6N squad - starting team

[Mikey Brown]

I think you’ve misread that. 6:2 bench with Skinner for Harris! Kinghorn covering the entire backline I guess.

Odd. Seems harsh on Crosbie, although he’s not been doing anything flash he’s been very physical.

[Mikey Brown]

Also why can’t Watson have played well just because they lost? I mean I have no idea if he did, but probably would have stuck with the same team.

Ditching Harris without any other centre cover is an interesting move. I can see the appeal of extra power up front against France but I never believe our backs are sturdy enough to risk it. It makes it hard to bring Kinghorn on as a tactical move when you’re risking your only injury cover.

[BaldiePete]

I think you’ve misread that. 6:2 bench with Skinner for Harris! Kinghorn covering the entire backline I guess.

Odd. Seems harsh on Crosbie, although he’s not been doing anything flash he’s been very physical.

Whoops. I’ve read it properly now and edited it. I’m not convinced by the 6:2 split but it’s going to be very physical up front against the French so it makes some sense to have some extra weight on the bench.

[Mikey Brown]

Hmmm.

[Big D]

Hmmm.

Watson was rotten as were most if them last week.

[Mikey Brown]

Hmmm.

Watson was rotten as were most if them last week.

Grandslam out the window?

[septic 9]

Watson has been pretty ineffectual in his 2 games back. Exactly bas he was pre injury. Huge call

[septic 9]

Also why can’t Watson have played well just because they lost? I mean I have no idea if he did, but probably would have stuck with the same team.

Ditching Harris without any other centre cover is an interesting move. I can see the appeal of extra power up front against France but I never believe our backs are sturdy enough to risk it. It makes it hard to bring Kinghorn on as a tactical move when you’re risking your only injury cover.

Steyn covers centre. Or a Toonie favourite to 10 and Russell to 12

[Cameo]

I'm okay with it. Harsh on Crosbie but I can see the desire for more turnover threat. We will just have to wait and see how Watson goes.

I never like 6:2 but can remember at least one game against France where we played quite well but were buggered because our forwards dropped like flies in an ultra physical game (the Strauss game is the one that comes to mind). Kinghorn gives us that option - though I'll be very nervous if there is an early injury in the backs as it's not like any of our forwards are obviously suited to filling in.

[francoisfou]

Here's the French side for Sunday's match:
Le XV de départ des Bleus : 15. Ramos ; 14. Penaud, 13. Fickou, 12. Moefana, 11. Dumortier ; 10. Ntamack, 9. Dupont (cap) ; 7. Ollivon, 8. Alldritt, 6. Jelonch ; 5. Willemse, 4. Flament ; 3. Haouas, 2. Marchand, 1. Baille

Remplaçants : 16. Barlot, 17. Wardi, 18. Falatea, 19. Taofifenua, 20. Cros, 21. Macalou, 22. Couilloud, 23. Jalibert

As I mentioned earlier, I'm a bit surprised that Willemse has been included, but maybe we'll see a lot more commitment from him that was sorely lacking in the first two rounds.

[Mikey Brown]

I'm okay with it. Harsh on Crosbie but I can see the desire for more turnover threat. We will just have to wait and see how Watson goes.

I never like 6:2 but can remember at least one game against France where we played quite well but were buggered because our forwards dropped like flies in an ultra physical game (the Strauss game is the one that comes to mind). Kinghorn gives us that option - though I'll be very nervous if there is an early injury in the backs as it's not like any of our forwards are obviously suited to filling in.

Yeah, I don't know who he is referring to in that video above presumably he thinks Fagerson or Watson can just go in to the backs if needs be. I don't really see it.

[Cameo]

I think Watson might have filled in in the centres previously but only for very short periods. Would certainly kill our attack. Better if you have someone who has the pace to stand on the wing (suspect that would be left to one of the 9s).

[BaldiePete]

I think Watson might have filled in in the centres previously but only for very short periods. Would certainly kill our attack. Better if you have someone who has the pace to stand on the wing (suspect that would be left to one of the 9s).

Scott Steele ended up on the wing for us a couple of years ago against Wales. I’m fairly sure that Price has as well.

[Mikey Brown]

I think Watson might have filled in in the centres previously but only for very short periods. Would certainly kill our attack. Better if you have someone who has the pace to stand on the wing (suspect that would be left to one of the 9s).

Scott Steele ended up on the wing for us a couple of years ago against Wales. I’m fairly sure that Price has as well.

At least keeping Horne there on the bench, who has some real pace, may have added some versatility. I’m just sort of baffled by GT being fine with any of our forwards dropping back.

[Donny osmond]

Ah Gilchrist

[morepork]

That was head on head that clearout.

[Ross. S]

That was head on head that clearout.

It was a flying headbutt

[Donny osmond]

Ah Haouas

[francoisfou]

Severe on Gilchrist! A yellow would have been reasonable. Haouas, however, was plain clumsy and red was justified.

[Donny osmond]

Ah Russell

[Mr Mwenda]

Severe on Gilchrist! A yellow would have been reasonable. Haouas, however, was plain clumsy and red was justified.

Hmmm, both were reds for me. Like Ewels v Ireland last year.

[Donny osmond]

Ah-ha! Russell!!

[Donny osmond]

Severe on Gilchrist! A yellow would have been reasonable. Haouas, however, was plain clumsy and red was justified.

Hmmm, both were reds for me. Like Ewels v Ireland last year.

Clear red for me

[Mr Mwenda]

Bad luck, Scotland. I thought they were gonna nab that.

[Big D]

Severe on Gilchrist! A yellow would have been reasonable. Haouas, however, was plain clumsy and red was justified.

Both clear reds IMO