[2024 Six Nations] Scotland vs England - 24/02/24

[AngloScotsHybrid]

It is an interesting question. Does playing better in some areas, but worse in others each week constitute progress?

I always get annoyed when a player in any sport has one good game and the commentators say they are back in form. Form for me is about consistency. Anyone can have a good game now and again *cough* Ben Young *cough*.

If England kept up the improvements week to week then fine, but it seems like whatever improves comes at the expense of something else. Last week wide defence was an issue. It was better this week. However, instead Scotland found room down the middle instead.

It's the same with the players. None of them really are playing with any kind of consistency that you could call an improvement.

Yes I always get annoyed when they say he has proved his critics wrong after one good performance. The critics were still right that he was rubbish in all the previous games.

 

[Which Tyler]

Scotland vs England - minute-by-minute

http://www.rugbyrebels.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=6807

 

[West Country Wail]

Too many southerners in the side, tbh
All soft as puppy shite

Borthwick and Wigglesworth spent too much time down south, they've been assimilated

Ford also seems to have gone the silent killer route rather than overtly Lancastrian too so you're down in DHB (double hard *******) stakes there too.

 

[Reiser99]

I feel pretty depressed by where we are, but I am struggling to see what has really changed since the pre-game chat?

Most, if not everyone (posters and pundits) had the Scots as favourites and expected them to win. They did and now there's a collective meltdown which I don't fully understand.

On this occasion, I'm more annoyed by the players than I am with Borthwick. For the first 20, we looked quite good and we looked pretty well drilled.

When the wheels fell off, it went progressively downhill and not one player took the game by the scruff of the neck. The knock-ons and myriad of crappy errors were unforgivable and we just gifted so much to Scotland. We can say the players are over coached, but truthfully, that's a poor excuse for skilled professionals.

Where I am critical of Borthwick is WTF happened at half time? We were 4 points down and (at that point) could have felt justifiably disappointed to be behind. Surely, we should have been coming out fighting knowing that a try or even a penalty could have shifted momentum back in our favour. The fact that neither the coach or the on field leaders can inspire this group is a big concern.

In general, it's felt like since the EJ era that England sides have no adaptability. Instead they stick with the same tactics and hope they work. No one is standing up and taking command.

It's changed slightly under Borthwick. It's start well for 15-20 minutes then stop. No one then seems to be able to fix it. The pool match against Arg was possibly the exception with Ford doing drop goals. However, he tried it again against Scotland and it felt like the completely wrong decision. We'd shown at the start we could score with ball in hand, but after a few mistakes and the pressure came on Ford decided to take the DG instead. It was weird and it again it felt like none of the players were in the same page. They didn't know as a group what they were meant to be playing, so it led to individual moments such as the Ford DG and IFW scoring his try pretty much solo apart from the pass from the ruck.

I still feel EJ killed any creativity and independent thought. My issue with Borthwick is I don't think he's trying to fix this.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

In general, it's felt like since the EJ era that England sides have no adaptability. Instead they stick with the same tactics and hope they work. No one is standing up and taking command.

It's changed slightly under Borthwick. It's start well for 15-20 minutes then stop. No one then seems to be able to fix it. The pool match against Arg was possibly the exception with Ford doing drop goals. However, he tried it again against Scotland and it felt like the completely wrong decision. We'd shown at the start we could score with ball in hand, but after a few mistakes and the pressure came on Ford decided to take the DG instead. It was weird and it again it felt like none of the players were in the same page. They didn't know as a group what they were meant to be playing, so it led to individual moments such as the Ford DG and IFW scoring his try pretty much solo apart from the pass from the ruck.

I still feel EJ killed any creativity and independent thought. My issue with Borthwick is I don't think he's trying to fix this.

No issue with taking a DG (unless there's an overlap!). Gives opposition defence more to think about and keeps the scoreboard moving.

But agree with the general thrust of your comments.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

The backlash against the Scottish squad not being very Scottish is growing. Will World rugby change the Eligibility laws to parents born? Or even a simple play where you born (Even it means players like Marcus Smith won't have an international rugby career).

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-u...ity-law-six-nations-england-scotland-ireland/

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Where you're born is a bit much (Heaslip, Israel's finest rugby export) but I'd be up for strengthening the rules consideribaly

Can't remember who it was on here but they had a good points based threshold idea,
It was a while ago so I can't remember the details but it was something along the lines of:
Residence at different ages nets you different amounts of points, so if you move somewhere as a pro it takes twice as long as if you moved somewhere as a child.
Grandparents count towards eligibility but don't qualify you automatically, so you'd need a grand parent and be playing in that country for a couple of years to qualify etc.

It's pie in the sky but I'd scrap residency after you reach a certain age entirely - something like you can't become eligible for a different country after the age of 25 (so you could still join the final year of an academy at 21 and become eligible four years later)

 

[Wasps92]

I must admit I do find it a joke that the likes of Van Der Merwe are allowed to play for Scotland.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

These articles criticising players who qualified under old rules are a bit pointless no? Give it 5 years and then the only contentious ones will be grandparent rules, I think general consensus is more split on that.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

These articles criticising players who qualified under old rules are a bit pointless no? Give it 5 years and then the only contentious ones will be grandparent rules, I think general consensus is more split on that.

Well they will be players who spend the five years waiting as well.

 

[Saintjay]

The backlash against the Scottish squad not being very Scottish is growing. Will World rugby change the Eligibility laws to parents born? Or even a simple play where you born (Even it means players like Marcus Smith won't have an international rugby career).

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-u...ity-law-six-nations-england-scotland-ireland/

Where you were born feels harsh, i don't think anyone would really argue George North isn't welsh.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Well they will be players who spend the five years waiting as well.

Yeah but considerably less. I doubt any of Aki, Lowe or JGP come to Ireland under the 5 year rule, they'd have gone to France or Japan and bounce around from there most likely without the goal of international rugby. Duhan certainly wouldn't have qualified for Scotland, he went to Worcester.

To be honest, I don't really have a problem with a player who commits 5 years of his life in a country playing for that country. It's good enough to become a citizen in most places, why not for playing a bit of ball?

Duhan is actually quite interesting in this regard, pretty sure he qualifies for UK citizenship but wouldn't qualify to play for any of the three UK teams under the current rule.

 

[General Melchett]

No problem to discuss/review the rules as I'm sure there are merits to that process but I'm slightly uneasy about the timing of this article being released. Not saying it's sour grapes but it's the kind of thing that would happen if the RFU suits were behaving like politicians and wanted to control the narrative via a journo and create a distraction from a fourth successive CC loss. I think the article would have more credibility if it had been released after the 6N had been done and dusted.

 

[ncurd]

No issue with taking a DG (unless there's an overlap!). Gives opposition defence more to think about and keeps the scoreboard moving.

But agree with the general thrust of your comments.

Its a bit odd to complain about that DG, the attack had filtered to nothing and the Scottish defense was well set.

More odd on decision was Scotland not attempting the bonus point when 11 points ahead. sure England score a try shortly after but weird scoreboard knowledge.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

To be honest, I don't really have a problem with a player who commits 5 years of his life in a country playing for that country. It's good enough to become a citizen in most places, why not for playing a bit of ball?

Totally this. If someone's prepared to live somewhere, contribute to the local rugby scene and, frankly, pay taxes over an extended period that's OK by me.

Certainly far more relevant than basing it on where one (out of 4) blood relatives of 2 generations ago happened to be born.

 

[ncurd]

Totally this. If someone's prepared to live somewhere, contribute to the local rugby scene and, frankly, pay taxes over an extended period that's OK by me.

Certainly far more relevant than basing it on where one (out of 4) blood relatives of 2 generations ago happened to be born.

I think residency is way more important that birthplace and lineage.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I must admit I do find it a joke that the likes of Van Der Merwe are allowed to play for Scotland.

And all thanks to bloody Cockers.

Failed his original Edinburgh medical but Cockers signed him regardless and the rest is history.

With friends like that…..

 

[AlRums]

Yeah but considerably less. I doubt any of Aki, Lowe or JGP come to Ireland under the 5 year rule, they'd have gone to France or Japan and bounce around from there most likely without the goal of international rugby. Duhan certainly wouldn't have qualified for Scotland, he went to Worcester.

To be honest, I don't really have a problem with a player who commits 5 years of his life in a country playing for that country. It's good enough to become a citizen in most places, why not for playing a bit of ball?

Duhan is actually quite interesting in this regard, pretty sure he qualifies for UK citizenship but wouldn't qualify to play for any of the three UK teams under the current rule.

Duhan only went to Worcester after he qualified, and he had already spent 4 years at Edinburgh, I think he probably would have remained in Scotland for the extra year if that had been the rule at the time.

So that argument pretty much fails. As they say, he did his time

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Duhan only went to Worcester after he qualified, and he had already spent 4 years at Edinburgh, I think he probably would have remained in Scotland for the extra year if that had been the rule at the time.

So that argument pretty much fails. As they say, he did his time

Although becoming eligible for Scotland in summer 20 and beetling off to Worcester in Jan 21 wasn't a good look.

Blatant case of winger envy.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Duhan only went to Worcester after he qualified, and he had already spent 4 years at Edinburgh, I think he probably would have remained in Scotland for the extra year if that had been the rule at the time.

So that argument pretty much fails. As they say, he did his time

It only fails based on your assumption that he wouldn't move for five years.

Getting into hypotheticals you have to consider the two years without international appearance fees and increased sponsorship opportunities, the initial contract offer which may have been shorter and the Boks coming calling.