Skip to content
  • Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

  • Tipping
  • Team Sheets
  • Highlights
  • Results
    • All Blacks

      Search every All Blacks Test. Filter results by year, opposition, location, venue, city and RWC stage

    • Super Rugby

      Search every Super Rugby since match 1996

    • NPC

      Search NPC results. Only first division matches from 1976-2005. All results from the 14 team competition (2006-present) are included

Scotland v Australia

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
86 Posts 40 Posters 7.6k Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • MN5M MN5

    Eight tries against a tier one nation.

    In the past it woulda taken a whole season to rack up that many. What an effort from the boys in blue.

    raznomoreR Offline
    raznomoreR Offline
    raznomore
    wrote on last edited by
    #70

    @mn5 said in Scotland v Australia:

    Eight tries against a tier one nation.

    In the past it woulda taken a whole season to rack up that many. What an effort from the boys in blue.

    Im amazed you were able to make out the keyboard under all of the semen

    MN5M 1 Reply Last reply
    8
    • raznomoreR raznomore

      @mn5 said in Scotland v Australia:

      Eight tries against a tier one nation.

      In the past it woulda taken a whole season to rack up that many. What an effort from the boys in blue.

      Im amazed you were able to make out the keyboard under all of the semen

      MN5M Online
      MN5M Online
      MN5
      wrote on last edited by
      #71

      @raznomore said in Scotland v Australia:

      @mn5 said in Scotland v Australia:

      Eight tries against a tier one nation.

      In the past it woulda taken a whole season to rack up that many. What an effort from the boys in blue.

      Im amazed you were able to make out the keyboard under all of the semen

      It beads off a smartphone surprisingly well with the right cloth

      1 Reply Last reply
      8
      • MrDenmoreM MrDenmore

        Part of Australia's problem in rugby union is that the Wallabies exist almost purely to try to beat the All Blacks. Their marketing budget lives and dies on the Wobs scoring the odd win against their trans- Ta$man foe. That's because the Bledisloe is virtually the only union game that gets bums on seats here and even on that score they're struggling these days.

        So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

        Worse, the superstructure of Wallabies rugby is erected above a decaying and neglected base rapidly sinking under assault from the other codes - even soccer these days.

        That the Wallabies still sit so highly in the IRB dodgy rankings is the greatest wonder of it all.

        barbarianB Offline
        barbarianB Offline
        barbarian
        wrote on last edited by barbarian
        #72

        @mrdenmore said in Scotland v Australia:

        So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

        You're having a dollar each way here, though. The ABs were depleted, so that game meant nothing. But when a depleted Wallabies lose to Scotland, it means everything?

        It's too simple just to say 'the Wallabies are shit'. Because that AB victory came on the end of an undefeated six game spell that began with a bloody near miss in Dunedin. But of course we were lucky that game, yeah? Or you were just unlucky - I can't remember which, now.

        The reality is, this is a team that is still mentally frail. We have the talent but we're not quite there tactically or mentally. We can win one week and then lose the next. And the Northern Hemisphere sides have improved greatly since 2015. But I won't accept that this team was just shit all along, and beating the ABs was all because you 'didn't really try anyway'.

        KiwiMurphK MrDenmoreM boobooB 3 Replies Last reply
        5
        • barbarianB barbarian

          @mrdenmore said in Scotland v Australia:

          So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

          You're having a dollar each way here, though. The ABs were depleted, so that game meant nothing. But when a depleted Wallabies lose to Scotland, it means everything?

          It's too simple just to say 'the Wallabies are shit'. Because that AB victory came on the end of an undefeated six game spell that began with a bloody near miss in Dunedin. But of course we were lucky that game, yeah? Or you were just unlucky - I can't remember which, now.

          The reality is, this is a team that is still mentally frail. We have the talent but we're not quite there tactically or mentally. We can win one week and then lose the next. And the Northern Hemisphere sides have improved greatly since 2015. But I won't accept that this team was just shit all along, and beating the ABs was all because you 'didn't really try anyway'.

          KiwiMurphK Online
          KiwiMurphK Online
          KiwiMurph
          wrote on last edited by KiwiMurph
          #73

          @barbarian Wallabies also dont have the depth of ABs (which isnt surprising given the two countries recent Super Rugby records)

          ABs dealt with loss of Brodie a lot better than Wallabies dealt with no Coleman (as just one example).

          I think a lack of talent/depth (or that they are too young) is a big part of the poor showing in your last two tests.

          Guys like Simmons and Moore should have been put out to pasture a long time ago.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • mariner4lifeM Offline
            mariner4lifeM Offline
            mariner4life
            wrote on last edited by
            #74

            The wallabies lack of depth means some of their players absolutely have to play a shit load of rugby every year. By the time November rolls around they are cooked.

            They're still lacking in a few areas, especially at 8. The inevitable return of saint pocock won't help that either, as i imagine he'll be shoehorned back in there.

            What i struggle with is the variances in application. It's almost as if the team mirrors the Fox Sports marketing for rugby, where only beating the AllBlacks matter. Contrast Bled II and III with just about every other game this year. Like different teams were playing

            NTAN 1 Reply Last reply
            3
            • mariner4lifeM mariner4life

              The wallabies lack of depth means some of their players absolutely have to play a shit load of rugby every year. By the time November rolls around they are cooked.

              They're still lacking in a few areas, especially at 8. The inevitable return of saint pocock won't help that either, as i imagine he'll be shoehorned back in there.

              What i struggle with is the variances in application. It's almost as if the team mirrors the Fox Sports marketing for rugby, where only beating the AllBlacks matter. Contrast Bled II and III with just about every other game this year. Like different teams were playing

              NTAN Offline
              NTAN Offline
              NTA
              wrote on last edited by
              #75

              @mariner4life said in Scotland v Australia:

              Contrast Bled II and III with just about every other game this year. Like different teams were playing

              Second half of Bled I was also decent work by us.

              The performance overall hasn't been consistent, which is what they say they're working towards. Shitting the bed against Scotland at home, and getting run over by England in the last 15 minutes will stand out as low points.

              Take out the threat of Folau and Coleman and we're looking at some real dud decisions in their replacements. Kerevi didn't work at 12, and never would compared to the combination of Beale and Foley. Most players are now resigned to the fact that if Folau is healthy, and still in rugby's ranks (Parramatta rumours continue to circulate), then there is no point trying for the fullback spot.

              Those three form a triangle at 10, 12, and 15 that is hard to replicate with other personnel.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • barbarianB barbarian

                @mrdenmore said in Scotland v Australia:

                So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

                You're having a dollar each way here, though. The ABs were depleted, so that game meant nothing. But when a depleted Wallabies lose to Scotland, it means everything?

                It's too simple just to say 'the Wallabies are shit'. Because that AB victory came on the end of an undefeated six game spell that began with a bloody near miss in Dunedin. But of course we were lucky that game, yeah? Or you were just unlucky - I can't remember which, now.

                The reality is, this is a team that is still mentally frail. We have the talent but we're not quite there tactically or mentally. We can win one week and then lose the next. And the Northern Hemisphere sides have improved greatly since 2015. But I won't accept that this team was just shit all along, and beating the ABs was all because you 'didn't really try anyway'.

                MrDenmoreM Offline
                MrDenmoreM Offline
                MrDenmore
                wrote on last edited by
                #76

                @barbarian Put it this way. The Wallabies cope with the absence of Folau or Coleman far, far worse than the All Blacks deal with the absence of Ben Smith and Retallick. I think it's a totally fair observation that Australia is up for games against the All Blacks in a way you never are against Scotland or even Wales. In contrast, the ABs know they are on a hiding to nothing if they slip one test.

                1 Reply Last reply
                3
                • barbarianB barbarian

                  @mrdenmore said in Scotland v Australia:

                  So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

                  You're having a dollar each way here, though. The ABs were depleted, so that game meant nothing. But when a depleted Wallabies lose to Scotland, it means everything?

                  It's too simple just to say 'the Wallabies are shit'. Because that AB victory came on the end of an undefeated six game spell that began with a bloody near miss in Dunedin. But of course we were lucky that game, yeah? Or you were just unlucky - I can't remember which, now.

                  The reality is, this is a team that is still mentally frail. We have the talent but we're not quite there tactically or mentally. We can win one week and then lose the next. And the Northern Hemisphere sides have improved greatly since 2015. But I won't accept that this team was just shit all along, and beating the ABs was all because you 'didn't really try anyway'.

                  boobooB Online
                  boobooB Online
                  booboo
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #77

                  @barbarian said in Scotland v Australia:

                  @mrdenmore said in Scotland v Australia:

                  So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

                  You're having a dollar each way here, though. The ABs were depleted, so that game meant nothing. But when a depleted Wallabies lose to Scotland, it means everything?

                  It's too simple just to say 'the Wallabies are shit'. Because that AB victory came on the end of an undefeated six game spell that began with a bloody near miss in Dunedin. But of course we were lucky that game, yeah? Or you were just unlucky - I can't remember which, now.

                  The reality is, this is a team that is still mentally frail. We have the talent but we're not quite there tactically or mentally. We can win one week and then lose the next. And the Northern Hemisphere sides have improved greatly since 2015. But I won't accept that this team was just shit all along, and beating the ABs was all because you 'didn't really try anyway'.

                  Mostly agree.

                  But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                  barbarianB TimT 2 Replies Last reply
                  1
                  • StargazerS Offline
                    StargazerS Offline
                    Stargazer
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #78

                    Sekope Kepu suspended for 3 weeks

                    Wallabies prop Sekope Kepu appeared today before an independent World Rugby-appointed Disciplinary Committee following the red card he received after 39 minutes of the Autumn International match between Scotland and Australia on Saturday, 25 November 2017 for an infringement of law 10.4(h) ('a player must not charge into a ruck or maul. 
                    
                    Charging includes any contact made without use of the arms, or without grasping a player'). Mr Kepu accepted that he had committed an act of foul play and that it had warranted a red card.
                    
                    The Disciplinary Committee, chaired by Jean-Noel Couraud (France), along with former international players, Becky Essex (England) and De Wet Barry (South Africa), considered all of the available evidence and heard submissions from Mr Kepu and his representatives. The Disciplinary Committee considered the relevant incident to have been a dangerous shoulder charge into a ruck in which contact was made with an opponent's head. In considering sanction, the Disciplinary Committee assessed the seriousness of Mr Kepu's conduct and concluded that it had been in the mid-range of World Rugby's scale of seriousness for that type of offending, which has an entry point sanction of a six-week suspension.
                     
                    The Disciplinary Committee considered that there were no aggravating factors and that there were several mitigating factors, including Mr Kepu's 'guilty' plea and his previous clean disciplinary record. The Disciplinary Committee allowed the maximum discount of 50% and reduced the length of the suspension to three weeks.
                     
                    Taking account of Mr Kepu's playing schedule (and in particular that the Southern Hemisphere close season is about to start), the Disciplinary Committee suspended Mr Kepu until midnight on Sunday, 4 March 2018. He was reminded of his right of appeal.  
                    

                    This means that Kepu will miss the first two games of the Super Rugby season.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • antipodeanA Offline
                      antipodeanA Offline
                      antipodean
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #79

                      That's a joke. He launches himself with a shoulder to the head of an opposing player. He has a history of being a dirty shit on the field.

                      One wonders what games these halfwits are involved in.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • boobooB booboo

                        @barbarian said in Scotland v Australia:

                        @mrdenmore said in Scotland v Australia:

                        So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

                        You're having a dollar each way here, though. The ABs were depleted, so that game meant nothing. But when a depleted Wallabies lose to Scotland, it means everything?

                        It's too simple just to say 'the Wallabies are shit'. Because that AB victory came on the end of an undefeated six game spell that began with a bloody near miss in Dunedin. But of course we were lucky that game, yeah? Or you were just unlucky - I can't remember which, now.

                        The reality is, this is a team that is still mentally frail. We have the talent but we're not quite there tactically or mentally. We can win one week and then lose the next. And the Northern Hemisphere sides have improved greatly since 2015. But I won't accept that this team was just shit all along, and beating the ABs was all because you 'didn't really try anyway'.

                        Mostly agree.

                        But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                        barbarianB Offline
                        barbarianB Offline
                        barbarian
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #80

                        @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                        Mostly agree.

                        But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                        OK. But by the same measure we were actually pretty decent against England and didn't deserve to lose by 25.

                        boobooB 1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • boobooB booboo

                          @barbarian said in Scotland v Australia:

                          @mrdenmore said in Scotland v Australia:

                          So typically the Wallabies' win against a depleted and unmotivated All Blacks in the dead-rubber cash-in third Bledisloe in Brisbane gave them a false sense of hope. They bask in the glow of trans- Ta$man confected glory for five minutes then go back to getting beaten by Scotland and being totally ignored by the news media here.

                          You're having a dollar each way here, though. The ABs were depleted, so that game meant nothing. But when a depleted Wallabies lose to Scotland, it means everything?

                          It's too simple just to say 'the Wallabies are shit'. Because that AB victory came on the end of an undefeated six game spell that began with a bloody near miss in Dunedin. But of course we were lucky that game, yeah? Or you were just unlucky - I can't remember which, now.

                          The reality is, this is a team that is still mentally frail. We have the talent but we're not quite there tactically or mentally. We can win one week and then lose the next. And the Northern Hemisphere sides have improved greatly since 2015. But I won't accept that this team was just shit all along, and beating the ABs was all because you 'didn't really try anyway'.

                          Mostly agree.

                          But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                          TimT Offline
                          TimT Offline
                          Tim
                          wrote on last edited by Tim
                          #81

                          @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                          But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                          I find this claim baffling. Australia outplayed NZ for much of that game, particularly at rucks and on the fringes.

                          boobooB 1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • barbarianB barbarian

                            @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                            Mostly agree.

                            But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                            OK. But by the same measure we were actually pretty decent against England and didn't deserve to lose by 25.

                            boobooB Online
                            boobooB Online
                            booboo
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #82

                            @barbarian said in Scotland v Australia:

                            @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                            Mostly agree.

                            But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                            OK. But by the same measure we were actually pretty decent against England and didn't deserve to lose by 25.

                            Very true

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • TimT Tim

                              @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                              But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                              I find this claim baffling. Australia outplayed NZ for much of that game, particularly at rucks and on the fringes.

                              boobooB Online
                              boobooB Online
                              booboo
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #83

                              @tim said in Scotland v Australia:

                              @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                              But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                              I find this claim baffling. Australia outplayed NZ for much of that game, particularly at rucks and on the fringes.

                              Ok. It's my opinion and I'm sticking by it.

                              Basically I think people confused scoreline with performance.

                              Essentially the last 65mins were 35-12. And those 12 were very rare incursions into our 22.

                              Add in two of the first three tries were fortuitous and the feeling all the way from 17-nil that the ABs were just grinding them down and pkaying better.

                              "Shit" may be overstated but this is TSF.

                              CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
                              3
                              • boobooB booboo

                                @tim said in Scotland v Australia:

                                @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                                But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                                I find this claim baffling. Australia outplayed NZ for much of that game, particularly at rucks and on the fringes.

                                Ok. It's my opinion and I'm sticking by it.

                                Basically I think people confused scoreline with performance.

                                Essentially the last 65mins were 35-12. And those 12 were very rare incursions into our 22.

                                Add in two of the first three tries were fortuitous and the feeling all the way from 17-nil that the ABs were just grinding them down and pkaying better.

                                "Shit" may be overstated but this is TSF.

                                CrucialC Offline
                                CrucialC Offline
                                Crucial
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #84

                                @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                                @tim said in Scotland v Australia:

                                @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                                But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                                I find this claim baffling. Australia outplayed NZ for much of that game, particularly at rucks and on the fringes.

                                Ok. It's my opinion and I'm sticking by it.

                                Basically I think people confused scoreline with performance.

                                Essentially the last 65mins were 35-12. And those 12 were very rare incursions into our 22.

                                Add in two of the first three tries were fortuitous and the feeling all the way from 17-nil that the ABs were just grinding them down and pkaying better.

                                "Shit" may be overstated but this is TSF.

                                That is my recall of the game as well. We gave them a handicap lead and ran them down in the home straight.

                                antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
                                1
                                • MajorPomM Away
                                  MajorPomM Away
                                  MajorPom
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #85

                                  And they say NZ fans are arrogant ... !

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  2
                                  • CrucialC Crucial

                                    @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                                    @tim said in Scotland v Australia:

                                    @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                                    But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                                    I find this claim baffling. Australia outplayed NZ for much of that game, particularly at rucks and on the fringes.

                                    Ok. It's my opinion and I'm sticking by it.

                                    Basically I think people confused scoreline with performance.

                                    Essentially the last 65mins were 35-12. And those 12 were very rare incursions into our 22.

                                    Add in two of the first three tries were fortuitous and the feeling all the way from 17-nil that the ABs were just grinding them down and pkaying better.

                                    "Shit" may be overstated but this is TSF.

                                    That is my recall of the game as well. We gave them a handicap lead and ran them down in the home straight.

                                    antipodeanA Offline
                                    antipodeanA Offline
                                    antipodean
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #86

                                    @crucial said in Scotland v Australia:

                                    @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                                    @tim said in Scotland v Australia:

                                    @booboo said in Scotland v Australia:

                                    But regarding Dunedin: you were actually quite shit in that game and didn't desreve to be within 20 points.

                                    I find this claim baffling. Australia outplayed NZ for much of that game, particularly at rucks and on the fringes.

                                    Ok. It's my opinion and I'm sticking by it.

                                    Basically I think people confused scoreline with performance.

                                    Essentially the last 65mins were 35-12. And those 12 were very rare incursions into our 22.

                                    Add in two of the first three tries were fortuitous and the feeling all the way from 17-nil that the ABs were just grinding them down and pkaying better.

                                    "Shit" may be overstated but this is TSF.

                                    That is my recall of the game as well. We gave them a handicap lead and ran them down in the home straight.

                                    The similarities with "the greatest game ever" are what strike me. A team gets out to a big lead thanks to some opportunistic tries against a team still in the sheds. Then the team behind plays much the better rugby for the remainder of the match.

                                    The only difference was the Wallabies didn't have a Lomu stealing it at the end.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    1
                                    Reply
                                    • Reply as topic
                                    Log in to reply
                                    • Oldest to Newest
                                    • Newest to Oldest
                                    • Most Votes


                                    • Login

                                    • Don't have an account? Register

                                    • Search
                                    • First post
                                      Last post
                                    0
                                    • Categories
                                    • Search