Rugby Union

[invergowrie arab]

1 hour ago, Self-raising Lazarus said:

Once Hogg Russell and that crop retire Scotland are back in the doldrums big time.

 

How would we know?

[GAD]

Good start from Glasgow, though the first 4 minutes being scrums was shite. Edinburgh responding well, though so many of the Scotland front 5 getting mulched in the scrum isn't the best 

[GAD]

Glasgow getting absolutely and emphatically destroyed in these kicking duels.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

1 hour ago, GAD said:

Glasgow getting absolutely and emphatically destroyed in these kicking duels.

I miss those kicking duels

[afca32]

Really good game that. Tuipulotu, Steyn and Gray all excellent. Great finish by Paddy Harrison at the end which could've set up and exciting finish.

[Self-raising Lazarus]

2 hours ago, invergowrie arab said:

How would we know?

There's nobody breaking through at club level to follow them.

[GAD]

Turning point if that game was Jamie Ritchie behaving like a dick.

[mcfadden22]

Any team that starts with Kinghorn & Pyrgos at 9 & 10 deserves to lose

[come on shire]

Literally a game of 2 halves. Edinburgh far better in the 1st half whilst Glasgow were better in the 2nd.

We gave ourselves a lot to do as we were 10 points behind at one point but we managed the game well in the 2nd half. I thought Ali Price wasn't at his best but George Horne ran the show when he came on. I noticed Edinburgh suffered a bit when Bill Mata went off...

[flyingscot]

I thought Glasgow were excellent last night. They suffered a bit with the kicking game but in the second half their creativity and running was excellent. Edinburgh really had no answer for that. Mata I didn’t think had this best game last night but I think that when he tired and went off, the gaps became bigger for Glasgow.  Ritchie seemed to struggle in particular, I think he was lucky not be penalised on several occasions where he was interfering, particularly on the line just before the yellow card (which in itself was a bit silly). 

Early days of course, but I think Franco Smith has worked out where the strengths and weaknesses are and the style for Glasgow to play which was not as least apparent under Danny Wilson. 
 

I was tempted to go last night, but the cheapest tickets I saw on the lead up where £40. With that plus travel I gave it a miss but fair play to the 25k there. 
 

 

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

The player development of the SRU is clearly very broken and probably always has been, with the handful of world class talents who emerged in the 2010s seemingly more luck than judgement. The Thistle (fancy lads themselves) did a piece looking at the decline of private schools as a source of players which I found interesting. While I'm sure we'd all like to see rugby become a more mass participation sport there's no denying that the facilities, resources, presumably higher quality games and others advantages should give these schools a lead. 

https://thistlescottishrugbypodcast.substack.com/p/why-are-edinburgh-private-schools?r=lo623&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

For comparison, someone shared an image below their tweet on this showing where Irish national team players come from, showing a pretty massive difference between us and a team we'd probably all like to replicate. To continue the analogy I'd actually say our team of recent years is similar to the Irish team of the 2000s with a very decent squad of players, a couple of consistently world class ones and a couple who could be when in form. Of course, they managed to win some stuff 

Moving from the private schools to youth development in the 18-20 generally that seems to have completely cratered, especially in S&C with our 20s looking like boys against men most of the time, and while the super 6 is quite fun I don't think it's doing much to bring these guys on when they can even get a game. 

Into senior teams the recruitment for the pro teams has largely gone downhill in recent years. While there's still good project or Scots qualified players coming in, there seem to be fewer guys coming in to offer real quality (Boffeli being a notable exception) and far more guys just filling up rotational space in the squad.

The third pro team argument is never going to go away but financially seems a non starter. Hard to argue we wouldn't be able to blood more young players at a decent level though, as at the moment there seem to be a lot of guys who make a little breakthrough at Edinburgh or Glasgow and then before you know it they're 24 and have played 24 professional games of rugby. Injuries also a factor there of course.

Italy have made leaps and bounds with their youth development in recent years but like when everyone wanted the football team to copy what Iceland were doing it's probably not completely transferrable and other than some impressive youth results it hasn't translated to much yet. I don't know that we're fucked but I think the optimism of the 2010s was probably misplaced as we are still playing catch-up on how to do professional rugby properly and our development and pathway is in awful shape

 

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by Genuine Hibs Fan

[honestly united]

1 hour ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

The player development of the SRU is clearly very broken and probably always has been, with the handful of world class talents who emerged in the 2010s seemingly more luck than judgement. The Thistle (fancy lads themselves) did a piece looking at the decline of private schools as a source of players which I found interesting. While I'm sure we'd all like to see rugby become a more mass participation sport there's no denying that the facilities, resources, presumably higher quality games and others advantages should give these schools a lead. 

https://thistlescottishrugbypodcast.substack.com/p/why-are-edinburgh-private-schools?r=lo623&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

For comparison, someone shared an image below their tweet on this showing where Irish national team players come from, showing a pretty massive difference between us and a team we'd probably all like to replicate. To continue the analogy I'd actually say our team of recent years is similar to the Irish team of the 2000s with a very decent squad of players, a couple of consistently world class ones and a couple who could be when in form. Of course, they managed to win some stuff 

Moving from the private schools to youth development in the 18-20 generally that seems to have completely cratered, especially in S&C with our 20s looking like boys against men most of the time, and while the super 6 is quite fun I don't think it's doing much to bring these guys on when they can even get a game. 

Into senior teams the recruitment for the pro teams has largely gone downhill in recent years. While there's still good project or Scots qualified players coming in, there seem to be fewer guys coming in to offer real quality (Boffeli being a notable exception) and far more guys just filling up rotational space in the squad.

The third pro team argument is never going to go away but financially seems a non starter. Hard to argue we wouldn't be able to blood more young players at a decent level though, as at the moment there seem to be a lot of guys who make a little breakthrough at Edinburgh or Glasgow and then before you know it they're 24 and have played 24 professional games of rugby. Injuries also a factor there of course.

Italy have made leaps and bounds with their youth development in recent years but like when everyone wanted the football team to copy what Iceland were doing it's probably not completely transferrable and other than some impressive youth results it hasn't translated to much yet. I don't know that we're fucked but I think the optimism of the 2010s was probably misplaced as we are still playing catch-up on how to do professional rugby properly and our development and pathway is in awful shape

 

 

Interesting article. One of the comments though gives a list of players to be produced just at Merchiston castle over the last decade and ask's if it is the clubs / SRU that is causing the issue.

I would argue that maybe the Private Schools are falling behind their counterparts - again I dont have anythng to back this up, are there many cross border matches between schools?

Im firmly of the belief that given we only have 2 teams players are not getting the game time as they have to dislodge an international from the team to get game time. When a player does get game time early its because they are world class, ie Hogg, Russell, Gray all getting games at 19/20, but further down, the international squad fillers are 24/25 or older before they have the pro team experience to get international recognition and by then its too late to be able to push on from good to great.

We just seem to miss something from 17/18 to 20/21 - I had previously put it down to guys being in hte institute of sport not getting proper meaningful games so we didnt breed winners, some people are born with it but others can learn it from being in tight, meaningful games and wanting to win, and learning from losing also what it takes to win - Scotland have been too soft for years and its getting proper competition at an early age which will change that.

I think its too early to write off the Super 6's but the coaches need to be ensuring the youngsters are playing and not just filling the team with older journeymen. Again a 3rd team would help to blood more players but as was said is  costly. Glasgow and Edinburgh now are probably bringing in a decent amount in gate money compared to 10 / 15 years ago (crowds up to close to 10k at Glasgow, compared to 3-4k not so long ago) which will also have increased sponsorship etc so maybe worth looking at again.

[GAD]

We are definitely miles behind Ireland, considering with the signing of Healy today for Edinburgh we are now going to start taking their players! The youth teams regularly get battered as well, with physicality seeming to be the biggest issue. I've got a mate who is a coach for U18s at a supposedly high level in Scotland and he's told some some sobering stories of games v Irish teams in particular having to be stopped before someone got hurt due to the differences in physicality and intensity.

[GAD]

Mind you, at least the signing of Healy hopefully means Kinghorn at 10 is no longer a thing?

[flyingscot]

10 hours ago, GAD said:

We are definitely miles behind Ireland, considering with the signing of Healy today for Edinburgh we are now going to start taking their players! The youth teams regularly get battered as well, with physicality seeming to be the biggest issue. I've got a mate who is a coach for U18s at a supposedly high level in Scotland and he's told some some sobering stories of games v Irish teams in particular having to be stopped before someone got hurt due to the differences in physicality and intensity.

I'm with you that we are behind Ireland by miles, but I'm not sure how we effectively fix this? That said, I'm not sure some of the physicality and intensity is necessary good for guys at u18s level. 

Healy signing today is a decent move for Edinburgh, given that Glasgow were interested apparently a few years back. Seems like someone Toony has been interested in for a while. 

11 hours ago, honestly united said:

I think its too early to write off the Super 6's but the coaches need to be ensuring the youngsters are playing and not just filling the team with older journeymen. Again a 3rd team would help to blood more players but as was said is  costly. Glasgow and Edinburgh now are probably bringing in a decent amount in gate money compared to 10 / 15 years ago (crowds up to close to 10k at Glasgow, compared to 3-4k not so long ago) which will also have increased sponsorship etc so maybe worth looking at again.

I'd like a 3rd Pro team to improve the playing squad but not sure where you put it. I still think the SRU should have made it London Scottish and invested in them, but that ship sailed. If you consider Scotland, I just don't see the Borders being viable for various reasons despite it being good rugby country, perhaps Tayside/Dundee would work but not sure how that impacts on other 2 existing teams. 

On the finances of the pro-teams, we'll not know, but with the number of players on the books (including international who probably aren't cheap) I suspect revenue is perhaps still marginal, especially given the talk of people like Al Kellock that increased ticket prices support retention of better players. We certainly can't compete with the likes of England or France on that score and shouldn't. 

Glasgow's crowds have plateaued or dipped slightly since the permanent sold out days (I notice far more empty seats). I also think Glasgow missed out on an opportunity to have a slightly bigger ground capacity as there was a market to get the non-rugby punter more engaged and turn them into rugby goer. Sadly the price hikes and sparseness of seats stops that but can't argue Glasgow have gone from 1.5K to 8k in 15 odd years. I think price of rugby is still a bit of an issue - I thought £40 was awful steep for the 1872 game at Murrayfield (£80 for 2 tickets plus travel) so we watched it on the telly but 25k were there so can't argue at that. 

[GAD]

6 hours ago, flyingscot said:

I'm with you that we are behind Ireland by miles, but I'm not sure how we effectively fix this? That said, I'm not sure some of the physicality and intensity is necessary good for guys at u18s level. 

Healy signing today is a decent move for Edinburgh, given that Glasgow were interested apparently a few years back. Seems like someone Toony has been interested in for a while. 

I'd like a 3rd Pro team to improve the playing squad but not sure where you put it. I still think the SRU should have made it London Scottish and invested in them, but that ship sailed. If you consider Scotland, I just don't see the Borders being viable for various reasons despite it being good rugby country, perhaps Tayside/Dundee would work but not sure how that impacts on other 2 existing teams. 

On the finances of the pro-teams, we'll not know, but with the number of players on the books (including international who probably aren't cheap) I suspect revenue is perhaps still marginal, especially given the talk of people like Al Kellock that increased ticket prices support retention of better players. We certainly can't compete with the likes of England or France on that score and shouldn't. 

Glasgow's crowds have plateaued or dipped slightly since the permanent sold out days (I notice far more empty seats). I also think Glasgow missed out on an opportunity to have a slightly bigger ground capacity as there was a market to get the non-rugby punter more engaged and turn them into rugby goer. Sadly the price hikes and sparseness of seats stops that but can't argue Glasgow have gone from 1.5K to 8k in 15 odd years. I think price of rugby is still a bit of an issue - I thought £40 was awful steep for the 1872 game at Murrayfield (£80 for 2 tickets plus travel) so we watched it on the telly but 25k were there so can't argue at that. 

I guess with the physicality and intensity thing, it depends what you are trying to do. Do you want rugby to be a fun runaround for everyone to enjoy at all levels, or do you want it to be a fiercely competitive bear pit where the cream rise to the top, the rest get left behind and you focus on building teams that win stuff. I don't know if I fully agree with it, but there is an argument you can't do both.

I think the problem with the Glasgow crowds is the lack of big names (Russell and Hogg put numbers on that gate, there is nobody like that now), the last few seasons of utter mediocrity and the loss of Friday night games during it, the high prices, and the fact it was really difficult for ordinary punters to actually buy tickets for a while as so much was sold to corporate, who often didn't show up. The amount of times I fancied going, went to buy a ticket, was told it was sold out, then watched the game on TV to see massive spaces in the stands was pretty high.

 

[Mark Connolly]

I’ve said it before, but after years of following them through a lot of thin, Glasgow finally got it right on the pitch when they won the league, and since then they have rewarded the fans by constantly increasing prices while simultaneously lowering the quality of the squad. Even the final at Celtic Park should have been a stepping stone, but they followed that by getting rid of all the best players and not replacing them with anything near resembling the quality.

They obviously haven’t been helped recently with the lack of Friday night games being scheduled by the league, but that is just one of a multitude of problems, the majority of which are self inflicted

[honestly united]

On the face of it the SRU's strategy was fairly sound if you accept that the teams remain mediocre. Accept that you cant compete with ENG / FRA on wages, let your top players move abroad at 26/27 for a pay day after giving Glasgow and Edinburgh some good years. This opens up spots for youngsters coming through in the squads, keeps costs reasonable etc

Obviously both have had some success over the last few years and there is now an expectation from fans, and also an increased income stream which has not been met with a new strategy. Obviously they are not going to pay top dollar for players, but we have had a couple of players (before Wasps / Worcester) come back up from England taking up spots and some of the imports have not been up to much. Maybe we were spoiled with Nakarawa, DTH and Matawalu but we havent had any hit those heights as of yet. 

Im not sure on the wages front how much the SRU are spending, but if you look at England the salary cap is £5m (plus marque player, and home grown exceptions) per team, how much are Glasgow / Edinburgh paying out? Its probably comparable given the size of the squads they have to carry due to internationals / limits on game time per season. Maybe wouldnt cost much more for a 3rd team if you could reduce the squads at Glasgow and Edinburgh slightly 

 

[ajwffc]

last time I searched for budgets for the two sides Glasgow was just over the £5m mark and Edinburg just bellow that. Welsh clubs about the same apart from Dragons who get a lot less than the others. Irish sides are about the £7m mark apart from Leinster who pay about £10m a year 

[flyingscot]

5 hours ago, GAD said:

I guess with the physicality and intensity thing, it depends what you are trying to do. Do you want rugby to be a fun runaround for everyone to enjoy at all levels, or do you want it to be a fiercely competitive bear pit where the cream rise to the top, the rest get left behind and you focus on building teams that win stuff. I don't know if I fully agree with it, but there is an argument you can't do both.

I think the problem with the Glasgow crowds is the lack of big names (Russell and Hogg put numbers on that gate, there is nobody like that now), the last few seasons of utter mediocrity and the loss of Friday night games during it, the high prices, and the fact it was really difficult for ordinary punters to actually buy tickets for a while as so much was sold to corporate, who often didn't show up. The amount of times I fancied going, went to buy a ticket, was told it was sold out, then watched the game on TV to see massive spaces in the stands was pretty high.

 

It's a difficult one, but I'm not sure how good or safe an idea the focus on physical rugby is to under 18s level. 

Many of Glasgow's issues weren't corporate tickets for me, but over random fixture times. I could predict the guys who wouldn't make it around us when it clashed with club rugby or football matches. They now have ticket resale, but not sure how well it goes as it's not constantly sold out. 

I still have my season ticket but if it wasn't for the covid cash rebates I might have chucked it. £427 - for 12 URC and Challenge Cup games... Sadly I remember the Firhill prices! Even this season I've missed 2 games already due to clashes with other things on...