
SCOTLAND
15. Stuart Hogg: 6
Showed snippets of the undoubted danger he poses on the counter-attack, but in general the English defence marshalled Hogg well.
14. Sean Maitland: 5
He is a fine finisher but he is not a ‘something from nothing’ type of winger. With England’s defence so dominant, Maitland never looked like sparking Scotland’s ailing attack.
13. Mark Bennett: 5
He has been out with injury and it showed. Unable to make single break through the English defensive line, and although he ran some hard angles they were always easily read by the defence.
12. Matt Scott: 6
The most creatively successful of the Scottish backs, Scott also weighed in with 11 tackles as the English centres were generally well marshalled.
11. Tommy Seymour: 5.5
It was a similar story for Seymour as for Maitland, and although the Glasgow winger did work hard to try to get his hands on the ball as often as possible, he coughed up possession a whopping six times.
10. Finn Russell: 4.5
Kicked a lot of ball with a clear remit to give Scotland territory, but too often his radar was out. Read a Ben Youngs pass well to take an intercept on his own five metre line, but then kicked away the potential counter attack ball.
9. Greig Laidlaw: 5
His goal-kicking was as reliable as ever but the same old issues – namely his lack of speed to the breakdown and laboured service – were in evidence once again, and sapped Scotland of any momentum.
1. Alasdair Dickinson: 6.5
The scrum was solid for Scotland while Dickinson was on the park, something which noticeably changed when he was replaced.
2. Ross Ford: 5
Struggled with his darts and still can’t hook the ball at scrum-time – thankfully the latter didn’t really matter as Scotland, incredibly, only had one scrum on their own put-in.
3. WP Nel: 6.5
Like Dickinson, the scrum remained solid, if not dominant, while Nel was on the park.
4. Richie Gray: 6
For someone of his stature, you can’t help but want more from his ball-carrying game. Especially when the back-row is so shorn of players effective in that domain.
5. Jonny Gray: 6.5
Made 15 tackles without missing a single one, which is a decent stint by anyone’s standards. Carried a fair amount of ball but, like so many of the Scottish pack, made few inroads over the gainline.
6. John Barclay: 5.5
Much chat in the build-up centred on Scotland’s employment of two ‘genuine’ opensides, but apart from one good counter-ruck that led to a turnover, Barclay was unable to have any real influence on the breakdown.
7. John Hardie: 6
Like Barclay, Hardie’s breakdown nous was effectively snuffed out by a coordinated English effort across the park. The Kiwi was one of Scotland’s better ball-carrying forwards, however.
8. Dave Denton: 4.5
Denton’s work-rate was as high as ever but he simply lacks the physical presence to be an effective carrier at international level. It was a key reason the English defence could retain its lightening line-speed.
Replacements: 5
Gordon Reid had a torrid time at the scrum, conceding two penalties, and while the other replacements toiled hard, none had any great impact on the game. With both Laidlaw and Russell struggling to dictate the game, it was a surprise to see Hidalgo-Clyne and Weir left on the timber for the full 80 minutes.
ENGLAND
15. Mike Brown: 6
Always a willing runner, but never really evaded Scottish defenders. In 12 carries, he only beat one man – a solid, if unspectacular shift from the Quins fullback.
14. Anthony Watson: 6
One dancing run in the first half had Scottish hearts in mouths, but in general Watson didn’t see a great deal of the ball. His influence should grow as the tournament goes on.
13. Jonathan Joseph: 6
Like Watson, there was one occasion when Joseph pulled his trademark hitch-kick and threatened to cut loose – but couldn’t quite capitalise. Otherwise he was quiet, another indication of the fairly limited English game-plan.
12. Owen Farrell: 7
A very decent stint indeed in an unfamiliar position, including dictating and executing the wrap-around move that led to Nowell’s decisive try. Goal-kicking excellent, as usual.
11. Jack Nowell: 7
An easy walk in for his try but it was no less than the Devon winger deserved, after his work-rate had been immense for most of the game. Made some strong carries into traffic; he’ll hope for more space next weekend.
10. George Ford: 5
Some of his tactical kicking, especially in the second half, kept England in Scottish territory, but too much of it otherwise was aimless. There were also a couple of handling errors that belied his lack of confidence at the moment.
9. Danny Care: 6
The difference in speed of service between Care and Laidlaw was obvious, but there were very few trademark snipes from the Quins man. Instead, the focus was on tactical kicking – which he mostly did well.
1. Joe Marler: 6.5
Bread and butter at scrum-time was managed with minimal fuss. Little else to talk about.
2. Dylan Hartley: 7
Handled the added pressure of captaincy well, remaining calm throughout. Made his tackles and, other than one blip, hit his lineout jumpers. A good start to the regime.
3. Dan Cole: 6.5
Back to somewhere near his best with a solid showing at the scrum, and pilfered one bit of ball at the breakdown superbly. Conceded three penalties, however, more than any other player on the pitch.
4. Joe Launchbury: 7
Didn’t get his hands on the ball too often, but he made his tackles and, more crucially, used his weight well at ruck-time to consistently smash Scottish tacklers and jackal-ers away from the ball.
5. George Kruis: 7.5
Massive shift from Kruis, who finished as England’s second top tackler with 16. Also smashed his way over the line for a try and was a nuisance at the breakdown.
6. Chris Robshaw: 6
A quiet game for Robshaw, who went about his business with his usual efficacy. As an ex-captain, his communication around the ruck area was crucial at times.
7. James Haskell: 7.5
18 tackles made and none missed is a fine return for Haskell, who was noticeably busy. Along with the rest of the pack, he successfully nullified the threat of Hardie and Barclay at the breakdown.
8. Billy Vunipola: 8.5
Comfortably the best player on the pitch. Looked hungry from the start of the game til the final whistle, carrying the ball 22 times for 51 metres made – more than anyone other than the two fullbacks. Gave England the gainline supremacy that Scotland so lacked.
Replacements: 7
Billy’s brother Mako was heavily involved after coming on, scrummaging well, carrying with relish and showing a beautiful deftness of touch in the build-up to Nowell’s try. Ben Youngs’s cameo was less impressive, almost gifting Scotland a 75 metre intercept try. None of the other subs had a noticeable impact on the game but none let the side down, either.
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images

37 replies on “Six Nations 2016: Scotland vs England Player Ratings”
Hartley didn’t make his tackles, though, did he. He missed 3. Out of 9. 66% is not good enough for an international hooker, never mind an inspirational captain. Add that to the 0 metres made, and you’ve got a barely average performance.
I wasn’t that impressed by Haskell or Robshaw at the Scottish rucks as they never seemed to be there on time competing, they always seemed to be late and then bounced off the back.
Mako should start over Marler against Italy as he was far more effective scrummaging and carrying, I thought Clifford showed quite well in his limited game time too.
Lawes worried me when he came on and I think he needs to be swapped out for Itoje for Italy.
Excellent defence by England, Lack Lustre in defence but an away game against a team that showed well in The World Cup a satisfying win.
But on a whole fair comment.
Lack lustre in attack, I am a numpty.
Marler was propping against arguably the best TH in world rugby & didn’t concede any penalties. Mako wasn’t & also gave away a silly scrum penalty. He’s best suited to the bench – to be unleashed for the final 30 mins
Billy V was pretty phenomenal. Thought the front 5 did well, in particular the lock combination looked better than it has for years for England. Kruis ran the line out well, and along with Launchbury we have two dynamic locks for one. Neither lack at scrum time and both add mobility around the park – really good blend.
Wonder if we will see Vunipola at 6 to accommodate Hughes come the summer? Or one of the two used an an impact sub? Certainly feels like it would benefit England if they had both in the XV – especially whilst the back line is quite light.
Did launchbury come off due to injury? It seemed somewhat early
No idea it did seem early though. Potentially just a tactical switch, as Lawes at his best certainly doesn’t significantly weaken that area. May just have been a switch for fresh legs.
I saw somewhere that Launchbury was sick with a stomach bug the night before the game, so that would explain it.
Add 0.5/1 to all the scottish scores and they are about right.
Unneccessarily harsh on what was a fairly typical Scotland performance
It was a typical performance from Scotland, but I’m not sure how it could be considered much more than the average 6 that it got?
No tries, no line breaks. Scrum lost, line out lost.
England were solid, that’s about it, and there was never a point that Scotland really looked like winning the game.
7 line breaks to Englands 3 actually
According to ESPN I’m pretty sure it was 4 to 0 in England’s favour. I can’t say I can remember one line break from Scotland, certainly there can’t have been 7.
ESPN is where i got my stats from. check again
Leon not a chance in hell, I think you and the deluded Grieg Laidlaw saw a much better Scotland side on the pitch, the closest Scotland got to winning the game was the intercepted pass on their 5 metre line and they even fluffed that.
Jacob has it closer to the mark.
I thought Launchbury was actually a way below his best and when Lawes came on he helped bring the defensive line-speed up. I think he fulfils this role quite well, and could be used as an impact sub to improve the defence.
I think Jones used his bench very well, and maybe the article doesn’t reflect this enough. No, the backs weren’t cutting through Scotland like butter, but their jobs and therefore he resisted making changes. Yes, he could have brought Devoto on for Ford, but had Devoto then missed a key tackle and cost us the game, he would have been chastised.
Instead, he used his forward subs to keep control of the game. He didn’t make 2 or 3 at pre-planned times, but he used Lawes to bring up the defence just after half-time, Mako to improve the carrying game when the game was still quite tight, Youngs for Care to help close the game out when we were 8 points up and then Clifford to increase the energy and breakdown work just after they got back within 7. Jamie George coming on 4 minutes before the end was just a fresh pair of legs, and England lost nothing in the set-piece or around the park.
Hill, Devoto and Goode stayed on the bench. I can’t remember the last time England had 3 unused subs.
Yes Rob! That was the thing that infuriated me most about the Bomber. His replacements and their timing always seemed preordained and nothing anyone did on the pitch – good or bad – seemed to make any difference. He used to severely disrupt momentum by emptying the bench when there was no need. By contrast, it’s almost like Jones was actually watching the game and responding accordingly.
Can’t argue with any of those really. Billy V was by far the best player on the pitch. I would love to see Beaumont and Clifford added to that back row. Much more mobile, and some serious ball carrying ability.
Ford was very poor, and showed how short of confidence he is. I would be tempted to drop him to the bench for the Italy game and give Devoto a shot in the 12 shirt. Farrell was organising everything, and would be much more comfortable at 10 (although he still played better than Ford out of position at 12).
Agree with Jacob about the second row. Outstanding combination, and much better than any combination than we’ve had for some time. Lawes wasn’t too convincing when he came on though, and think he would benefit from more time to fully recover from his hamstring problem.
Like the idea of a Beaumont, Vunipola and Clifford back row – but would there be enough industry in there. Wondering if enough rucks would be hit and enough tackles made? I would like to see one of Beaumont or Clifford some in though. One worked in the back row is enough – I’d probably stick with Haskell based on Saturday, shift him to 6 and play Clifford.
Not sure about throwing Devoto in. Would love to see a Cips/Farrell axis but obviously that isn’t an option. I was hoping it was Bath’s form the was leading to Ford looking poor this season – unfortunately that doesn’t look to be the case.
Until Ford regains his form, he really should be dropped in favour of Farrell. He does not look like the same player as in the last 6 nations
In fact the entire Bath contingent looked somewhat listless, with Watson the best of the three. Think I’d drop Joseph for Daly as well
Am concerned about the lack of carrying in this England team. Vunipola was not just the go to ball carrier for the pack but also did what a powerful 12 would normally be doing. Against better teams that will be all too easy to defend against.
All the pack need to carry more, especially the starting front row. Second row were better but Launchbury and Kruis should be forced to watch non-stop videos of Retallick. On the flanks, Haskell, for all his size and time spent in the gym, seems far too easy to stop on the gainline or to be driven backwards in the tackle. And if EJ is to continue with Robshaw he needs to emulate the way Quins use him as a link between forwards and backs.
The backline needs some power at 12. There was no one running straight and hard to bend the defensive line and suck defenders in. It looks like EJ will be relying on Tuilagi for this in the long run but in the near term he should look at a player like Sam Hill to give us the go-forward that we lacked.
Overall though it was a team selected to do a job and it did that job well. Kudos to Hartley who played well in the set piece and didn’t get sent off
PS – is anyone else worried about Farrell’s tackling? He goes far too high and in a different game could have been penalised a couple of times. As for his petulant push, I hope EJ takes him aside and tells him to grow up
Kudos to Hartley for staying on the field? What??? He was adequate in the tight, missed three tackles out of nine and the fact that he didn´t make a single carry strongly suggests he was well short of a gallop. He was completely anonymous (which given recent press coverage he was probably quite happy about) but can you imagine either George or Youngs going through an entire match without carrying the ball? Sincerely hope he is living on borrowed time. Agree completely about Farrell´s tackling and I don´t think Jones telling him to grow up will make him any less petulant.
Meant sarcastically of course (the ‘kudos for not getting sent off’ bit)
I’d like to see him carry much more as in the past he has carried well, especially close to oppo try lines. However, I don’t mind that he didn’t on Sat as he had so much to prove and I can understand him wanting to concentrate on his key roles in the set piece
He hit all his line outs and to my mind strengthened the scrum. I think Nel would have had a field day against a Youngs / Marler combo. Getting the set piece right is so important as EJ has been at pains to point out and Hartley played a big role in that
Given he’s just come back from injury as well, I would expect to see him improve game by game but if he doesn’t I hope EJ is not stubborn and we see him dropped for George.
Nice summation Pablito. Like yourself,I think we need a second carrier in the back row. If BV gets injured during a game there is no one in the current squad who could replicate what he does. I see Beaumont has been added to the 25 which can only be a good thing.
Regarding Farrell,he just ain’t a 12,not at this level. No gas,not hefty enough to make telling line breaks and he still hasn’t grown up,which makes him a liabilty wherever he plays in my book.
I’d agree with your comment about lack of industry with that back row – I saw a comment by Haskell basically saying Billy V goes well when he is free to just carry hard – made possible by the other back rowers hitting the rucks. If Billy is tied up with this then he’s just wasted. But I do fear that Wales and Ireland will target him and tackle low (I can see Lydiate starting that one) and then England are basically stuffed. So then another (and different type of) carrier like Beaumont would be very handy. Tough to get the balance.. I’d agree with starting Clifford though, I think England would hugely benefit from his speed to the breakdown.
This was meant as a reply to Jacob.
I would like to see more support on the carrying front for Vunipola. Certainly I don’t think we have the need to have Robshaw and Haskell in the back row. Based on Saturday, Haskell made more impact and doubled the number of tackles that Robshaw made, so I’d keep him and pick either Clifford or Beaumont against Italy.
That was mostly because Robshaw was in the middle of rucks slowing ball down which allowed Haskell to stand off a lot of them, waiting for the runner or trying to get to the scrum / fly half once the ball came out
I presume this was how they were asked to play. We all know that Robshaw will tackle all day if that’s what he is tasked to do. Clearly Jones wanted one of them to get into the dark places
and the other to tackle
As for carrying, Robshaw is most effectively used as a link a la Harlequins. He is also good at tidying up rubbish ball from rucks and resetting cleanly. He has a good sense of when this is necessary. But he doesn’t bust tackles and make yards like a Kaino or Alberts
Haskell for me doesn’t carry effectively. Given the size of him, he should be busting tackles like a Kaino or Alberts but far too often he is stopped dead or driven backwards. 7 carries for 2 yards is not what you want to see from a bloke with his size and athleticism.
For me if you are to choose one, it would be Robshaw every time as I have never seen him have a bad game (not counting captaincy decisions). Haskell most definitely blows hot and cold however, he did have a decent game on Sat.
Playing both though is, as you say, pretty redundant unless you are thinking defensively.
Eventually I’d like to see someone like Ewers on the blindside. He’s a player who does all the dirty stuff in the rucks yet carries briliantly. Clifford could also fulfill that role but isn’t Beaumont more of an 8?
That’s possibly very true about Robshaw/Haskell. We need one of them in there to rack up those tackles but I’d prefer if one came out.
Beaumont normally plays 8, but he looks to have all the skill set to do well at 6. Great in the line out, great ball carrier and a really good engine too. Personally thought I’d start Clifford and more the other one of Haskell/Robshaw to the bench.
Given all the young talent we have in the backrow I reckon Haskell and Robshaw will be permanently replaced within 18-24 months.Both too slow and not athletic enough
Wait, Farrell’s goal-kicking was excellent? Compared to Parisse’s, sure – but missing one out of four (or was it 2/4?) is hardly a masterclass. Yes, at least a couple were tricky, and it’s a solid enough performance but that’s still not good enough at international standard, especially with Cips’ exclusion supposedly hinging on poor kicking stats.
Why was devoto picked ahead of banahan who is bigger constantly gets over the gameline and has a great off loading game ??
They play different positions, fulfil different roles and have very different skill sets. Banahan is never an international 12
To be honest (and this is speaking as a long term Bath supporter), you could have left off the 12 from that last sentence…
Jack Nowell a ‘Devon’ winger? Say that to his face – he’s Cornish! Thought he was probably the best winger on show all weekend though, except for Vakatawa, which isn’t saying much for the sort of rugby on show. Difficult to be too hard on England’s outside backs though when the game-plan was to keep it tight and the service from the half-backs when they did look to expand a little wasn’t great – I suspect they’ll have more to do against Italy. Difficult to think of a player in the pack who had a poor game though, although apart from Billy (and Mako when he came on) I also wouldn’t say any were particularly outstanding. Cole’s best game in an England shirt for a long, long time but I still wouldn’t be surprised if he’s quietly shifted on some time soon when Brookes is deemed to be match fit.
Am I the only person that saw Billy Vunipola drive his knee purposefully into a Scotsman at a ruck in the second half. And no, Im not imagining it, I rewound it 3 times to check
Yes i saw it and winced wondering how long before the citing commission come calling. Not sure how intentional it was but it was a wollop
Looks fine to me. Lacey was right on top of it, had a better view of it from his side and no Scottish player made a fuss of anything. If there weren’t a ruck in the way I think you’d see what Lacey probably saw; Vunipola trying to shoe the ball loose and the Scottish player wrestling himself into the way to stop him, even if it meant wearing a bit of that hefty leg.
At last . I knew I wasn’t seeing things. I just found it on the iplayer. It was at 53:17 into the game if anyone wants a peek