After their 26-18 defeat in the first test, it is hard to know where to start with Scotland. Other than the nagging feeling that we’ve seen it all before.
There may not be any cavalry this time
This wasn’t Scotland vs Italy in the Six Nations, where if you send out some of the understudies and they get a torrid time you recall the big guns for the next game.
This particular iteration of Gregor Townsend’s Scotland is without Hogg, Russell, Harris, Watson and Ritchie, five guys who would likely all start a Six Nations game if fit. The emphasis is on development, and finding backup players for the next World Cup.
Barring Hamish Watson, who is at least on the tour, no big guns are waiting in reserve. The solution, if there is to be one, must come from within.
Players out of position is something we have discussed a lot, but seeing Crosbie at 6 and Hutchinson at 12 would, I suspect, give us a much clearer picture of their merits. The latter might also make some space for the standoff inside them.
Which brings us to:
Kinghorn is not a 10, but he might have to be
Blair Kinghorn carried the can for that one on a lot of social media, but it is unfair to put all the blame on him. When Scotland played their best 15-20 minutes just after half time he was at the heart of both attacking moves that resulted in tries: delivering a nice pass across to Bennett who scythed in at the corner, and running a curving arc of his own to set up a simple switch move with fullback Rory Hutchinson that put the Saints man over the line.
That showed what he can do in attack, but both of those moves could quite as easily have been a full back coming into the line. The rest of the game was lacking in direction at standoff, with some aimless kicking and one pass to no-one during a simple attack move that gives plenty of ammunition to the doubters.
Where he could easily improve the attack would be to give more ball to Hutchinson, who looked impressive in brief cameos. Consider the amount of touches on the ball that Hogg gets in a typical game, and what Hutchinson could spark with a similar level of involvement. Whether that should be a 12 or at 15? (Hutchinson & Bennett at 12/13 please).
In an ideal world, Russell and Hastings would be your starting tens and Kinghorn offers a variety of cover there and across the back three – making him a good bench choice. So what are we really learning?
The rest of the team were equally culpable – the pack in particular – for the lack of genuine input Scotland had into the outcome of this game. Even Finn Russell might have struggled to look good. With Ross Thompson the only genuine 10 cover but even rawer than Kinghorn at test level, expect Blair to get another shot at redemption next weekend.
Restarts are still a killer
Darcy Graham catching a restart with a foot in touch was pretty bad, but allowing Edinburgh man Emiliano Boffelli to reclaim the Argentinian restart just after Scotland’s two decent tries was a momentum killer. Scotland had just worked themselves into the game and then they worked themselves right out of it again.
After that try, aside from the forward pass non-try (that no-one reviewed, thanks Argentinian TV guy), they were always struggling to keep the scoreboard under control and could not haul Argentina back within reach.
The silly penalties are getting sillier
There were plenty of errors (see forward passes, restarts above) but discipline was a big issue during the Six Nations and once again it provided the opposition with easy territory and possession. Toony seemed like he didn’t rate all of Nic Berry’s decisions, and the TMO sounded like he was having a fair amount of hassle getting access to the footage he wanted, but as usual the mantra is the same: play to the whistle.
Scotland struggled for possession early on, so to see a lineout go astray (oops), only for Zander Fagerson to recover it (phew) only for him to get pinged for holding on (oops) was a good example of Scotland compounding errors with more errors.
There was a distinct lack of leadership to calm the situation down when something went wrong. It’s a game of rugby, things will go wrong. It is how you recover from that and Scotland looked a little rudderless under the captaincy of Gilchrist and the direction of Kinghorn. So things got worse each time, and Argentina were ideally placed to capitalise without having to play brilliant rugby too much.
Perhaps luckily for Scotland, Argentina gave away the same number of penalties as they received (10 apiece) so trading kickable penalties was a common feature of the match, even if Argentina only had 57% success with the boot. If the hosts tighten up their discipline and kicking next weekend, Scotland better be damn sure to tighten up theirs.
Argentina deserve more credit
Los Pumas were playing their first home test in nearly 3 years, they have a team stacked with experience and their largely exiled players are operating at the highest level (and Edinburgh).
New coach Michael Cheika couldn’t have expected a better start.
To think our not-quite-first XV had any right to steamroll them playing thousands of miles from home at altitude was naive. None of the team or managment would admit this was the expectation but it certainly seemed that Scotland did not come out of the blocks at full pelt expecting a test match.
I was genuinely surprised when the half time whistle went, as it barely seemed like anything had happened, certainly on Scotland’s part.
Argentina ran the ball 10 more times than Scotland but made almost double the metres (389 to 200). They weren’t flashy, but they weren’t afraid to play either. This should have been a fun watch. And it was if you are an Argentina fan or a neutral. The team who ventured the most, won.
The speed of their defence was very good, with every half break pounced upon by defenders. 14 turnovers were conceded by the Scots through various sloppiness, but even the ones that weren’t nicked slowed the speed of Scotland’s ball to allow the defence to re-assemble. Rinse, repeat.
Our pack need to clear out tacklers more quickly or better yet get beyond the gainline, if they can.
In short, there is plenty to work on for next weekend’s second test.
Additional Reporting: John Anderson and Jonny McGinty. Stats via ESPN
19 responses
Picking one of the premiership’s best 12s at 15 and a players who’s been a brilliant attacking fullback for most of his career at 10 just strikes me as aimless and inconsistent.
What’s happened to Hastings? I haven’t been following that closely. Out of favour? Injured?
He’s a 10 who plays 10. Unless something has happened why wasn’t he picked?
Inconsistency is Townsend’s downfall. I trust him to pull it back but Argentina are a settled championship team playing us at home at the end of a long season. You can’t mess around and beat them.
Hastings injured… ok
Smith at 15, Hutchinson at 12, Thompson at 10, Darge at 7, Crosbie at 6, Cummings at 5, Cherry at 2
This seems far too sensible to me!
Alternatively Kinghorn to 15. He’s not a test standard 10 but he’s more than capable at 15. Leaving Smith as an impact sub
Don’t rate Kinghorn as an International player, even at 15 and definitely not at 10
Toony it seems is too busy trying to be “cleverer” than the rest, and along the way he is losing control of his team’s skillset and mindset…does this indicate insecurity, impatience, or a desire to be deviant?
We are trying too hard. I’d like us to play one game meat and potatoes…no flash, no tricks just the basics done well by players in their normal position…if we get gubbed then so be it.
Also..I think that GTs stubborn resistance when an experiment consistently doesn’t achieve the result envisaged …sometimes it comes off…but ultimately it is his undoing.
It seems to me that something in the team broke a while back…and instead of resetting back to basics ..he just kept trying too hard to be different. Playing players out of their natural position rarely works out over the stretch..and ultimately can damage a players confidence.
I would go with
1. Schoeman
2. Turner
3. Fagerson
4. Cummings
5. Gray
6. Crosbie
7. Watson
8. Fagerson
9. Price (c)
10. Thompson
11. McLean
12. Hutchinson
13. Bennett
14. Graham
15. Kinghorn
Except that , for me, Gray and Gilchrist were woeful…and so I’d give Cummings, Skinner a go with Young on the bench.
I’d pick Cherry ahead of Turner. I’m just not convinced by Turner at test level. Cherry does what it says on the tin for a no.2.
VDM at wing is our best wing…we are just not using him properly. Rowe deserves a shot in place of Graham, as does McLean.
Considering our dearth of natural 12s …GTs non-selections and usage of Hutchinson is perplexing. I dont think we have a better fit 12 than him.
I do can see no justification for dropping Darcy Graham and I would prefer to see Sutherland starting, he has a lot to prove and Toony should back him.
It’s also bizarre how GT…as a player in his day considered as creative and maverick 10,12,13…treats any player with similar skills and approach like he has never seen one…doesn’t rate them..or has no idea what to do with them or tactics to deploy around them. Russell…Kinghorn…Hutchinson…Jones …etc
There will only be one Gregor Townsend.
Imagine if there was a new coach and he switched things up for next six nations by forgetting all grudges, playing the best players in their best positions, while thinking about balance of the team:
Schoeman, McInally, Fagerson
Gray, Cummings
Ritchie, Watson
Dempsey
Price (C), Russell
VDM, Taylor, Jones/Bennett, Darcy, Hogg
Kebble, Turner, Nel, Darge,
Horne, Hastings, Maitland
[Fagerson, Skinner, Harris, Hutchinson]
*Redpath not considered
Will never happen 🤪
Taylor was a great player but bedeviled with injuries and never quite got a run of games. Should never have gone to RWC 2019 due to lack of match fitness and not sure many would include in the squad now, let alone a match day 23. Gray needs to recover his best form – just over-played last couple of seasons? – back row open to debate and Rambo possibly 2nd or even 3rd choice now. Totally get using a tour to bring in some fresh blood, just wish we would stop trying to force square pegs into round fly-half, full-back sized holes
I think the Taylor and Maitland cases bear looking at. This is a rudderless team struggling for spine and experienced heads, including in the six nations. They (and Matt Scott and Huw Jones) were Scotland’s only representatives in top level semi / finals this year. But are what deemed surplus to requirements. They clearly are both good enough for Saracens but not for a team that relies on Johnson, Harris, Steyn, Rowe, McLean. Maitland is 33 and fighting fit and form and starts every important game for Saracens; Taylor is 32 and has had to be managed for injury his whole career (except by GT last World Cup when he was played unfit along side Harris – a combo we could all see was wrong) but is also involved in every important game and currently fit. It makes no sense they are not in the dressing room and looking at the options the team. It’s just another example of a rift/grudge robbing Scotland of two of the best players and what no one has noticed?
Amen on BK!
One thing I’ve noticed is that the chatter about whether Matt Fagerson is any good as an international 8 has really died down. I think he’s gaining broader acceptance and if he can stay fit he should get a good run of caps. Maybe Dempsey will come in but lets see.
Yeah.. I think he’s improved. Though I still think he would have been better developed at 6 or 7..
He’s not Ardie Savea …but he is looking like he could be a good player at 8 if he keeps progressing..and he’s got time to do that.
It is unfortunate , however right now , Dempsey looks like a natural 8. There is always his age and the Toony factor to overcome , however I would have no concerns if Dempsey took the jersey.
Townsend will be gone by the World Cup and Hoggy(along with Russell)will be his nemesis.