Scotland v South Africa: Player Ratings

We’re doing something a little different this week. After Cammy’s two-pronged ratings last week, I’ve added a third metric and we’re going for marks out of 12. For forwards, we’re looking at set-piece performance and for the backs “influence” which is a little like attitude, involvement in scoring chances and may just be totally subjective. For the bench players, the third metric is “Impact”.

All in all it adds up to a mark out of twelve, yes twelve.

Forwards

Rated on Attack, Defence and Set Piece

1. Gordon Reid: Played 44 minutes but difficult to say whether his mission to shore up the set-piece was a success, as most of the action seemed to be on the other side of the scrum. Looked a little tired at times. - (A2/D3/S2) 7/12

2. Stuart McInally: Set the tone with a huge hit early in the game but couldn't impose his dynamic ball carrying. - (A2/D3/S3) 8/12

3. Willem Nel: Found it tough in the scrum against the GingerBok! Not as much carrying this week either, but then no-one made that much ground against a doughty South African defence. - (A2/D2/S2) 6/12

4. Ben Toolis: Big lineout effort and fair throws himself around in defence but for some reason has morphed into Jonny Gray Mk II rather than the baller he started out as. - (A1/D4/S2) 7/12

5. Jonny Gray: Big part of the huge maul that was about the last brilliant thing Scotland did in the game, but as pack leader and substitute captain may take responsibility for not converting either of the penalty/corner lineouts to points. - (A1/D4/S2) 7/12

6. Sam Skinner: An interesting experiment at 6 and was a heavy presence as a carrier and link player in the first half but faded a bit under heavy pressure in the second half. Still a big, useful find for this Scotland squad. - (A3/D4/S2) 9/12

7. Hamish Watson: Earns much kudos for the sneaky try in the lineout - Rassie wasn't watching the 6 Nations then - and was his usual bustling, whirling presence with the ball he had. Didn't have as much effect on the deck though against pummelling clear outs. - (A3/D3/S4) 10/12

8. Ryan Wilson: Against a big pack like this, his tenacity in defence tends to be outweighed by the lack of impact with ball in hand. Didn't make much headway. - (A2/D3/S2) 7/12

Backs

Rated on Attack, Defence and Influence

9. Greig Laidlaw (capt): Kicked his points and was ably directing the team until he and Hogg departed around the same point in the second half, after which his leadership was missed. Steady service but only made one half hint at a break. Could have done more to get Poite to sort the breakdown but Roman doesn't often listen to pleas. - (A2/D3/I3) 8/12

10. Finn Russell: Finn's mixed bags these days are far less mixed than they used to be and his kicking from hand was frequently assured. So he's learned a kicking game which is great but threw too many hospital passes and his own attacks ended up smothered in dark green. Is looking promising at playing a controlling game but ironically should have attacked more. - (A1/D3/I3) 7/12

11. Sean Maitland: Had a solid first half during which he saw plenty of action, but saw very little ball in the second when South Africa started slowing the ball very cleverly and rarely found himself in any sort of space. - (A3/D3/I3) 9/12

12. Pete Horne: Very influential in the first half with some great half breaks and some tackles larger than his size. Could have been punished for the Willie Le Roux pass had the fullback managed to get a hand on it. - (A3/D3/I3) 9/12

13. Huw Jones: Had one of his great games in attack, with several scything breaks that the South Africans couldn't shut down. Still drifts off tackles but was great to see him back threatening. Horne's try was the proverbial "worldie" and Jones was the magician behind it. - (A4/D2/I4) 10/12

14. Tommy Seymour: Another quiet game with some nice high ball catches and a part in a couple of breaks very close to the touch line where he seems to operate best. As with most of the backline, a little starved of ball in the second half. - (A3/D3/I2) 8/12

15. Stuart Hogg: Another influential night that had a sad end hobbling off. Might have influenced the result if he had stayed on when leadership seemed to be an issue. Huge boot and some superb breaks from deep. - (A4/D3/I3) 10/12

Replacements

Rated on Attack, Defence and Impact

16. Fraser Brown: Wasn't able to affect the breakdown like he can do which would have been a huge help given South African dominance in the second half, but makes a great impact sub. Still very little to choose between him and McInally. - (A2/D2/I3) 7/12

17. Allan Dell: Wasn't expected to make much of an impact in the scrum so no surprises there, but threw himself about in defence. Got a bit of needle from the country of his birth. - (A1/D3/I2) 6/12

18. Simon Berghan: May be worth a start next weekend. Not hugely influential in the scrum but throws himself about in the loose. - (A2/D2/I2) 6/12

19. Josh Strauss: Did make a difference with ball carrying, but relative to how little ground South Africa conceded in the middle of the park it couldn't have saved the result. Is definitely worth a start next weekend. - (A3/D3/I2) 8/12

20. Jamie Ritchie: Took a pressure lineout close to his own line late in the game but didn't get a chance to make an impact. - (A2/D2/I3) 7/12

21. Ali Price: You'd expect the replacement scrum half to speed things up off the bench but this was that rarity that Scotland were visibly tiring by the end. Needs to rediscover his spark. Either a cooler head or a more inspirational crazy head required. - (A2/D2/I2) 6/12

22. Adam Hastings: Threw some nice passes and once again doesn't look short of confidence at this level. When the team is so mixed up late in the game, not sure positioning him at fullback in defence is a great idea. - (A3/D2/I2) 7/12

23. Chris Harris: Gone back a step from last weekend when he was very good. Couldn't dig himself or Ali Price out of a hole and ended up conceding a lineout inside the 22 when they really needed territory. - (A2/D3/I2) 7/12

Let us know your thoughts on the system. For example, should we add a fourth ranking (breakdown?) to get it back to marks out of ten?! Should we mark backs on something else? Thanks for reading.

Tags:

54 comments on “Scotland v South Africa: Player Ratings

  1. Scrummo on

    Would like to see a return to big standard ratings out of 10, don’t really think there metrics add anything and a mark from 12 is just odd.

    Agree with the gist of most of what you’ve said. Not sure how Harris has gone a step backwards though? Brought on out of position he made his tackles and took contact when needed. Only truly memorable moment was being the recipient of Price’s bizarre decision to try the blindside from our own 5m line which he couldn’t do much about.

    Overall the Boks physicality and Pollard’s assuredness was the difference and there is no shame in the first point given the size of them.

    Also feel for Nel a bit, Poite seemed to decide he was infringing when Moore suggested he was actually getting inside the loosehead and splitting him off legally.

    Reply
    • TeamCam on

      The Boks played Poite superbly at scrum time, whether they were boring in or collapsing. I remember Nel getting penalised when it looked like GingerBok had folded like an accordion.

      I don’t think it was the Boks’ physicality, they just seemed to flood the breakdown and we didn’t adjust accordingly and kept seeming to switch off at ruck time.

      Rory: how about a mark for the ref? I think Poite lost several, especially for the ‘lineout/scrum… oh wait it’s a free kick even though I’ve blown my whistle’ fiasco.

      Reply
      • Ian on

        I think the ref had a good game. Communicated well, was balanced, didn’t make it about him. I do think the assistant refs missed some stuff (some questionable forward pass calls).

      • SB on

        Poite let them away with murder at the breakdown.

        At their second try there was no release from Kolisi he was lifting Jones off the ground when the Scotland players tried to clear out and the ball splilled out.

        Wales and SA have both mugged us on the floor and been allowed to do it by French refs. There’s not much to be done about refs so we need to get smarter.

      • Neil on

        I think we need to stop talking about referees unless it’s Joubert level screw-ups.

        At the end of the day no international referee will get more than around 80-90 % of the decisions right.

        I more annoyed at world rugby for how they are making alot of the rules unclear and allowing referee interpretation on alot of rules which brings inconsistencies.

        I propose we promote Nigel Owens to a new rank in world rugby which allowes him to control everything regarding this stuff.

  2. Gavin Barr on

    At least we were a lot closer than in the last meeting with the boks. Sadly looks like dire warnings about SH coming back too soon were justified. Doubt he’ ll Be available for the six nations. Peter Horne justified his choice I thought, despite all the stick he seems to attract. I think that game just about sums up where we are now in the pecking order. But a brilliant first half.

    Reply
  3. Wabster on

    Laidlaw score is too high. We should judge each performance on its own merits. He exacerbated to slow ball situation when he needed to get there quicker and actively extract the ball.
    Were our exit options coach choices or made on field? Laidlaw,s box kicks were not working. Does he not have the pass to whip it back to Hogg standing deep to send a kick to the oppo 22m line, which I believe is what we should have done against a set defence, aiming for as few rucks in our own third of the pitch as possible. He was still on the pitch when we turned down the equalising penalty at 58 minutes…I thought he was meant to be the cool head.
    We have a year to the RWC and I think Horne G should be given the game time to develop into our number 1 because if he could develop in the areas where Laidlaw has strengths (possibly under the tutelage of Greg as well as Mike Blair) to go with his obvious attributes: quick to the ruck, quick at the ruck, fast and long pass, genuine sniping threat, fantastic offensive tracking and great cover defending (in all of which he is ahead of Laidlaw already, I think) then it might help us over the line in more games. Use Laidlaw as steady closer or plan b off the bench.
    A similar argument could be made that, injuries permitting, a couple of other young players should be backed in the six nations if we believe they will be better in a year’s time than the incumbents. This would be a good debate starter but I wonder about Bradbury, Fagerson, Carmichael.

    Reply
    • Rob on

      Fully agree about Laidlaw. He slowed up slow ball even more allowing SA to line up their defense. Needed to get ball away asap but he just can’t do that. Time for a change!!!!

      Reply
  4. Hoggworld on

    But surprised at the praise of Finn Russell’s kicking game in the ratings guys. He kicked the ball straight to SA twice in the first half, including for their first try. Coupled with several missed place passes I though he had a poor match

    Really laidlaw and Hogg have to do all the game management including kicks to touch. Russell has nearly 40 caps so his game management should be a lot better. Russell seems to have a free reign to take risks and chuck the ball about.

    The England game aside he’s had a poor year for Scotland including shockers against Wales and Italy.

    I think 10 is our biggest problem position at the moment, control will be needed against Japan next year and at the moment we don’t have that at 10.

    Reply
    • Rody on

      Agreed. The style of play in Paris for FR seems not to work well for Scotland at all. Or it is just a drop of form he has and we shouldn’t worry too much.

      Reply
    • CAVOK on

      By now Russell should have the experience to manage a game effectively. In this he fails miserably compared with most fly halfs of the top teams. Hoping he’ll have a good game for once is not the basis on which to build a winning team.

      Reply
      • KenScot on

        Agree with this, thought it was Russell’s worst ever Scotland outing. Think 7/12 is incredibly generous.

        If you re-watch the first 6 mins again he makes 3 clear errors (high pass to Nel that led to him being turned over on ground, then a ridiculous attempted offload, then a horrible cross-kick). In 6 mins!

        Settled down somewhat from them, but kicked too much ball away and threw too many hospital passes.

        We need to take the rough with the smooth with Russell… but we also can’t pretend this was a good performance.

        My overall feeling is that he needs to improve his game where ball is slow and we don’t have momentum. With quick ball and go forward he’s arguably the best in the world. In opposite scenario he’s frequently terrible. No half-backs thrive with static ball obviously, but the best adapt their game and get their team playing in right areas.

    • DaveM on

      Finn Russell is utterly over-rated as an international. He is fantastic at club level, but loses his head in a Scotland jersey. He made more than his fare share of howling errors (as usual) on Saturday, yet still has a place in the squad. He has had more than enough chances, and there are better, younger players available. Time for him to go.

      Reply
  5. Scrummo on

    Does anyone else think we need more bastard as well as leadership in our pack?

    Yesterday South Africa were hurtling into the rucks and smashing us. The ref wasn’t fussed when they pushed the boundaries of what could be termed clearing out legally and we had nobody who could match that. Wilson is the closest we have and obviously at the forefront when it kicked off after Horne’s try and as much as he’s derided we’d be softer without him.

    There probably isn’t a place for a Jim Hamilton style enforcer these days but we miss a Hines in my opinion. When we do produce big lads like Ford or the Grays they certainly don’t have the presence of a Snyman or a Vermeulen.

    Reply
    • TeamCam on

      I wouldn’t object to a bastard, but I’d really like someone who knows the laws to spot what the oppo are getting away with and get everyone to respond in kind. E.g. if Wakes’ defensive line is offside, make ours offside; if they’re illegally slowing down the ball, let’s do that too.

      Reply
    • Warks Scot on

      Know what you mean & don’t think it’s just a matter of bulking up. Wilson did a great clear out on Joe Launchbury last Calcutta Cup, just need that attitude & determination. We need to be either quick to the breakdown or smash through it, didn’t do either & at times looked a bit half hearted. Same with tackling & carrying, just don’t get the go forward. Think Skinner is a useful addition but not at 6.
      For Argentina, might be tempted to put Harley at 6 for his line jumping ability in a probable absence of Wilson & also his breakdown presence. Let’s also get Graham capped coming off the bench. Wish JB was able to help out rather than being stuck in the commentary box! And on the scoring, can’t be doing with pre decimalisation.

      Reply
      • Scrummo on

        Agree with all that and thank you for reminding me of that clear out on Launchbury, a real highlight of that game! That game is a great example of Wilson’s importance too.

        Sometimes it seems like we let the opposition players take liberties with us, holding in the rucks etc. Not many tried that sort of thing with Euan Murray, Jacobson, Big Jim, Hines, Stroker or Jason White. There was a ruck yesterday where Toolis was being held at the side and after a very short and futile half hearted struggle just flopped back and waited it out.

      • Pio on

        It was a clear out of a doing, upright and off balance opponent, not a Sean o’Brien clear out of two Jackling opponents.

        Wilson, like Harley, Fusaro and to a lesser extent Horne (We can’t ignore all of the awful errors he makes interspersed with some decent play) are all examples of good Pro 14 players who are just not good enough at international level

    • Alanyst on

      In most cases our “big guys” didn’t grow up playing Snymans and Vermeulens…I think that the level of aggression in youth rugby is probably much higher in South Africa than here.

      Reply
  6. john on

    Du Preez was ,for a season, looking like the nasty ball playing 8 we’d been praying for. He got a bad injury and has never been the same since. Got a bad throat injury recently think he’s back playing again yet.

    Reply
  7. Alanyst on

    Some thoughts…..

    1) Watching that game was a bit like many of those Glasgow vs Munster games over the past few years…on steroids. Don’t remember Glasgow winning that many either.

    2) We will never be reliably top 5 as long as we have a substantial number of “project players” and “Granny-picks”…simply put if these players were not seen to be good enough in the SA/NZ/Aus/Eng youth systems, we can’t expect to beat those teams regularly using their unselected players…

    3) Funny how the tone has been fairly “upbeat” for losing (at home) to the 5th ranked side…but a few weeks ago, we lost (away) to the 3rd ranked side and it was all doom and gloom! Perhaps a review of perspective needed re. Wales.

    Reply
    • Referendum on

      Great post. Agree with most of it. A lot of the usual ingrained errors came back on Saturday with restarts, turnovers, scrum issues (probably not wholly our fault and it didn’t go backwards), Russell making too many mistakes (think it probably was his worse game for Scotland) yet we did manage to get close although I never really believed in the last ten mins mainly cos Hogg was off the park and Finn was so inept today. I can’t remember anything he did that was more than what was expected and so many errors that cost us big.

      Wales are now a real top 3 team in world rugby and probably show that by beating SA by 10 on Saturday.

      We really need to work out coping with blitz defence and fast

      Reply
  8. Neil on

    I really hope Toony does not bring in any new players or experiment now up until after the WC, we narrowly lost to SA with in my mind 4/5 choice lock, a lock at Blindside and Wilson at 8.

    We need stop now, nail on a team with players who can execute a plan B and finalise it. They need consistency now to be world beaters.

    We have the players when all are fit.

    Should everyone be fit here is the WC squad and what i hope would be consistently picked until then

    Forwards
    1. Allan Dell
    2. Fraser Brown
    3. Zander Fagerson
    4. Richie Gray
    5. Sam Skinner
    6. John Barclay
    7. Hamish Watson
    8. Blade Thomson
    Backs
    9. George Horne
    10. Finn Russell
    11. Tommy Seymour
    12. Duncan Taylor
    13. Huw Jones
    14. Sean Maitland
    15. Stuart Hogg
    Subs
    16. Stuart Mcinally
    17. Murray Mcallum
    18. Simon Berghan
    19. Grant Gilchrist
    20. Magnus Bradbury
    21. Greig Laidlaw 9/10 Cover
    22. Alex Dunbar
    23. Blair Kinghorn

    Alternative Player/game

    24. Ross Ford
    25. Daryll Marfo (Wildcard)
    26. Rob Harley
    27. Josh Strauss
    28. SHC
    29. Adam Hastings
    30. Peter Horne
    31. Darcy Graham (Bolter)

    Reply
    • jonjo on

      Ritchie Gray – has played once in 2 years.

      Sam Skinner – 2 caps

      Zander Fagerson – Never fit.

      Blade Thomson – Uncapped

      Duncan Taylor – Hasn’t played since 2016

      Reply
      • SteveW1001 on

        Throw in Murray McCallum, Marfo and SHC and we are pretty much turning the team upside down based on recent internationals!

      • Neil on

        Mcallum is in there for his ability to play Loosehead and Tighthead

        SHC should get in based on the fact Price has not taken his chances after refinding abit of form.

        Marfo is my wildcard, he will be a lion and world player of the year in 2021

  9. TheSmidge on

    I’m just not sure I like the new scoring system.

    Seems on the whole to overstate individual contributions…Wilson and Russell both scored 7/12, but really didn’t merit pass marks. Reid, Nel, Toolis, Seymour, Hastings all seem to have more than they deserved from what I could see from my seat in the South Stand.

    Reply
    • Rory Baldwin on

      It’s probably a combination of things, one of them being that I was tweeting, writing the match report and scribbling +/- points on a team sheet so I’m sure plenty was missed! What we’re trying to do is give a little more transparency as to where the rating comes from, but you could be right that it does focus too much on the individual and some sort of “teamness” way of looking at things could be useful. It’s an experiment and we may change it again next weekend and then get some feedback at the end of the autumn.

      Reply
      • TheSmidge on

        Definitely appreciate the effort Rory, particularly as transparency is intended rather than a default “Ross Ford” score for everyone. Perhaps some sort of “team contribution” + or – balancing aspect would be fair, that would certainly bring down Wilson and Russell for this week. One of the tendencies of giving marks-out-of for a variety of aspects is that (massacres as Twickenham aside) there will be very little occasions that anyone will score zero for any part. Therefore, rather than starting at 6, everyone does start with a base line and overall contributions could be overstated (as seems to be happening).

      • Rory Baldwin on

        Starting to think I’ll be look at rating on 4 fronts next week, which would be 4×5 taken as half points. Then /2 to get a mark out of 10. That way traditionalists like ol’ Scrummo are happy with the end result but there’s a wee bit more insight and indeed method rather than just picking a number… As to what the 4 are, who knows. Current thinking is Attack/Defence/Breakdown/Influence with the latter covering set-piece, bench impact and extra points for ridiculous skill etc.

      • Neil on

        I dont think this scoring system is bad, just you are to generous.

        For example

        I would say to earn a 4 in defense you not only need to make all your tackles but also make some of those tackles ones which drive the opposition back and put them behind the gain-line.

        Just a high tackle rate in this era is 3/4 for me which is still a positive i guess.

      • Rory Baldwin on

        That’s fair Neil, I was hoping for some post-match stats before I typed them up, in order to double check my thinking, but they didn’t make any available at BTM. I might revise them if I get a chance to watch the game back.

      • TheSmidge on

        It is always interesting to compare what “gut reaction” ratings are to more scientific ones based on metrics from the game. Might be worth considering delaying ratings until stats are available from ESPN, though danger is that it will be delayed too long and then there’s no longer any impetus for a good “debate” about it.

        One of the things that might be useful to consider, as Neil is getting at, is a range of metrics that have an equivalence to a score. In defence its maybe easier, as you can look at tackles/tackles completed and how that translates into turnovers or penalties won. But in attack, while it might be easy to rate someone highly for a length of the field run, beating loads of defenders, if it leads to being isolated and conceding a penalty for holding-on, then maybe a high score isn’t merited as much.

  10. Martin on

    Scoring system is fine in principle it goes someway to quantify what can sometimes feel like an arbitrary process. I always try and look at the relativity of the scoring rather than the numbers themselves – i.e. though Huw Jones was very good so where does everyone else rate in comparison.

    I think the effort was 1st rate and aside from the first 20 minutes the defense was immaculate. With the ball I think the only thing that really let us down was our inability to get gainline success and quick ball – i say ‘only’ but it really is the essence of the game !

    When we get over the gainline and suck the defenders in narow we have the passing, talent and speed to get behind the blitz defence – coupled with how good we are in the unstructured stuff (Hogg’s break up the touchline and Jones from the rebound penalty shows perfectly). But look at the irish and allblacks game – sometimes the defence is so good that you dont get the room to play and then you really need to win the collisions and take the points on offer to build pressure – if we can get that aspect right – and its much easier said than done, then we can afford to be more patient and play territory more – knowing that when it is on we are probably in the top 2 or 3 in the world in attacking support running rugby. All in all, it shows where we need to be better, but also reinforced how close we actually are.

    Reply
    • Referendum on

      Yeah been feeling this all season in Scottish football with the calls not backing up refs in the review panel now it is coming to rugby. It’s all about the legal side of things now. What can be held up in court and what can’t?

      Rather than you kick somebody with intent to seriously injure you’re off in football. You headbutt somebody with the aim to knock them out you’re off too. Ridiculous. Can’t stand this sort of stuff sometimes.

      Yours A Frustrated Referee.

      Reply
      • Referendum on

        Bonus is that Hogg is fit for Argentina. I have bad ankles too and know they can recover pretty quickly even if you go over pretty heavily.

      • JohnMc on

        Missed the incident at the ground live but watched it on YouTube earlier today. It was a shocker, and the ‘…degree of provocation….’ taken into consideration by the citing official is complete and utter you know what. No excuse ever for a deliberate nutting on the park. Retrospective red and a ban should have been meted out.

    • Ian on

      Ben Skeen was our TMO against SA.

      He was also TMO for the Calcutta cup in 2017 where he and Raynal missed a dangerous ‘tackle’ (almost a punch) by Itoji on Hogg in the 8th minute. Hogg had to go off with concussion as a result. And he was our TMO in 2015 RWC QF where he told Joubert to ignore the late, late hit on Hogg in 77th minute. So perhaps Hoggy is remembering all this in voicing his criticism.

      I think Hogg is correct, rugby is still not taking player welfare seriously and the officials are not making it happen. I was astonished on Saturday at Poite saying the late hit on Watson was ‘dangerous’ but only warranted a penalty.

      Reply
  11. Highland Bear on

    Rory For the influence rating you might wish to consider the time an individual player is on the pitch as a factor. Someone hooked after 50 minutes will inevitably have less influence than someone who sees out the 80.. Likewise a replacement on with 30 minutes of game time will have more influence than someone who comes on for the last 10.
    You might also look at Red & Yellow cards under this category. Someone with a red (a rarity in the Scottish international side) should automatically get a zero, or even a negative score. Someone with a yellow should have one or two automatically deducted from the overall rating.

    Reply
    • Merlot on

      I’m sure cards will come into play in any scoring system, but I’m not sure a red necessarily warrants a zero score. Scotland have had two red cards that I know of – Scott Murray for retaliating about some Welsh foul play in Cardiff, and the infamous Stuart Hogg shoulder incident, again at the Millennium. Both could be considered harsh and both had been playing well up to that point.
      With yellow cards, there is a difference between stupidity (Fraser Brown at Twickenham) and wrong place wrong time (Finn Russell at home vs Wales). And you’d have to account for taking one for the team – ie a yellow for being the latest in a string of team penalties.
      In any event, the influence (or not) of cards and time on the pitch is still subjective, so let’s not try and get too scientific about it. As long as Rory (or whoever) can back up their scores with good reasoning, then let them get on with it and let’s argue the scores afterwards.
      BUT giving someone a zero, whatever has happened, is disrespectful to someone who is putting their body (and career) on the line for Scotland. They’d have to get red-carded in the first minute for something stupid and unprovoked and undoubtedly a red card.

      Reply
  12. Merlot on

    Personally I think the scoring system is a bit overcomplicated. What we all do (subconsciously if nothing else) is rate everyone against everyone else in the team. So with a starting point depending on whether it’s a win (7) or a loss (6) you can decide who was average in the team and who was outstanding. You could increase the starting point to 8 for an outstanding win against superior opposition (last Autumn vs Australia, perhaps) and reduce it for an abject loss (last Spring vs Wales anyone?).
    Nobody should get a 10, unless they’ve been Mary Poppins (look it up). Equally nobody should get a 4 unless they have personally handed the opposition the game.
    So against South Africa (starting point 6/10):
    I would give Watson, Hogg and Jones an 8/10 for Saturday’s performance.
    Skinner, Maitland and Horne get 7/10 for above par performances.
    Reid, McInally, Gray, Laidlaw, Seymour get 6/10.
    Nel, Toolis, Wilson and Russell get 5/10, for either below par performances or major errors. Arguably Laidlaw and Gray underperformed and should get 5s, but Laidlaw’s performance was affected by the slow ball from the forwards (exacerbated by the saffers lying all over it) and Jonny again topped the tackle count with 15 (none missed), and defences win games (see Ireland).
    The scoring SHOULD be subjective. Otherwise there would be no argument and no blog!!!

    Reply
      • Ben F on

        Scoring is fine Rory – You will never get consensus . We argued over scores on the old system , we are arguing over scores on this . The transparency is good, not everyone in rugby recognises the diversity . We all have our favorites as well. Keep it going , we will all learn more when it is transparent and we get the polarised opinions .

        It is a raw deal when we dont recognise every man for his job on the pitch, so Hogg will not get marks for proping up the scrum and Gordy Reid will not get marks for being last line in defence or slicing defences like the Millenium Falcon. But they do get marked for their respective strengths.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not appear on the comment. It will not be used for marketing purposes or shared with any other third parties.

 characters available. Comments over the limit require moderation. Need more? Drop us an article!