Rugby Union

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

Edinburgh have a good coach and...on paper....a good squad but are under-performing big time at this moment.

Glasgow have an average coach, an average squad full of over the hill average players, and are rank pish at this moment. 

Both teams are especially weak in the 9-10 axis. Edinburgh have a good stand off and a piss poor scrum half. Glasgow have a decent scrum half (I accept other opinions) in Price, and a pish stand off. 

Edinburgh should have a pack that should compete at the highest level, but they haven't fired for a while. Glasgow have ageing, average forwards that are visibly sucking the life out of the Fagerson brothers.  

It stunned me today that Glasgow lined up with Horne, Grigg and Seymour in the backs, but it didn't stun me that combined they offered absolutely nothing. Nada. 

Scottish rugby needs....deserves.....much better than this. I think Edinburgh can still recover under Cockerill, but Glasgow have looked rudderless for a long time now. 

What the hell is going on ?

[peasy23]

Edinburgh have a good coach and...on paper....a good squad but are under-performing big time at this moment.
Glasgow have an average coach, an average squad full of over the hill average players, and are rank pish at this moment. 
Both teams are especially weak in the 9-10 axis. Edinburgh have a good stand off and a piss poor scrum half. Glasgow have a decent scrum half (I accept other opinions) in Price, and a pish stand off. 
Edinburgh should have a pack that should compete at the highest level, but they haven't fired for a while. Glasgow have ageing, average forwards that are visibly sucking the life out of the Fagerson brothers.  
It stunned me today that Glasgow lined up with Horne, Grigg and Seymour in the backs, but it didn't stun me that combined they offered absolutely nothing. Nada. 
Scottish rugby needs....deserves.....much better than this. I think Edinburgh can still recover under Cockerill, but Glasgow have looked rudderless for a long time now. 
What the hell is going on ?

Hard to say exactly where it started to go wrong for Glasgow, but giving Toony the Scotland gig mainly because they were scared he might bugger off abroad wasn't the SRU's smartest decision ever imo. It was always going to be tough to replace guys like Hogg, Russell and the Grays, but some of the signings have been woefully substandard. Some of the foreign imports in particular have done nothing, their only positive contribution was being available in international windows.

I wasn't shocked by yesterday's scoreline. Glasgow have been getting rag dolled about the place all season and I never felt they would get close to Exeter's physicality. The biggest concern was how devoid of any attacking ideas Glasgow were. Even on the odd occasion they put some decent passes together, there didn't look to be any belief that they could actually score a try. The number of times they took the ball into contact and either got turned over or gave away a penalty was laughable.

[honestly united]

I think Embra will turn it around, i think they overachieved last year, but they have solid spine to the team that should see them back to a solid upper mid table by the end of the season. The issue with them is that they placed too much emphasis on Mata to deliver a few big plays per game, and he has just not produced the same form he had at this time last season. If they can get him firing alongside Watson and Ritchie I think they will be fine. They have a solid scrum, van der Walt is a good stand off, and in Duhan they have someone that can score tries.

Glasgows issue's are all down to recruitment, and I appreaciate that we dont have the budget of the English, French and even the Irish, but it has been woeful. I thought Rennie was a downgrade on Toonie, but Wilson is 3 or 4 steps back, at least with Rennie we played a bit of exciting rugby even if it cost us tries at times. In terms of players we know that we are going to be made up of mostly bang average Scottish players, what has let us down is the imports, where over the last few years we've gone from gems like Nakarawa and Matawalu (i know they are still here but 5 years on they are no longer at their peak) and DTH, to Frisby, Thompson et al. If you are going to get imports I would rather we went for ex internationals that we going to add to the team and be guaranteed starters, than 3 or 4 players to sit on the bench or not even start.

Just going through the squad, Seuili, Pieretto, Lokotui, Matthews, Bean, Dolokotu, Ionne, Tagive, Fergusson ,Thompson, Gordon have all been signed over the last couple of years, I would rather swap all of them for 3 quality signings along with another 3 or 4 academy players to make up the numbers

Then you look at the scottish players, Allan, Nicol and Rae should have been good enough to be starting, but are behind Seilui and Pieretto, Fusaro has been passed it for sometime, and Wilson and Harley are on the way out - i still think they have something to offer but shouldn't be starters. In the backs there are a lot of good players, but we dont have the balance. We have 1 stand off who is injured long term, and the back ups are not up to it in Horne and Thompson. Johnson and Jones in the centre SHOULD be world class but has gone backwards with Grigg and McDowall solid back ups, 5 scrum halfs is overkill but what happens when you only have 2 pro teams, but again we still haven't replaced Hogg and Jackson at full back.

 

However there are bright spots for the future, at Glasgow you have Cummings and the Fagerson's that are still young, added into Bain, Dobie and MCDowall who will all be in the Scotland squad shortly, and at Embra have Chamberlain and Paterson that look good prospects which gives us nearly a whole set of backs. We do though have nearly a full squad for Scotland of guys in the 24-28 range that should be with us for a good few years so not in the position we have been in of an aging squad with no one coming through, we just need 2 or 3 additions every year.

[peasy23]

RWC 23 draw today. Ludicrous to be making the draw so far out from the tourney, but here are the seedings. Scotland in pot 3 which at least means we avoid Argentina. Preferred options from pots 1 and 2 for me at the moment would be Wales and Japan.

[ajwffc]

draw is at 1130 here https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/2023/pool-draw

[invergowrie arab]

Talking of the game changing if you go back to the 70s matches in YouTube it's almost a different sport - just lads throwing overhead passes and kicking it for no real reason.

I know it's yer old da saying everything was better in his day but everything was better in my day. 1988-95 was basically a golden age of rugby you would want to watch between the previous generations where it was like the Eton Wall game and the advent of professionalism which saw backs become 20 stone battering rams.

In the last 5 years I think the game has become more watchable again but technical infringements still dominate.

[peasy23]

[ajwffc]

it is time for  the draw but lets talk some more 

[ajwffc]

so pool B for us 

South Africa (shit)

Ireland (f**k off)

Scotland

Asia/Pacific 1 (probably one of Tonga or Samoa 

Europe 2

[ajwffc]

rest of draw 

 

Pool A

New Zealand

France

Italy

Americas 1

Africa 1

Pool B

South Africa

Ireland

Scotland

Asia / Pacific 1

Europe 2

Pool C

Wales

Australia

Fiji

Europe 1

Final Qualifier Winner

Pool D

England

Japan

Argentina

Oceania 1

Americas 2

[peasy23]

so pool B for us 
South Africa (shit)
Ireland (f**k off)
Scotland
Asia/Pacific 1 (probably one of Tonga or Samoa 
Europe 2

Couldn't have went much worse tbh.

[honestly united]

11 minutes ago, peasy23 said:

39 minutes ago, ajwffc said:

so pool B for us 
South Africa (shit)
Ireland (f**k off)
Scotland
Asia/Pacific 1 (probably one of Tonga or Samoa 
Europe 2

Couldn't have went much worse tbh.

We got the easiest team in pool 4, surely thats something (loser of Tonga / Samoa plays off against top Asian side probably S Korea for the place)

Pool 1 NZ would have been worst, Wales best and not much between SA & Eng - the Saffers were a good laugh in Newcastle in 2015 so will take that and hoefully get tickets to that game in France.

Wouldn't have wanted France in pool 2, I hate the Irish so beating them good - surely in 2 years we can come up with a plan to beat 1 team!!

[Bully Wee Villa]

Can't say I'm full of confidence about that draw. Still you never know what Scotland/Ireland will be like in three years.

[GordonS]

Shit draw. We need to forget about world cups anyway, our focus should be on sneaking a 6N while others are in transition, so we should be targeting the 2024 6N right from now. 

[HibeeJibee]

Pool D in 2019: Wales, Australia, Fiji, Georgia, Uruguay

Pool C in 2023: Wales, Australia, Fiji, Europe 1 (almost certainly Georgia), Repechage (quite possibly Uruguay)


Pool A in 2019: Japan, Ireland, Scotland, Samoa, Russia

Pool B in 2023: South Africa, Ireland, Scotland, Asia-Pacific 1 (quite possibly Samoa), Europe 2 (quite possibly Russia)


Pool C in 2019: England, France, Argentina, Tonga, USA

Pool D in 2023: England, Japan, Argentina, Oceania 1 (quite possibly Tonga), Americas 2 (quite possibly USA)


Pool B in 2019: New Zealand, South Africa, Italy, Namibia, Canada

Pool A in 2023: New Zealand, France, Italy, Africa 1 (almost certainly Namibia), Americas 1 (quite possibly Canada)



Basically shuffled 3 teams.

Not to mention drawing it almost 3yrs ahead.

What an utterly laughable system.

[honestly united]

6 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

Pool D in 2019: Wales, Australia, Fiji, Georgia, Uruguay

Pool C in 2023: Wales, Australia, Fiji, Europe 1 (almost certainly Georgia), Repechage (quite possibly Uruguay)


Pool A in 2019: Japan, Ireland, Scotland, Samoa, Russia

Pool B in 2023: South Africa, Ireland, Scotland, Asia-Pacific 1 (quite possibly Samoa), Europe 2 (quite possibly Russia)


Pool C in 2019: England, France, Argentina, Tonga, USA

Pool D in 2023: England, Japan, Argentina, Oceania 1 (quite possibly Tonga), Americas 2 (quite possibly USA)


Pool B in 2019: New Zealand, South Africa, Italy, Namibia, Canada

Pool A in 2023: New Zealand, France, Italy, Africa 1 (almost certainly Namibia), Americas 1 (quite possibly Canada)



Basically shuffled 3 teams.

Not to mention drawing it almost 3yrs ahead.

What an utterly laughable system.

As its quite likely to be the same 20 teams again and the seeding doesn't change that much it was likely to happen.

Form the last seeding, only Ireland swapped places with South Africa, and Scotland swapped with Japan.

Last time though Georgia were direct qualifiers and Fiji were Oceania 1 qualifier for example so the same but different

 I think (hoping) there will be a few changes ie Canada wont win the Americas qualifying, infact will be lucky to get 2nd. Im hoping we might see a few changes in the teams, maybe Kenya or Zimbabwe (Algeria could be a wild card if they can entice all their French based players to play the qualifiers) can pip Namibia for the African spot, and Europe 2 could go to Russia, Romania or Spain.

Having more that half the teams as direct qualifiers means that the Tier 2's miss out on games against the tier 1's in qualifying. If you went back to only the semi finalist qualfied direct and were the top 4 seeds, you would have for example Australia in the qualifiers with Fiji, Tonga and Samoa who they hardly play at the moment, Scotland, Ireland, France and Italy, lining up against Georgia, Romania, Spain, Russia, Belgium, Portugal etc Granted to start with the matches would be 1 sided, but at least these countries would be getting games against the top sides on a more regular basis

[HibeeJibee]

Obviously some new qualifiers would be good... That said the same teams dominate regional qualifying every time (Namibia, USA/Canada, Uruguay etc.).

Over last 20yrs literally only variation has been 1 of Portugal/Russia/Uruguay each time. (EDIT: plus Romania's 2019 disqualification). Russia  have been only new face in last decade and a non-European debutant won't have been seen in almost quarter of a century!

Plus they manipulate continental quotas. Pacific islands bombed RWC 2015 meaning none qualified automatically: so bumped their slots for 2019 at Europe/Asia's expense (Japan = hosts).

When draw isn't mixing same old faces up, either - very underwhelming.

Edited December 14, 2020 by HibeeJibee

[honestly united]

57 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

Obviously some new qualifiers would be good... That said the same teams dominate regional qualifying every time (Namibia, USA/Canada, Uruguay etc.).

Over last 20yrs literally only variation has been 1 of Portugal/Russia/Uruguay each time. (EDIT: plus Romania's 2019 disqualification). Russia  have been only new face in last decade and a non-European debutant won't have been seen in almost quarter of a century!

Plus they manipulate continental quotas. Pacific islands bombed RWC 2015 meaning none qualified automatically: so bumped their slots for 2019 at Europe/Asia's expense (Japan = hosts).

When draw isn't mixing same old faces up, either - very underwhelming.

There are a few countries there or there abouts In the Americas Chile and Brazil are improving as they get to play in the Americas 6 nations now with Argentina, Uruguay, USA and Canada, Brazil have already picked up wins against Canada and the USA, if the SLAR picks up next year that will give them a boost.

Not wanting to sound too cliche, if there was a bit less corruption and govt interference the likes of Kenya, Zimbabwe and Uganda could be pushing Namibia, Madagascar as well get 40-50k at their home games, Algeria and Morroco could probably put together fantastic teams if the french clubs let them

 

[GAD]

I think the worst part of the draw is that even if we do get through, it's to play NZ or France. To be honest, you don't know how good anyone is going to be in 2023 right now anyway, so no point worrying about it!

[John Lambies Doos]

Dreadful draw. Consoling myself with the fact that Ireland won't make it past a QF again