That World Cup Draw Is A Real Challenge To The SRU

I WOULD like, if I may, to carry-on where I left off in yesterday's blog. There, I finished by asserting: our priority is to get the ongoing Governance Review out of the way, so we know where we are going; then, we need to look at our coaching and player development programme, which needs urgent sorting-out, then, we can, slowly, begin to move forward.

 

 

Gregor Townsend - the hard work to 2023 starts today

I posted yesterday before the 2023 World Cup draw was made. As you should all know by now, in France in 2023, Scotland will face: South Africa, Ireland, Asia/Pacific 1 and Europe 2. We don't yet know which nations will fill the two minor slots, but, on current form it will be either Samoa or Tonga from Asia/Pacific and one from Spain, Romania or Russia from Europe.

If it's Samoa, they could trouble us and Ireland, but, right now, we are looking at two from the top three qualifying – and we are the lowest-ranked of that trio.

Another cause for concern around 2023 is the age profile of the national squad. Scotland, at least in the professional era, has never been guilty of giving youth its chance. Wales has a proud record of throwing-in teenagers, not so Scotland.

Of our present national squad of 46 players:

• 14 (11 forwards and 3 backs) are already 30 or older

• 16 more will be 30 or older come 2023

• only 16 players (7 forwards and 9 backs will be under 30 in 2023.

I am not writing-off those players who will be in their thirties by the next World Cup, but, given the attritional nature of modern rugby, we have perhaps just 24 internationals in which to find and integrate at least half a squad, before France 2023. OK, with summer tours in 2021 and 2022, we could maybe add another six internationals to that, but, we dohn't have many games in which to blood new players.

BUT – I would suggest, given the conservative nature of Scottish selection protocols, we are looking for a handful of “bolters” to come out of left field before we kick-off in 2023. Given too the reluctance of the Edinburgh and Glasgow management to trust their younger players, this is asking a lot.

I am going to be controversial here, since there are a number of fierce critics of the FOSROC Super6 who simply refuse to hear anything good of this competition. However, I still believe, given time, this is the future. We have to get it running properly, as a means of getting our younger players, the former Under-20 caps and the Academy “students” playing regularly and testing themselves. This has yet to happen, but, when it does, I can see it being a major influence in player development.

I still feel, we have to be brave and go quickly to a Super 8 and even a Super 10. We need a Super franchise in Glasgow, one further north than Stirling, a second Borders franchise (and this time SRU, listen to the Borders clubs and go with a 21^st century South team – moving round the Borders grounds) and, as I have heard from at least a couple of guys already inside the Super system – why not London Scottish?

The RFU is cutting funding to the Championship, the tier of rugby where Scottish currently play. This is now a largely semi-professional league. So, if Scottish is now a semi-pro outfit, why shouldn't they play in Scotland's Super competition?

And, with Scottish on-board, perhaps more cross-border games against other English Championship sides, or even their Premiership sides' Academy teams could be arranged – giving our younger players more experience?

We have to do something to get our kids through faster – the current system is not working.

SO – Adam Hastings is off to Gloucester and Duhan van der Merwe to Worcester. A career in professional sport is a short one, so I really cannot condemn a young man for cashing-in as best he can. However, to me these moves are a rugby version of Scott McKenna leaving Aberdeen for Nottingham Forest and John McGinn ditching Hibernian for Aston Villa.

If top-flight sport really was about glory rather than money, I feel they would have stayed where they are. To my mind, Gloucester – for all their great traditions – and Worcester, are lesser sides than Glasgow and Edinburgh.

 

 

Duhan van der Merwe - maybe owes the SRU a bit more loyalty

With particular regard to VDM – if I was the SRU apparatchik in charge of writing contracts for imported project players, I would think of inserting a clause which demanded, once they were capped by Scotland, they had to remain with their Scottish club for two full seasons before they could move on.

Edinburgh made VDM an internationalist, he has, if he does move, not repaid them.

FINALLY – can I point followers of this blog (again) to the excellent The Offside Line, and in particular a column by Gavin Blackburn on youth development, particularly around younger, teenaged players.

 

 

 

Gavin Blackburn - has penned a thought-provoking piece for TOL

 

This is a particular interest of Gavin's and he has penned some very-good sense on this issue. Funnily enough, he's not the only one saying what he is. At least a couple of guys within the Super6 community have said exactly the same to me as Gavin extols in his article.

Please, get across to TOL and read Gavin's piece – then maybe we should start shouting at BTM to implement it.

Sadly, I Am Again Forced To Say - It's Shite Being Scottish

“About Scottish Rugby

Scottish Rugby is the governing body for rugby union in Scotland. We work hard to grow the game and inspire Scotland through rugby.

We are proud to represent the nation and the sport on the global stage, sharing and upholding our values of respect, leadership, achievement, engagement and enjoyment.

I have cut and pasted the above heading and four paragraphs directly from the official SRU website. Those 52 words are, if you like, the SRU's “mission statement.” They open with a bald statement of fact, and an even bolder claim – which some within the game in Scotland might dispute. Do we really all believe some of the ruling junta are working hard to grow the fame and inspire Scotland through rugby?

Because, I wasn't very inspired when I sat down to watch Exeter v Glasgow Warriors, on BT TV yesterday. In fact, I was so uninspired, I baled-out immediately Stuart Hogg scored for Exeter at the start of the second half; deciding I would rather switch channels and watch Finn Russell strutting his stuff for Racing 92 against Connacht.

Thanks to the Irish province's brave second half fightback, I did not regret my choice – and, by the way, if you didn't watch the game, without reaching the heights of which he is capable, the gallus one played his way back in nicely for Racing and provided he stays fit, he should be fully on-song come the Six Nations.

Look at the two matches. The two leading sides in Europe last season, each with home advantage, facing respectively one of Scotland's two clubs (of near-equal standing) and Ireland's fourth-ranked province. The Scottish side were routed by six tries to nil, the Irish side lost by a mere four points and had their exalted hosts hanging-on grimly as the clock ran down. From a Scottish perspective, that result in Paris merely under-lined something that has been obvious for some time. The Irish RFU are running their game far better than the SRU are running theirs.

There is no escaping the conclusion, at the moment, Scottish rugby is on a downer. Glasgow were simply out-played by Exeter, while, on Saturday night, at BT Murrayfield, Edinburgh never looked like beating La Rochelle.

Even during that spell of heavy Edinburgh pressure towards the death, a series of attacks which ended with a Hamish Watson knock-on, watching on TV, I was waiting for Edinburgh to fuck-up. Long experience has taught me, our Scottish teams too often lack the mental composure to turn pressure into points. This has been our teams' Achilles heel throughout the open era. The only surprise at the knock-on was that it was “Mish” who made the mistake.

Given the truncated calendar in European club rugby this season, I am already prepared to write-off both teams hopes of advancing to the knock-out stages of the Heineken Cup, and Ah hae ma doots about either team securing the consolation prize of a last-16 place in the Challenge Cup.

I fear, Scottish Rugby, like Scottish Football, is on the downward slope as far as international status is concerned.

This has to be a worry for the SRU. Their management model is that they make the bulk of their money from filling BT Murrayfield with fans willing to pay top dollar to watch the Scotland international team play attractive, winning rugby.

The profits from this endeavour are then split between the costs of running the two full-time professional teams – whose reason d'etre should be to prepare Scottish players for the international arena and under-writing the club game, where these players should start off their climb to the top – their cap and wearing the thistle on their chests.

It is a sad fact of life, where Scottish Rugby is concerned, that at professional level, a lot of the cash which accrues to the SRU each year has to be spent on the professional game. Unlike in England, the SRU cannot find club owners with deep pockets to fund the lifestyle of our top home-based players – they have to under-write the cost of the professional game themselves, by directly employing the full-timers, and subsidising the six clubs willing to take-up franchises to assist with younger player development.

Whether this management model is the right one is, of course, open to debate. Perhaps we will find out when the ongoing governance review finally reports some time next year. Even then, this being Scotland, arguments one way and the other will surely continue.

I appreciate, Scotland is the weakest of the major rugby-playing nations. Fewer clubs, fewer players, we really need to mine the Scottish Diaspora if we are to compete on the world stage.

I had a look at the official SRU website, when penning this post. This lists a 45-man Scotland squad, which breeaks down thus:

• 17 players (38%) “Home Scots” who came through domestic rugby.

• 22 players (49%) “Scotland-Qualified” who learned the game in England or overseas.

• 6 players (13%) who learned the game in Scotland then moved away.

Of the 22 “Scotland-Qualified” players, the break-down is:

• 12 players (54%) qualify through “Grandparents' rights” - having a parent or grandparent who was born in Scotland

• 8 players (36%) qualify through residence.

• 2 players (10%) - actually Adam Hastings and Scott Steele, while 100% Scottish, came through English club academies – Bath and Leicester Tiogers respectively.

In all, the SRU employs 106 full-time professional players, between the two PRO14 sides and the Scotland Sevens squad. The break down of these players is:

• 58 players (55%) are “Home Scots” who learned their rugby within the Scottish game.

• 30 players (28%) are “Scotland-Qualified” having learned the game outside Scotland.

• 18 players (17%) are “Non-Scotland-Qualified.

[I think we can presume had Adam Hastings remained at George Watson's College, rather than decamping to Millfield, then the Bath Academy, he would still have broken through – probably to Edinburgh rather than Glasgow. But, had Scott Steele remained at Dumfries Saints and taken his chance in Scottish Rugby, perhaps moving-on to join Ayr, or one of the Borders clubs, rather than heading south to Leicester Tigers Academy, would he still have trained-on to be capped?]

• Are we getting value for money from the SRU's investment in the domestic game?

• Are we happy with a 55%-45% split between home-grown and externally-recruited player?

• Is 17% of the professional players employed by the Union being foreign mercenaries, unable to immediately play for Scotland, acceptable? Again, does this offer value for money?

• Are we doing Open Rugby properly? Have we ever?

For my part, I have no problem with the SRU bringing in an “X-Factor Player” like Leone Nakarawa or Niko Matawalu. However, I struggle to see what benefit Scottish Rugby gets from young already-capped home-grown players having to sit in the stand, while journeymen imports who cannot play for Scotland either start or are on the bench.

Players want to play, but, it seems to me, if you are a young Scottish player, unless you are deemed to be “exceptional” your lot is to train and barely play, while a non-Scot gets to wear the match-day jersey.

There have been increased calls for a return to the old amateur era set-up, of players playing for their clubs, then for their Districts, then for Scotland. The reality is, we didn't do any better then than we do now. In fact, if you consider: what was in effect a Glasgow District XV lost 19-90 to a fully-professional Leicester Tigers back in 1997, and at the weekend a fully-professional Warriors lost 0-42 to Exeter Chiefs, I think we have to acknowledge, going back to the old District set-up would be a retrograde step.

We need to have full-time professional players in Scotland if we are to compete in the PRO14 and in Europe. I think our problem is – we are not doing enough to keep our players playing; the fringe players are not being challenged enough so they are ready to step up. Certainly in comparison to how the Irish bring on their fringer players – the SRU is way off the pace.

I am also coming round to the view, the quality of coach working in Scotland is not good enough – at every level, and our coach education needs to improve markedly.

But, the necessary improvements will not happen overnight, indeed, I fear they may be some time in coming. We need to get the Governance Review out of the way; then we need to look at the coaching and player development – sort these out and things might improve, but, there is no quick fix for where we are now.

Success In Rugby Has A Lot To Do With Going To The Right School Or Club - but, that's hardly shock news

RIGHT – you're a young, ambitious rugby player, whose dream is to play for Scotland. So, where do you go to learn the game, and have the best chance of getting a Scotland cap?

Given the current recruitment protocols at BT Murrayfield I suggest your short list of intended destinations offering the best chance of achieving your ambition would be:

1. Stellenbosch University

2. University of the Witwatersrand

3. University of Pretoria.

Go to any of these three, and your air ticket to Edinburgh will follow in due course. However, if you don't fancy decamping to South Africa, don't worry, there are alternatives closer to home.

Back in the amateur era, there was a clear career path – go to the correct school, in either Edinburgh or Glasgow, get into either of the Oxbridge universities, get your Blue – play a couple of games for London Scottish and the cap will be along within weeks. This however is no longer the case.

Today, you need to get a contract with a full-time professional team, which in Scotland gives you a choice of Edinburgh or Glasgow. They tend to recruit directly from the Scottish Rugby Academy – who in turn tend to only allow their students to play for certain clubs, or in some cases recruit from these clubs.

So, where should you be playing? Far be it from me to offer advice, but offer I will. Here are the top ten Scottish clubs when it comes to getting Under-20 players a professional contract:

1. Stirling County – 26 past players with pro contracts

2. Heriot's – 25 players with pro contracts

3. Boroughmuir – 23 players with pro contracts

4. Watsonians – 23 plaeyrs with pro contracts

5. Glasgow Hawks – 22 players with pro contracts

6. Edinburgh Academical – 21 players with a pro contract

7. Currie – 18 players with a pro contract

8. Stewart's-Melville – 17 players with a pro contract

9. Melrose – 15 players with a pro contract

10. Ayr – 14 players with a pro contract

 

Groomed at Stirling County - but not one of their 26 U-20 caps

 

 

AS I said above, some of these players were directed to the club with whom they won their Under-20 caps – Finn Russell, for instance, though he came through the Stirling County system, won his Under-20 caps with Falkirk, before moving on to Ayr.

Eleventh place in the list is held by Hawick, a club which definitely grows its own, but by whom the iconic green shirt is still given-out on the basis: “If they're good enough, they're old enough.” Even born-and-bred “Teris” admit, the Hawick club has an uneasy relationship with Murrayfield, but, the Hawick system still, as it has for years, works – young Teris still long to pull on that green shirt and represent the toon.

 

 

Two examples of Hawick's "if they're good enough, they're old enough" ethos

The only other club in double figures when it comes to U-20 caps is Aberdeen Grammar, while, leading the way among the non-Scottish clubs, whose players are recruited via the Scotland Qualified campaign are Loughborough University and Newcastle University, both with eight alumni with Scotland Under-20 caps.

You may have noticed, the six FOSROC SUPER6 franchise clubs are all in the top ten – but, looking at the list, I cannot help but wonder what was wrong with Glasgow Hawks' franchise bid – that they didn't get one in spite of their excellent record in bringing through the likes of George Horne, the Fagerson Brothers and Scott Cummings.

Mind you, I suppose, for as long as Murrayfield's first stop in search of recruitment is South Africa, it matters little what happens at home.

Of course, certainly among its “white tribe,” in South Africa, Rugby Union is far-more the people's game than it is here. The chances are, your average 20-year-old Saffer, intent on a rugby career, has better basic skills than his Scottish equivalent. He certainly has a chance of having got closer to the fabled 10,000 hours of practice deemed necessary if you are to make a game your career.

They also, probably have better nutrition and strength and conditioning experience than their Scottish equivalent.

So, the truth probably is, the SRU will continue to recruit from South Africa for as long as that is a cheaper alternative to putting in-place the necessary expertise and systems which will improve the lot of young Scots.

It has long been held true in football – it's cheaper to buy ready-made from elsewhere, rather than making the investment in people and facilities to grow your own.

And, for as long as the paid officials, keen to protect their own wee empires, rule the roost at BTM, and the bottom line is more-important than growing domestic Scottish Rugby, I fear we are stuck with regular imports of cheap Saffers.

Getting off this bandwagon and back to putting home-grown Scottish talent first, has got to be a priority, I feel.

Why Don't We Steal An Idea From Gridiron?

IT IS generally accepted – American Football is an offshoot of Rugby Football. Similarly, Rugby League split from Rugby Union and since these two games went their separate ways, they have, it might be argued, shown the parent game – Rugby Union – how it is done, when it comes to innovation.

Sadly, in taking-back one RL innovation – defensive alignment – Rugby Union has done itself no favours. The modern defensive set-up, of having an entire team of players strung across the park, as if involved in a giant game of British Bulldog, has done nothing for attacking Rugby Union.

The purists, or maybe its RU's in-built conservatism, best encapsulated in the time-honoured Scottish Rugby moan of: It's aye been and aye will be,” means, suggesting maybe RU could learn something from other forms of football, is not a way of winning friends and influencing people.

BUT – needs must, and, if we are to bring back exciting rugby, then maybe we should see if there are things from other games we could borrow or adapt.

Indeed, I feel RU, at least at the elite level, is back where it was in the 1960s, when, on the back of those 100-plus lines-out in the Scotland v Wales match at Murrayfield, the “Australian Dispensation,” banning kicking directly to touch from outside a team's own 22 (25 as it was in those days of Imperial measure), was banned.

[Can I say here, my own favoured move would not require us to look elsewhere, simply BRING BACK REAL RUCKING, and we would have a better, faster, more-entertaining game.]

But, given we are unlikely to see the return of Real Rucking, what might we do to save our game from stagnation?

Let me get the really left field suggestion out of the way first:

Why don't we steal American Football's Forward Pass?

 

 

Eli Manning passing, I can think of a Scottish 10 who might try this if allowed to

I had a wee look at the history of the forward pass, and it seems it was introduced in around 1906, with President Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt a major driver in its introduction – after a year of carnage in the game which reportedly saw 18 players killed and 159 seriously injured.

Legalising the forward pass was a means of opening-up the game and eliminating the mass plays of the time.

OK, Rugby Union in 2020 is not that dangerous. However, this week's eruption of concern over early-onset Dementia does indicate, the game has a problem, which if not tackled soon, will get worse.

Might not allowing the forward pass work as a safety feature in RU today; eliminating the breakdown and the mass defensive lines we see in the modern game? The forward pass might lead to the end of the current fashion for one line of players strung across the field – if a forward pass was an option, some defenders would need to drop into the back field to cover for it, thereby creating more space for the attacking side to actually attack.

 

And, just imagine the roar at BT Murrayfield, if Finn Russell was to unleash an 81st minute "Hail Mary" 40 metre pass to Darcy Graham to win Scotland a Calcutta Cup and Grand Slam.

American Football possession works on the “downs” principle – the side with possession of the football has four downs to advance ten yards. If they succeed, they get another four. Failure leads to the surrender of possession to the opposition.

I don't know if Rugby Union is quite ready for a “four downs” rule – or even Rugby League's “six tackles” rule – where the attacking team has to surrender possession if they haven't scored by going through that number of tackles. But, while there is a great degree of team work involved in multi-phase rugby, watching a team go through over 20 phases, and only advancing less than ten metres is a bit boring. Having the forward pass option could brighten things up.

 

This might have
 

Mind you, and I don't know what Gilbert, the world-leaders in manufacturing rugby balls might make of this suggestion, but, if we bring-in forward passing, there could be a case for reverting to the smaller, slightly-different shaped American Football ball. I doubt if many scrum-halves of fly-halves, the guys most likely to be making forward passes could work it properly with a size 5 rugby ball.

 

 

to become this - however

 

[Another wee thought. Time and again we see a pack playing repeat pick and go from one metre out – against a massed defence. Has no coach ever thought of adapting some of the over the top moves American Football teams use when on “third and goal” snaps?]

Imagine, for instance, having your two best line-out lifters propelling a fast-moving, ball-carrying three-quarter over the heads of the defending side into the in-goal area. That would be spectacular.

I've just had another, as we say here in God's County of East Ayrshire - “rush of shite to the brain.”

Something we might borrow from Ice Hockey – the concept of the “Power Play,” when a miscreant is sent to the sin bin. In ice hockey, when a player is banished to the bin, the opposition loses their one-man advantage the moment they have scored during their period of numerical advantage.

Let's adapt that to RU, but finesse the penalty – a try scored during a yellow card “power play” is, like the penalty try, automatically worth seven points – there is no need for the conversion.

There might also be a case of, as in ice hockey, cancelling the power play once the team with the numerical advantage scores, particularly if the yellow card was shown for a technical law breach.

For a red card, why not try something dear old Allan Hosie used to be very-keen on? Allan's suggestion was, after a red card offence, the foul play would incur the additional punishment of a penalty, taken from the 22, central to the posts – but worth an almost-guaranteed ten points.

While I am on a roll. We really need to look at the driving maul, and sort this out. Let's outlaw the ability to pass the ball backwards – the catcher has to retain possession, thereby allowing the defending side to attack the ball while the maul is in motion.

If the current maul is worked properly, it is well-nigh undefendable – which is basically unfair. This aspect of the game definitely needs sorting-out.

While I am at it, I will repeat my call for a clamping down on the wee slippages which have become the norm – squint feeds at scrums and lines-out, stealing additional yards when kicking to touch, and – those seldom-punished but frequently dangerous tactics - taking-out opponents beyond the breakdown, the “torpedo” entry to the breakdown.

Doing nothing is not an option, we have to do something to make Rugby Union safer, and more-entertaining.