6 Nations 2020

[Big D]

Pretty sulky stuff

I'm not sure it all is. Some of it is but some of it isn't. If he was sulky he wouldn't have spoken to the psychologist knowing there was no real reason to. Plus texting him to say he can go home? At least have the decency to call him, or do it face to face. That isn't to.say Russell is blameless, he clearly isn't*.

Every man and his dog knows Townsends tactics have been shite for a while. God forbid the team key play maker and apparent member of the leadership team wants to raise legitimate concerns. A key part of man management is to make your team feel like you are listening even if you don't change the plan.

*No surprise I am not completely against Finn, I was partly on KPs side when the england cricket team were partly mismanaging him.

I agree up to a point, but the idea that FR can swan in and start drinking when he's been told the rules and his attitude is he doesn't have to listen to those rules kinda takes the onus off anyone else to listen to him.



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

The drinking is the very minor tip of a much bigger ice berg and SRU PR have made it a much bigger thing.

[Banquo]

I'm not sure it all is. Some of it is but some of it isn't. If he was sulky he wouldn't have spoken to the psychologist knowing there was no real reason to. Plus texting him to say he can go home? At least have the decency to call him, or do it face to face. That isn't to.say Russell is blameless, he clearly isn't*.

Every man and his dog knows Townsends tactics have been shite for a while. God forbid the team key play maker and apparent member of the leadership team wants to raise legitimate concerns. A key part of man management is to make your team feel like you are listening even if you don't change the plan.

*No surprise I am not completely against Finn, I was partly on KPs side when the england cricket team were partly mismanaging him.

Some players are just difficult; you have to judge whether their presence ultimately helps or hinders. KP was sent away about a year before this was the case- but he is an utter knob. A lot of coaches are also shyte.

BTW, I should have said petty sulky stuff, reflecting both sides, as neither come out well.

I pretty much agree. But from what has been said, Russell as a senior player and part of the leadership group isn't out of line for speaking up to GT so long as its repectfully done. We don't know whether that is the case or not yet.

That article looks like a final nail in their relationship.

[whatisthejava]

I can’t make up my mind and thought if Scotland did well gt would be proven right and if Scotland were shite fr would be proven right.

My gut is scotland doesn’t know how to attack without Finn Russell and therefore we don’t know what to do in the 22.

We could have won yesterday, it was a coin toss and we lost.

[Mikey Brown]

There are much bigger problems than a lack of Russell in attack, but we’ve been able to cover them up to some degree because he can do incredible things.

That article made me sympathise with him more than I expected, as much as I still think he’s gone about this all in a bad way. I’m afraid Townsend is out of his depth, and our same lack of ruthlessness that we show on the field is reflected in this leadership group not managing to get through to Townsend and his team that this gameplan is not working.

You simply cannot be terrified of the gainline and get anywhere in this game.

[Donny osmond]

I'm not sure it all is. Some of it is but some of it isn't. If he was sulky he wouldn't have spoken to the psychologist knowing there was no real reason to. Plus texting him to say he can go home? At least have the decency to call him, or do it face to face. That isn't to.say Russell is blameless, he clearly isn't*.

Every man and his dog knows Townsends tactics have been shite for a while. God forbid the team key play maker and apparent member of the leadership team wants to raise legitimate concerns. A key part of man management is to make your team feel like you are listening even if you don't change the plan.

*No surprise I am not completely against Finn, I was partly on KPs side when the england cricket team were partly mismanaging him.

I agree up to a point, but the idea that FR can swan in and start drinking when he's been told the rules and his attitude is he doesn't have to listen to those rules kinda takes the onus off anyone else to listen to him.



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

The drinking is the very minor tip of a much bigger ice berg and SRU PR have made it a much bigger thing.

Maybe true but whether it's one extra drink or 10 extra drinks it's still symptomatic of someone who thinks the rules don't apply to him

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Big D]

I agree up to a point, but the idea that FR can swan in and start drinking when he's been told the rules and his attitude is he doesn't have to listen to those rules kinda takes the onus off anyone else to listen to him.



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

The drinking is the very minor tip of a much bigger ice berg and SRU PR have made it a much bigger thing.

Maybe true but whether it's one extra drink or 10 extra drinks it's still symptomatic of someone who thinks the rules don't apply to him

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

In isolation that is no different to a player turning up to a meeting 5min late. There hasn't been other reports of him breaking team protocol out with this one 4 day long issue. And if it's true he spoke to Townsend about how he was feeling 2 weeks before the meet up then he should have been managed differently. You can't manage a 30odd man squad in the same manner, the individual man management is important.

The SRU and Townsend have shifted the focus onto it being about Finn having a drink problem when by all accounts that isn't true.

This has mileage in it yet, but neither party look good. The 1st thing should be Townsend v results and performances. Then a new coach can talk to Finn and make his own mind up.

[sharvey44]

In regards to the drinking:

The senior leadership team made a decision without FR, a member of that group.
The decision seemed not to take into account foreign playing players.
I can understand FR’s frustration with that.

In regards to GT:

As was evident last year at Twickers the game plan was/is shite. We were shite in the WC and if team members are saying maybe we should look at a different plan and are being ignored then that’s an issue.

Also as hinted in the article FR isn’t alone in his views but he’s not on the SRU payroll so can speak up without fear of losing his pro contract.

[switchskier]

In regards to the drinking:

The senior leadership team made a decision without FR, a member of that group.
The decision seemed not to take into account foreign playing players.
I can understand FR’s frustration with that.

In regards to GT:

As was evident last year at Twickers the game plan was/is shite. We were shite in the WC and if team members are saying maybe we should look at a different plan and are being ignored then that’s an issue.

Also as hinted in the article FR isn’t alone in his views but he’s not on the SRU payroll so can speak up without fear of losing his pro contract.

I have some sympathy with this. I'd hate to be bound by a set of team rules that I had no say in, were fairly arbitrary and created a clear split between two parts of the team. Put that on top of 12 months of frustrations and poor results and I can see why it's spilled over. It's interesting to read this article with what Barclay said on the rugby pod this week. Paraphrasing but it was along the lines of "some blokes speak for the sake of saying things but finn speaks up when he thinks it's important to do so".

More widely I can see this being a major issue for Scotland in the future if coaches can't bridge the gap between those that come through the academy system and those that don't. We don't have enough players to favour one set over the other.

[Mr Mwenda]

A couple of thoughts. 1) It's entirely possible he is in denial about alcohol (and also high functioning). 2) how big a sacrifice would it have been to not have a third beer?

Not been paying much attention and can believe townsend isn't great, but it's hard to sympathise with Russell. He's paid to play for scotland after all.

[Donny osmond]

Anyway moving on... I hear Jonny Gray is now out for the rest of the 6N.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[hugh_woatmeigh]

Anyway moving on... I hear Jonny Gray is now out for the rest of the 6N.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

A huge loss but it would be good to see us develop Skinner and Cummings more at this level. Or even bring Richie into the set-up.

We don't have another Jonny but we have good options here.

[septic 9]

In regards to the drinking:

The senior leadership team made a decision without FR, a member of that group.
The decision seemed not to take into account foreign playing players.
I can understand FR’s frustration with that.

In regards to GT:

As was evident last year at Twickers the game plan was/is shite. We were shite in the WC and if team members are saying maybe we should look at a different plan and are being ignored then that’s an issue.

Also as hinted in the article FR isn’t alone in his views but he’s not on the SRU payroll so can speak up without fear of losing his pro contract.

I have some sympathy with this. I'd hate to be bound by a set of team rules that I had no say in, were fairly arbitrary and created a clear split between two parts of the team. Put that on top of 12 months of frustrations and poor results and I can see why it's spilled over. It's interesting to read this article with what Barclay said on the rugby pod this week. Paraphrasing but it was along the lines of "some blokes speak for the sake of saying things but finn speaks up when he thinks it's important to do so".

More widely I can see this being a major issue for Scotland in the future if coaches can't bridge the gap between those that come through the academy system and those that don't. We don't have enough players to favour one set over the other.

some of you guys seem to think there isn't always a team protocol on drinking and that it shouldn't apply to everyone. It was discussed by the senior leadership group according to Russell, so loads of players had no input. Maybe they should have waited until Finn arrived so they could agree the same thing (2 drinks) they have been agreeing for several seasons. Or get pissed until Finn arrived and told them they only should have had 2 drinks.
It did not come as a surprise to Russell. He chose to make an issue about something his mates did, with no involvement from Townsend or Dodson. Then chose to make it about something else. Big problem, one the team can do without

[septic 9]

In regards to the drinking:

The senior leadership team made a decision without FR, a member of that group.
The decision seemed not to take into account foreign playing players.
I can understand FR’s frustration with that.

like they have never had a player not based in Scotland before . Look, how they go through this stuff is a constant, has been for years, under several coaches and captains. And Russell is in his second season of being based in France, he knew the score

[ARM]

Ah good to see normal service resumed this year - all our best players injured/out and 0 from 2 to start the championship.

[septic 9]

In regards to GT:

As was evident last year at Twickers the game plan was/is shite. We were shite in the WC and if team members are saying maybe we should look at a different plan and are being ignored then that’s an issue.

Also as hinted in the article FR isn’t alone in his views but he’s not on the SRU payroll so can speak up without fear of losing his pro contract.

was the gameplan at Twickeham shite?
Russell's rant made no sense - pumped on adrenaline he said if we kick it they run it back and pump us, if we run it they turn us over and they pump us. We were never going to be able to play up the jumper 10 man rugby and win. There are not many other options for a gameplan.

What changed was a couple of tries either side of HT from errors gave us momentum, and England were in disarray. Russell kicked more second half than first

[septic 9]

We were shite in the WC and if team members are saying maybe we should look at a different plan and are being ignored then that’s an issue.

Also as hinted in the article FR isn’t alone in his views but he’s not on the SRU payroll so can speak up without fear of losing his pro contract.

or hinted because its made up? Or other players have realised they get to have a say but not to decide?

[Big D]

It's up to Finn to come back to the table and commit and up to Townsend to improve things on the field.

Both camps on full on spin mode at the moment. And in Townsends case not just about Finn. 

Aside from Finn, Townsend would be better served focusing on his team that haven't won an important match or even a non pre WC piss about v a better than shite-average team for a long time now. And has yet to win a notable game away from home in the 6N.

The main area we seem to have improved by coaching is defence. An area he was forced to make a change in rather than by choice.

To be fair the scrum is better but whether that is through DeVilliers or because Sutherland is fit and Fagerson has been good all year is debatable.

I'd rather GT and Finn keep quiet and get on with whatever they are trying to achieve.

[Donny osmond]

Anyway moving on... I hear Jonny Gray is now out for the rest of the 6N.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

A huge loss but it would be good to see us develop Skinner and Cummings more at this level. Or even bring Richie into the set-up.

We don't have another Jonny but we have good options here.

Yeah JG is clearly going to be a big loss but he's by no means the be all and end all of 2nd row rugby. Actually been more impressed with Cummings than JG of late, I feel he has a more rounded game.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Cameo]

Would Cummings plus Skinner be good enough in the lineout? Both strike me as the stockier sort of second row but would much prefer them to Toolis starting.

[General Zod]

Would Cummings plus Skinner be good enough in the lineout? Both strike me as the stockier sort of second row but would much prefer them to Toolis starting.

Yes - Cummings good, Skinner looked ok when I saw him jumping, but haven’t see him much to say anything beyond that. Can get Jamie Ritchie up too.

I am happy with our second row options, although would be keen to see Skinner at 8 for a game. Maybe at Exeter for a few games first!

This Townsend/ Russell thing is a complete shit show.

[General Zod]

Does anyone in the comms department have their performance monitored in any serious way? Or is it just full of people who perhaps joined with open eyes and gave up challenging after a while, happy with the free tickets, the chat amongst their friends and having the brand on their resumé for the time they move on? A time that never comes.

And that stadium announcer? Good god. The stupid countdown to kickoff that the players ignore. Every substitution announced like the second coming of Christ. Are we still in the 90s? Are the audience entirely children?

Can an insider sneak out the employee engagement data? Should be amusing.

[General Zod]

Who were the top-rewarded executives beside Dodson?

I think there were 3 others, but not sure.

[septic 9]

Would Cummings plus Skinner be good enough in the lineout? Both strike me as the stockier sort of second row but would much prefer them to Toolis starting.

neither are stocky in any way shape or form. Both are loose head locks rather than tight head locks. Both are decent to better in he lineout, Cummings is the main Glasgow jumper these days which has been going well.
The issue is whether they would have the combined ballast to lock out a scrum, and whether Skinner is ready yet. Cummings has played tight head lock for Glasgow, Skinner doubt has. Toolis packs down behind the TH for Edinburgh and has an excellent lineout, he is favourite, should be anyway

[septic 9]

Does anyone in the comms department have their performance monitored in any serious way? Or is it just full of people who perhaps joined with open eyes and gave up challenging after a while, happy with the free tickets, the chat amongst their friends and having the brand on their resumé for the time they move on? A time that never comes.

And that stadium announcer? Good god. The stupid countdown to kickoff that the players ignore. Every substitution announced like the second coming of Christ. Are we still in the 90s? Are the audience entirely children?

Can an insider sneak out the employee engagement data? Should be amusing.

do you get out much? Its pro sport everywhere. I'm not a fan, but the SRU are selling out Murrayfield every game. That has never happened before. Not even in he good old days when we were much better, as some seem to think. And since the consensus is it can't be on results, must be doing something right, eh?

[General Zod]

do you get out much? Its pro sport everywhere. I'm not a fan, but the SRU are selling out Murrayfield every game. That has never happened before. Not even in he good old days when we were much better, as some seem to think. And since the consensus is it can't be on results, must be doing something right, eh?

No, it’s not everywhere. I go to loads of sport events in different countries each year (including other 6N matches), and not everywhere has the over the top hype we are fed at Murrayfield. Even in America.

Yes, they’re selling out Murrayfield (or coming close - unlike your well-informed, cosmopolitan self, I don’t believe everything the SRU feed me). I also don’t believe the approach they are taking is the only one available to do this (if sell-outs are the only goal). Same as the financial results don’t mean we couldn’t be doing things better.

As it is, we have what I used to believe was a great atmosphere turned into a bit of a laughing stock to many (including players from both dressing rooms, I’ll bet), given the SRU-generated hubris of the Murrayfield experience.