowed to go a year with TJ Ioane and Lokotui with Darge/Boyle holding tackle bags at Edinburgh.

It's also not good enough Glasgow have average to below average players like Peterson and Henco Venter playing over young Scots.

de Bruin is captured by South Africa due to games he played for their u20 side in 2013 so can't qualify on residency. Schoeman I think his profile and level of play probably would have meant residency qualification factored into the decision to sign him. It was expected to be 5 years for him though so it would have been a relatively lower priority than Edinburgh’s needs for the 3 years of his first contract.

Venter I don't think residency would have been much of a consideration in his initial signing but it will increase his chances on contract renewals as he gets closer to that status.

The short term signings plug gaps. I don't think too many young Scottish players cope well with a sink or swim approach. There's also managing their physical development - these guys need to keep getting stronger / faster/ bigger during the season which is difficult to do while playing week in, week out.

Peterson being in for the short term (definitely not a below average performer by the way) allowed Franco Smith to manage game time for Max Williamson and Alex Samuel through the first half of the season while keeping the size and power of the Glasgow pack at a high level.

Venter was a specific request from Franco to fill a leadership role in the squad. His performances for Glasgow have also not been below average.

Didn't realise de Bruin wasn't even going to be a project. The SRU badly need to stop with stocking up on NSQ props. Venter will be capped he's surely close to qualification? We currently have as many props schooled in Scotland in the national squad as we have schooled in SA. I've no issue with project players, I have a big issue when that's the player development strategy of our national union.

Peterson and Venter are below average players, their peak is depth players at Glasgow. I hate to say, that's at best average in the grand scheme of things. I know everyone overrates players who play for their favourite team but Venter is 31 and in SA was a Currie cup level player, Peterson is just a solid Glasgow player. There's no place in Scottish pro teams where gametime is hard to come by for NSQs who aren't amongst the best players in the squad. Is a 31 year old south African with pro experience better than an academy player today? I hope so. Is it better for Scottish rugby? No. Not In my opinion.

Peterson as a short term signing is even worse to be honest. What's the expectation, players who have been in the stage 3 academy for what 2 years will be finally ready after another half a season? I presume he was signed because du Preez or Cummings was long term injured? Not to manage the gametime of youngsters I'd bet.

And player management is an argument I don't buy anyway. The young players need gametime, not management. Which it seems they must get a lot of, as they don't play.

And I don't buy sink or swim either. An example, Paterson yesterday. I'll tell you who will sink - the guys like Paddy Harrison who spend so much time training they'll never be match fit or ready. At u20 level him and ashman were a great one two punch. And now? Ashman is miles ahead. Why? Because Sale played him.

In my opinion, it's wrong to have NSQs who aren't top quality players in Scottish pro clubs. We have evidence of players such as Rowe and Paterson that coaches don't play because they're allowed to sign players with 30 odd pro games and are 26-30 that they don't play.

I appreciate that we're a diasporic country in a union in which nationality is fluid. And I don't like the cheap arguements because someone is born in England they aren't Scottish or whatever. But what is certain is that we're the only tier1 rugby nation who has outsourced development of our players to a major extent. And it's a real problem. The fix starts with reducing the number of NSQs the pro clubs have. Regrettable but required for a stronger national side.

[topofthemoon]

So exactly and these players mostly show why the NSQ policy is structured with either wrong long term assumptions or incredibly short termist.

Venter, de Bruin, Schoeman - all signed as project players. We cannot with 5 year windows outsource the development of front row. Examples of failed long term assumptions.

Nield, Swiel - needless depth signings as they're known to the SRU (Nield) or the HC (Swiel). You have McConnell training with the squad, ear marked as a beast, really good in the super6, u20s standout. Why are we wasting time with Nield? Swiel - see Scott, Cammy. There's been times he's played 15 I'm sure. Short termist, unacceptable.

Goosen - really good player, there are so few games during international windows that's not an excuse that washes I'm afraid. Edinburgh don't need back 3. Short termist, good players being available doesn't mean we should sign them.

Bofelli/Mara - world class player becomes available, okay that's fine. And I appreciate Mata was a bit of a "rugby risk" but I don't mind them. None of the above are risks.

And that's just this year - you had times when Edinburgh were running out Immelmann, Bofelli, Moyano - that was just wrong.

See also - Glasgow and props, Glasgow when they were allowed to go a year with TJ Ioane and Lokotui with Darge/Boyle holding tackle bags at Edinburgh.

It's also not good enough Glasgow have average to below average players like Peterson and Henco Venter playing over young Scots.

de Bruin is captured by South Africa due to games he played for their u20 side in 2013 so can't qualify on residency. Schoeman I think his profile and level of play probably would have meant residency qualification factored into the decision to sign him. It was expected to be 5 years for him though so it would have been a relatively lower priority than Edinburgh’s needs for the 3 years of his first contract.

Venter I don't think residency would have been much of a consideration in his initial signing but it will increase his chances on contract renewals as he gets closer to that status.

The short term signings plug gaps. I don't think too many young Scottish players cope well with a sink or swim approach. There's also managing their physical development - these guys need to keep getting stronger / faster/ bigger during the season which is difficult to do while playing week in, week out.

Peterson being in for the short term (definitely not a below average performer by the way) allowed Franco Smith to manage game time for Max Williamson and Alex Samuel through the first half of the season while keeping the size and power of the Glasgow pack at a high level.

Venter was a specific request from Franco to fill a leadership role in the squad. His performances for Glasgow have also not been below average.

Didn't realise de Bruin wasn't even going to be a project. The SRU badly need to stop with stocking up on NSQ props. Venter will be capped he's surely close to qualification? We currently have as many props schooled in Scotland in the national squad as we have schooled in SA. I've no issue with project players, I have a big issue when that's the player development strategy of our national union.

Peterson and Venter are below average players, their peak is depth players at Glasgow. I hate to say, that's at best average in the grand scheme of things. I know everyone overrates players who play for their favourite team but Venter is 31 and in SA was a Currie cup level player, Peterson is just a solid Glasgow player. There's no place in Scottish pro teams where gametime is hard to come by for NSQs who aren't amongst the best players in the squad. Is a 31 year old south African with pro experience better than an academy player today? I hope so. Is it better for Scottish rugby? No. Not In my opinion.

Peterson as a short term signing is even worse to be honest. What's the expectation, players who have been in the stage 3 academy for what 2 years will be finally ready after another half a season? I presume he was signed because du Preez or Cummings was long term injured? Not to manage the gametime of youngsters I'd bet.

And player management is an argument I don't buy anyway. The young players need gametime, not management. Which it seems they must get a lot of, as they don't play.

And I don't buy sink or swim either. An example, Paterson yesterday. I'll tell you who will sink - the guys like Paddy Harrison who spend so much time training they'll never be match fit or ready. At u20 level him and ashman were a great one two punch. And now? Ashman is miles ahead. Why? Because Sale played him.

In my opinion, it's wrong to have NSQs who aren't top quality players in Scottish pro clubs. We have evidence of players such as Rowe and Paterson that coaches don't play because they're allowed to sign players with 30 odd pro games and are 26-30 that they don't play.

I appreciate that we're a diasporic country in a union in which nationality is fluid. And I don't like the cheap arguements because someone is born in England they aren't Scottish or whatever. But what is certain is that we're the only tier1 rugby nation who has outsourced development of our players to a major extent. And it's a real problem. The fix starts with reducing the number of NSQs the pro clubs have. Regrettable but required for a stronger national side.

2026 for Venter.

Peterson was brought in following Du Perez injury. Allied to managing Gray and Cummings post World Cup it would have meant relying on Samuel and Williamson which the coaches didn't assess them as being ready for but with Peterson in place the young lads have still been able to get decent minutes spread across the two of them.

Sometimes the standard of the depth players can be nearly as important as the first XV when it comes to building a season. There aren't enough players at the standard required to compete in the URC and Europe.

I'd agree there need to be limits but I think eliminating all NSQs who aren't first choice players isn't realistic. Edinburgh's numbers as they stand look ok and maybe even a slot they could use if there's a position that needs strengthening. Glasgow's numbers need to come down but without hamstringing the squad.

[I like neeps]

de Bruin is captured by South Africa due to games he played for their u20 side in 2013 so can't qualify on residency. Schoeman I think his profile and level of play probably would have meant residency qualification factored into the decision to sign him. It was expected to be 5 years for him though so it would have been a relatively lower priority than Edinburgh’s needs for the 3 years of his first contract.

Venter I don't think residency would have been much of a consideration in his initial signing but it will increase his chances on contract renewals as he gets closer to that status.

The short term signings plug gaps. I don't think too many young Scottish players cope well with a sink or swim approach. There's also managing their physical development - these guys need to keep getting stronger / faster/ bigger during the season which is difficult to do while playing week in, week out.

Peterson being in for the short term (definitely not a below average performer by the way) allowed Franco Smith to manage game time for Max Williamson and Alex Samuel through the first half of the season while keeping the size and power of the Glasgow pack at a high level.

Venter was a specific request from Franco to fill a leadership role in the squad. His performances for Glasgow have also not been below average.

Didn't realise de Bruin wasn't even going to be a project. The SRU badly need to stop with stocking up on NSQ props. Venter will be capped he's surely close to qualification? We currently have as many props schooled in Scotland in the national squad as we have schooled in SA. I've no issue with project players, I have a big issue when that's the player development strategy of our national union.

Peterson and Venter are below average players, their peak is depth players at Glasgow. I hate to say, that's at best average in the grand scheme of things. I know everyone overrates players who play for their favourite team but Venter is 31 and in SA was a Currie cup level player, Peterson is just a solid Glasgow player. There's no place in Scottish pro teams where gametime is hard to come by for NSQs who aren't amongst the best players in the squad. Is a 31 year old south African with pro experience better than an academy player today? I hope so. Is it better for Scottish rugby? No. Not In my opinion.

Peterson as a short term signing is even worse to be honest. What's the expectation, players who have been in the stage 3 academy for what 2 years will be finally ready after another half a season? I presume he was signed because du Preez or Cummings was long term injured? Not to manage the gametime of youngsters I'd bet.

And player management is an argument I don't buy anyway. The young players need gametime, not management. Which it seems they must get a lot of, as they don't play.

And I don't buy sink or swim either. An example, Paterson yesterday. I'll tell you who will sink - the guys like Paddy Harrison who spend so much time training they'll never be match fit or ready. At u20 level him and ashman were a great one two punch. And now? Ashman is miles ahead. Why? Because Sale played him.

In my opinion, it's wrong to have NSQs who aren't top quality players in Scottish pro clubs. We have evidence of players such as Rowe and Paterson that coaches don't play because they're allowed to sign players with 30 odd pro games and are 26-30 that they don't play.

I appreciate that we're a diasporic country in a union in which nationality is fluid. And I don't like the cheap arguements because someone is born in England they aren't Scottish or whatever. But what is certain is that we're the only tier1 rugby nation who has outsourced development of our players to a major extent. And it's a real problem. The fix starts with reducing the number of NSQs the pro clubs have. Regrettable but required for a stronger national side.

2026 for Venter.

Peterson was brought in following Du Perez injury. Allied to managing Gray and Cummings post World Cup it would have meant relying on Samuel and Williamson which the coaches didn't assess them as being ready for but with Peterson in place the young lads have still been able to get decent minutes spread across the two of them.

Sometimes the standard of the depth players can be nearly as important as the first XV when it comes to building a season. There aren't enough players at the standard required to compete in the URC and Europe.

I'd agree there need to be limits but I think eliminating all NSQs who aren't first choice players isn't realistic. Edinburgh's numbers as they stand look ok and maybe even a slot they could use if there's a position that needs strengthening. Glasgow's numbers need to come down but without hamstringing the squad.

The coaches assessed that a pro who has the benefit and experience of playing a decade of rugby at a high level is better than two academy lads. Absolutely correct assessment. What I believe is the SRU should have said no, we're in the business of developing players. How many URC games did Cummings miss? Can't have been many.

I would have agreed that removing all NSQ depth players would derail in season in the old days. But now there's no club rugby during international weeks, I don't agree. Less rugby equals less depth required equals young Scots over NSQs.

[TheNatalShark]

So without a playing 7s side, we no longer have the means to change a players national team? Vs those teams that have so far realigned captured players.

[KingBlairhorn]

I think to a certain extent we have to say we are where we are and it’s about what we do next. Surely someone at the SRU has recognised that certain players will retire in the next few years (at Glasgow Brown and Gray for sure, Weir and Kennedy possibilities and also surely within a couple of years). What is the plan for those departures, each should be filled with a Scottish player be it from the Glasgow or the Edinburgh academy.

Equally at Edinburgh it’s no secret Nel, Cherry, Gilchrist and Watson are nearing the end, what is the plan to ensure the next player in is Scottish?

With that covered there is then a requirement to look at non-SQ players and ask if they can be replaced at the end of their contract with SQ players. I am not against having non-SQ players in the squad, but rather than having 4 or 5 mediocre ones I would rather there were 1 or 2 exceptional ones (think Mata, Nakarawa, DTH etc.). Could you imagine Glasgow or Edinburgh signing guys like Kitsoff, or Snyman or whatever? It would be so much better than signing, with all respect, absolute bog standard players like Peterson.

[I like neeps]

I think to a certain extent we have to say we are where we are and it’s about what we do next. Surely someone at the SRU has recognised that certain players will retire in the next few years (at Glasgow Brown and Gray for sure, Weir and Kennedy possibilities and also surely within a couple of years). What is the plan for those departures, each should be filled with a Scottish player be it from the Glasgow or the Edinburgh academy.

Equally at Edinburgh it’s no secret Nel, Cherry, Gilchrist and Watson are nearing the end, what is the plan to ensure the next player in is Scottish?

With that covered there is then a requirement to look at non-SQ players and ask if they can be replaced at the end of their contract with SQ players. I am not against having non-SQ players in the squad, but rather than having 4 or 5 mediocre ones I would rather there were 1 or 2 exceptional ones (think Mata, Nakarawa, DTH etc.). Could you imagine Glasgow or Edinburgh signing guys like Kitsoff, or Snyman or whatever? It would be so much better than signing, with all respect, absolute bog standard players like Peterson.

Glasgow to be fair at hooker have been playing Angus Fraser and Gregor Hiddleston this year. The plan will be to replace Gray with Samuel and Williamson, but the time to give them weekly starting roles is now except Peterson got them.

Cherry again Edinburgh have young hookers. But why has McBurney been playing over Harrison. Edinburgh only really play SQ second rows but I was far more angry when they signed Pearce Phillips in Cockerill's last year than I should have been. And with back row again Edinburgh are fairly good as playing Boyle and Muncaster but again there is nothing to be gained from Cam Nield and everything to be gained by giving his minutes to McConnell.

Nel the plan will be an nsq or sq from somewhere else. As the definition of insanity if you look it up in the dictionary is Scotland's approach to prop development.

[Tichtheid]

At Embra Schooey is 29, Venter 26, , Bomber Hislop 32 Mikey Jones 21.

Nel is 176, Sebastian 29, Rae 30, Williams 30.

I really hope Ollie Blythe-Lafferty is the answer (and Norrie at Glasgow), but it will take a lot of time before the question can be asked. The reality is that at tighthead we need someone (or two) in their mid-twenties, and more O B-Ls too.

To my mind last Friday night proved beyond doubt that the Super 6 and the Futures team should be invested in, both terms of time and funding. Up to now we have been absolutely battered off the park up front in the U20s

[topofthemoon]

The coaches assessed that a pro who has the benefit and experience of playing a decade of rugby at a high level is better than two academy lads. Absolutely correct assessment. What I believe is the SRU should have said no, we're in the business of developing players. How many URC games did Cummings miss? Can't have been many.

I would have agreed that removing all NSQ depth players would derail in season in the old days. But now there's no club rugby during international weeks, I don't agree. Less rugby equals less depth required equals young Scots over NSQs.

I point was more than the coaches assessed the players weren't ready to be relied on as week to week in the first team so better for the team and managing their development to have another more experienced player in the Depth Chart.

We're in the business of producing successful pro teams and developing players.

Cummings has had 3 rest weeks so far.

There are fewer clashes between club and international matches but there are still games. In a 'normal' season, there will be 2 games immediately before and after the November Test window; 2 games immediately before and after the Six Nations; and 2 games during the Six Nations that the main internationals will be withheld from - that's one third of all regular season games in the URC. Test players can also only play a maximum 5 matches in a row so could be looking at another 2 or 3 weekends off depending on timing of fixtures.

Difficult to find a forward who didn't also have time off injured! But as examples from the backs in 2022/23, Tuipulotu had 2 weeks off injured - 1 of which would have had to be a rest week anyway - and only played 16 out of 27 game for Glasgow last season. Price and Horne had no injuries and played 19 each.

[topofthemoon]

So without a playing 7s side, we no longer have the means to change a players national team? Vs those teams that have so far realigned captured players.

We didn't have access to this route before either because Scotland didn't compete in the Olympics, only GB. The change to permanently being GB 7s hasn't changed this.

[Biffer]

Doug as truth was very clear at the Edinburgh ST holders event last week that they deliberately lowered the number of NSQ players in the squad. He said it currently sits about 90%, and that’s how they intend to keep it.

In terms of replacements for players who are leaving this year or retiring in the next few, they mentioned Muncaster in relation to Mata, we have Boyle coming through to replace Watson, have Hosdgson, Sykes, Young and Campbell at lock, Currie and Scott at centre to replace Bennett, and Paterson, Henry and Sweeney in the back three. Prop is an issue though. Let’s see how the development of the guys in the academy goes if they’re playing super six.

[Tichtheid]

Doug as truth was very clear at the Edinburgh ST holders event last week that they deliberately lowered the number of NSQ players in the squad. He said it currently sits about 90%, and that’s how they intend to keep it.

In terms of replacements for players who are leaving this year or retiring in the next few, they mentioned Muncaster in relation to Mata, we have Boyle coming through to replace Watson, have Hosdgson, Sykes, Young and Campbell at lock, Currie and Scott at centre to replace Bennett, and Paterson, Henry and Sweeney in the back three. Prop is an issue though. Let’s see how the development of the guys in the academy goes if they’re playing super six.

It's a little disappointing if they are seeing Scott as a centre, I was hoping he was being developed as a 10.

I still think Crosbie will be first choice at 8 next year

[I like neeps]

The coaches assessed that a pro who has the benefit and experience of playing a decade of rugby at a high level is better than two academy lads. Absolutely correct assessment. What I believe is the SRU should have said no, we're in the business of developing players. How many URC games did Cummings miss? Can't have been many.

I would have agreed that removing all NSQ depth players would derail in season in the old days. But now there's no club rugby during international weeks, I don't agree. Less rugby equals less depth required equals young Scots over NSQs.

I point was more than the coaches assessed the players weren't ready to be relied on as week to week in the first team so better for the team and managing their development to have another more experienced player in the Depth Chart.

We're in the business of producing successful pro teams and developing players.

Cummings has had 3 rest weeks so far.

There are fewer clashes between club and international matches but there are still games. In a 'normal' season, there will be 2 games immediately before and after the November Test window; 2 games immediately before and after the Six Nations; and 2 games during the Six Nations that the main internationals will be withheld from - that's one third of all regular season games in the URC. Test players can also only play a maximum 5 matches in a row so could be looking at another 2 or 3 weekends off depending on timing of fixtures.

Difficult to find a forward who didn't also have time off injured! But as examples from the backs in 2022/23, Tuipulotu had 2 weeks off injured - 1 of which would have had to be a rest week anyway - and only played 16 out of 27 game for Glasgow last season. Price and Horne had no injuries and played 19 each.

Yes of course you'd rather rely on an established international than younger inexperienced players. I think viewing players as ready for week in week out games is the wrong mentality because there's never a point when they are "ready" without playing the games. They're ready when they play regular games.

The SRUs big failure, I think, is allow the coaches to wait for finished products and trying to miss out the dog days of players making mistakes. I think Townsend for all the stick I've given him has shown he's a very good developer of players and takes the brave decision. Like picking Paterson. It's a shame Everett isn't so brave, and so goes for Goosen instead.

That is a more games that I had thought. I assume rest protocols only affect the first 15 though, not sure Hornito needs a rest.

[Big D]

Before we return to club matches. My team for England game, I don't think we need many changes:
Schoeman
Turner
Fagerson
Cummings
GG
Christie - England have picked back rows that are built to tackle. I think we can potentially get one up at the ruck.
Darge
Dempsey

White - Has stepped up his control over the last two games. Perhaps a benefit of playing in France?
Russell
Duhan
Huwopulotu
Rowe - Deserves to keep his spot, bar one defensive error he has been good. Might depend how Graham goes this weekend.
Kinghorn - I know there will be calls for Paterson to keep his spot but Kinghorn offers more with the boot and counter attacking.

Ashman
EMM
Nel
Skinner
Fagerson
Horne
Healy
Redpath

[KingBlairhorn]

Before we return to club matches. My team for England game, I don't think we need many changes:
Schoeman
Turner
Fagerson
Cummings
GG
Christie - England have picked back rows that are built to tackle. I think we can potentially get one up at the ruck.
Darge
Dempsey

White - Has stepped up his control over the last two games. Perhaps a benefit of playing in France?
Russell
Duhan
Huwopulotu
Rowe - Deserves to keep his spot, bar one defensive error he has been good. Might depend how Graham goes this weekend.
Kinghorn - I know there will be calls for Paterson to keep his spot but Kinghorn offers more with the boot and counter attacking.

Ashman
EMM
Nel
Skinner
Fagerson
Horne
Healy
Redpath

My only argument with that is Darcy in if fit. Otherwise, spot on I think.

[Big D]

Gregor Hiddleston has picked up a FT deal with Glasgow. "Graduating" from a Wolves/Warriors partnership deal.

[Big D]

Before we return to club matches. My team for England game, I don't think we need many changes:
Schoeman
Turner
Fagerson
Cummings
GG
Christie - England have picked back rows that are built to tackle. I think we can potentially get one up at the ruck.
Darge
Dempsey

White - Has stepped up his control over the last two games. Perhaps a benefit of playing in France?
Russell
Duhan
Huwopulotu
Rowe - Deserves to keep his spot, bar one defensive error he has been good. Might depend how Graham goes this weekend.
Kinghorn - I know there will be calls for Paterson to keep his spot but Kinghorn offers more with the boot and counter attacking.

Ashman
EMM
Nel
Skinner
Fagerson
Horne
Healy
Redpath

My only argument with that is Darcy in if fit. Otherwise, spot on I think.

He might use Kinghorn as the back up 10 and put Graham/Rowe on the bench or go 6/2 but that only works if there is another lock/back row available.

[Tichtheid]

Elliot Millar Mills is a tighthead, I'm not sure he's played on t'other side, has he?

[Big D]

Elliot Millar Mills is a tighthead, I'm not sure he's played on t'other side, has he?

Sorry got them the wrong way round. Couldn't remember which. Hepburn in the 17 shirt for me.

[Slick]

Kinghorn will be straight in. Shame for Paterson, but don't think even he would expect to keep him place.

Rowe has done well/fine, but Darcy also walks back in.

[charltom]

Kinghorn will be straight in. Shame for Paterson, but don't think even he would expect to keep him place.

Rowe has done well/fine, but Darcy also walks back in.

Darcy should walk back in, but we should also be considering both Kyles as alternatives to Duhan...

[Big D]

Kinghorn will be straight in. Shame for Paterson, but don't think even he would expect to keep him place.

Rowe has done well/fine, but Darcy also walks back in.

Darcy should walk back in, but we should also be considering both Kyles as alternatives to Duhan...

When fit Graham and Duhan are well ahead of the other two. Both are far better finishers, equal if not better in defence (Steyn weakest of all four at international level IMO) and have repeatedly proven themselves at international level.

I wouldn't consider dropping someone who is a proven big game match winner for us especially when doing a lot of good things in the last two weeks. In all our big voodoo breaking away wins one of the main common themes is Van Der Merwe scoring tries. He's a game winner.

[Slick]

Kinghorn will be straight in. Shame for Paterson, but don't think even he would expect to keep him place.

Rowe has done well/fine, but Darcy also walks back in.

Darcy should walk back in, but we should also be considering both Kyles as alternatives to Duhan...

When fit Graham and Duhan are well ahead of the other two. Both are far better finishers, equal if not better in defence (Steyn weakest of all four at international level IMO) and have repeatedly proven themselves at international level.

I wouldn't consider dropping someone who is a proven big game match winner for us especially when doing a lot of good things in the last two weeks. In all our big voodoo breaking away wins one of the main common theme is Van Der Merwe scoring tries. He's a game winner.

100% all of this.

Charltom, uppercut from self, please.

[Jock42]

Graham and Kinghorn straight back in for me, wouldn't even consider dropping Dwayne. I was apprehensive about both Rowe and Paterson coming in at FB but they've both shown they can step up. Still a long way to go for either of them to dislodge those 3 but I'm more than happy of they have to cover in future.

[Tichtheid]

Graham and Kinghorn straight back in for me, wouldn't even consider dropping Dwayne. I was apprehensive about both Rowe and Paterson coming in at FB but they've both shown they can step up. Still a long way to go for either of them to dislodge those 3 but I'm more than happy of they have to cover in future.

Aye, and Ollie Smith is still ahead of Rowe and Paterson, but there is good depth building in the back three, something that we probably didn’t see coming a year ago when Hoggy was looking like his race was run.

Darcy, Dwayne, Kinghorn
Steyn, Rowe, Smith
Paterson

Edit, I forgot Arron Reed

[Big D]

Was going back over last year and this year 6N games stats as I wasn't sure if I was misremembering how bad I thought Steyns defence has been in 6N game.

I think he's made 26 and missed 16 in 6 6N games. That's including 7/0 v Italy. He was better v Tonga and Romania but that's Tonga and Romania.

He is a decent club level defender so not sure why it has gone awry in the 6N.

I'm sure TOTM Will correct the inevitable error but ESPN has it at:
7/4 v England
3/3 v Wales
2/2 v France
2/2 v Ireland
7/0 v Italy
4/5 v Wales.
Total = 26/16 (62% success)

Duhan and Jones were often criticised and Duhan still does get criticism over their defence but Steyn seems to get a free pass. Duhan around 68-70% over a smaller number of tackles IIRC which isn't great but is not a differentiator between them.

[Jock42]

Was going back over last year and this year 6N games stats as I wasn't sure if I was misremembering how bad I thought Steyns defence has been in 6N game.

I think he's made 26 and missed 16 in 6 6N games. That's including 7/0 v Italy. He was better v Tonga and Romania but that's Tonga and Romania.

He is a decent club level defender so not sure why it has gone awry in the 6N.

I'm sure TOTM Will correct the inevitable error but ESPN has it at:
7/4 v England
3/3 v Wales
2/2 v France
2/2 v Ireland
7/0 v Italy
4/5 v Wales.
Total = 26/16 (62% success)

Duhan and Jones were often criticised and Duhan still does get criticism over their defence but Steyn seems to get a free pass. Duhan around 68-70% over a smaller number of tackles IIRC which isn't great but is not a differentiator between them.

I've never been overly happy with Steyn at this level. I don't think he has the pace either.

[Yr Alban]

Was going back over last year and this year 6N games stats as I wasn't sure if I was misremembering how bad I thought Steyns defence has been in 6N game.

I think he's made 26 and missed 16 in 6 6N games. That's including 7/0 v Italy. He was better v Tonga and Romania but that's Tonga and Romania.

He is a decent club level defender so not sure why it has gone awry in the 6N.

I'm sure TOTM Will correct the inevitable error but ESPN has it at:
7/4 v England
3/3 v Wales
2/2 v France
2/2 v Ireland
7/0 v Italy
4/5 v Wales.
Total = 26/16 (62% success)

Duhan and Jones were often criticised and Duhan still does get criticism over their defence but Steyn seems to get a free pass. Duhan around 68-70% over a smaller number of tackles IIRC which isn't great but is not a differentiator between them.

I've never been overly happy with Steyn at this level. I don't think he has the pace either.

I think Steyn is a decent cover option. He hasn’t let us down, but Darcy and Duhan are our stars and I think Rowe is ahead of Steyn now too.

As has been said, pretty much all of our most important wins in the last couple of years have been on the back of Duhan’s tries. He is a game-breaker.

[charltom]

Kinghorn will be straight in. Shame for Paterson, but don't think even he would expect to keep him place.

Rowe has done well/fine, but Darcy also walks back in.

Darcy should walk back in, but we should also be considering both Kyles as alternatives to Duhan...

When fit Graham and Duhan are well ahead of the other two. Both are far better finishers, equal if not better in defence (Steyn weakest of all four at international level IMO) and have repeatedly proven themselves at international level.

I wouldn't consider dropping someone who is a proven big game match winner for us especially when doing a lot of good things in the last two weeks. In all our big voodoo breaking away wins one of the main common themes is Van Der Merwe scoring tries. He's a game winner.

Duhan has been a match winner, that is true, and there is no surprise that someone called Big D would defend him, but... he has also been very well kept in check by some of our most important opponents, and his defensive positioning has often been found wanting.

Don't get me wrong, he contributes lots, and played well again on Saturday, but the team only gets better if it seeks to improve wherever it can.

[Big D]

Darcy should walk back in, but we should also be considering both Kyles as alternatives to Duhan...

When fit Graham and Duhan are well ahead of the other two. Both are far better finishers, equal if not better in defence (Steyn weakest of all four at international level IMO) and have repeatedly proven themselves at international level.

I wouldn't consider dropping someone who is a proven big game match winner for us especially when doing a lot of good things in the last two weeks. In all our big voodoo breaking away wins one of the main common themes is Van Der Merwe scoring tries. He's a game winner.

Duhan has been a match winner, that is true, and there is no surprise that someone called Big D would defend him, but... he has also been very well kept in check by some of our most important opponents, and his defensive positioning has often been found wanting.

Don't get me wrong, he contributes lots, and played well again on Saturday, but the team only gets better if it seeks to improve wherever it can.

My reasoning for picking him is simple. His strike rate by Scottish standards is phenomenal. He is no worse a defender than most of the options and he scores tries that no one else in the team scores. People are quick to hold defensive concerns against him but not others who are equally deficient or worse.

I just can't see any benefit removing the winger who has scored tries is pretty much all of our biggest victories in recent times.

No other winger scores the tries he scores in the wins in Twickenham, Paris (pick and go) or Cardiff (except maybe Graham). One score games we relied on those tries in.

[Big D]

Edinburgh getting Nel, Sebastian, Young, Ritchie, Price, Healy and Paterson for the game this weekend.

Should be able to put out a very strong XV.

[Biffer]

Darcy should walk back in, but we should also be considering both Kyles as alternatives to Duhan...

When fit Graham and Duhan are well ahead of the other two. Both are far better finishers, equal if not better in defence (Steyn weakest of all four at international level IMO) and have repeatedly proven themselves at international level.

I wouldn't consider dropping someone who is a proven big game match winner for us especially when doing a lot of good things in the last two weeks. In all our big voodoo breaking away wins one of the main common themes is Van Der Merwe scoring tries. He's a game winner.

Duhan has been a match winner, that is true, and there is no surprise that someone called Big D would defend him, but... he has also been very well kept in check by some of our most important opponents, and his defensive positioning has often been found wanting.

Don't get me wrong, he contributes lots, and played well again on Saturday, but the team only gets better if it seeks to improve wherever it can.

Duhan’s defence has improved markedly in the last few years imo.

When we’ve got everyone fit we have a very, very dangerous backline.

[Tichtheid]

Edinburgh getting Nel, Sebastian, Young, Ritchie, Price, Healy and Paterson for the game this weekend.

Should be able to put out a very strong XV.

Goosen and Graham both had quad injuries, hopefully they are both fit and Graham his just being held back, Bennett, Boyle, Hodgson and Muncaster were all injured for the last game, worst case scenario if they are all still out;

Venter, Cherry, Nel, Young, Sykes, Ritchie, Watson, Mata,
Price, Healy, Dean(played on wing v Scarlets) Lang, Currie, Paterson, Boffelli
Harrison (I hope), de Bruin, Williams, Campbell, Dodd, Vellacott, Scott, McCann

I don't think Campbell has played yet this season and McCann may or may not be in the Edinburgh camp, so while the starting team is strong, we are a little stretched on the bench. de Bruin hasn't played this season, I don't think and I really don't relate him on the tighthead side, but he's listed on the team sheet as being solely a loosehead now

[Big D]

Graham has been held back by the national team apparently.