Northern Edition
Select Edition
Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Two changes to the Scotland XV and bench altered to a 5-3 split

Scotland players react at full-time to last week's loss in Italy (Photo by Alberto Pizzoli/AFP via Getty Images)

Gregor Townsend has made two changes to his Scotland team in the wake of their Guinness Six Nations round four ambush away to Italy. Having beaten England in round three, there was great optimism that a win in Rome would keep the Scots in the title hunt until the last day in Ireland.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, their 29-31 Stadio Olimpico setback quashed that ambition and rather than go to Dublin with a title shot still alive, they will contest the minor placings with an XV that has two backline alterations.

Stafford McDowell has been named to start at inside centre with Cameron Redpath dropping to the bench. He is joined there by George Horne, who has lost his starting spot at scrum-half to the promoted Ali Price.

Video Spacer

“Ben Earl is essentially playing like a back” – Beyond 80 | RPTV

Beyond 80’s Sam Larner breaks down how impressive Ben Earl’s performance was against Ireland. Watch the full analysis show now on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

Video Spacer

“Ben Earl is essentially playing like a back” – Beyond 80 | RPTV

Beyond 80’s Sam Larner breaks down how impressive Ben Earl’s performance was against Ireland. Watch the full analysis show now on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

The starting pack from Italy is unchanged, but the make-up of the bench has been altered.

Scotland had a six/two forwards/backs split in Rome but they have chosen a five/three divide for Dublin, with back-rower Jamie Ritchie omitted to accommodate the inclusion of Redpath as the third back.

Fixture
Six Nations
Ireland
17 - 13
Full-time
Scotland
All Stats and Data

The one other change to the replacements is the naming of Rory Sutherland as the sub loosehead instead of Alec Hepburn.

Ireland have named an unchanged starting XV despite their loss to England, but they have mirrored Scotland in switching to a five/three bench.

ADVERTISEMENT

Iain Henderson is the forward to make way for midfielder Garry Ringrose to come onto a bench that also includes Harry Byrne in place of Ciaran Frawley.

Scotland (vs Ireland, Saturday)
15. Blair Kinghorn – Toulouse (52)
14. Kyle Steyn – Glasgow Warriors (18)
13. Huw Jones – Glasgow Warriors (47)
12. Stafford McDowall – Glasgow Warriors (1)
11. Duhan van der Merwe – Edinburgh Rugby (38)
10. Finn Russell – co-captain – Bath Rugby (79)
9. Ben White – Toulon (21)
1. Pierre Schoeman – Edinburgh Rugby (30)
2. George Turner – Glasgow Warriors (44)
3. Zander Fagerson – Glasgow Warriors (66)
4. Grant Gilchrist – vice-captain – Edinburgh Rugby (71)
5. Scott Cummings – Glasgow Warriors (37)
6. Andy Christie – Saracens (7)
7. Rory Darge – co-captain – Glasgow Warriors (18)
8. Jack Dempsey – Glasgow Warriors (19)

Replacements:
16. Ewan Ashman – Edinburgh Rugby (16)
17. Rory Sutherland – Oyonnax (29)
18. Elliot Millar-Mills – Northampton Saints (3)
19. Sam Skinner – Edinburgh Rugby (34)
20. Matt Fagerson – Glasgow Warriors (43)
21. George Horne – Glasgow Warriors (29)
22. Cameron Redpath – Bath Rugby (13)
23. Kyle Rowe – Glasgow Warriors (3)

Six Nations Six Nations
Six Nations Greatest XV
Brian O'Driscoll
Brian O'Driscoll
ADVERTISEMENT
LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 1 hour ago
Ex-Wallaby laughs off claims Bath are amongst the best in the world

I ultimately don’t care who the best club team in the world is, so yeah, lets agree to disagree on that.


I would appreciate clarity on a couple of things though:

Where did I contradict myself?

Saying “Trophies matter. They matter a lot. But so does winning games. So does making finals.” is entirely compatible with ranking a team as the best - over an extended period - when they have won more games and made more finals than other comparable teams. It would be contradictory for me to say “Trophies matter. They matter a lot. But so does winning games. So does making finals.” and then completely ignore Leinster record of winning games and making finals.


“You can get frustrated and say I am not reading what you write, but when you quote me, then your first line is to say thats true (what I wrote), but by the end of the paragraph have stated something different, thats where you contradict yourself.”

What you said (that I think trophies matter) is true, in that I said “Trophies matter. They matter a lot. But so does winning games. So does making finals.”. Do you understand that Leinster won more games and made more finals than any other (URC-based) team did under the period under consideration?


“Pointless comparison on Blackburn and Tottenham to this discussion as no-one includes them on a list of the best club. I would say that Blackburns title season was better than anything Tottenham have done in the Premier League. My reference to the league was that the team who finished second over two seasons are not better than the two other teams who did win the league each time. One of the best - of course, but not the best, which is relevant to my point here about Leinster, not comparing teams who won 30 years ago against a team that never won.”

I really don’t understand why you would think that this is irrelevant. You seem to be saying that winning trophies is the only thing that matters when assessing who is the best, but doesn’t matter at all when assessing who is 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc.


“What I referred to in my Leinster wouldn’t say the were the best is your post earlier where you said Leinster were the best overall. You said that in two separate posts. Seasons dont work like that, they are individual. Unless the same team keeps winning then you can say they were the best over a period of time and group them, but thats not the case here.”

Well then we’ve just been talking at cross purposes. In that my position (that Leinster were the best team overall in 2022-2024) was pretty clear, and you just decided to respond to a different point (whether Leinster were the best team individually in particular years) essentially making the entire discussion completely pointless. I guess if you think that trophies are the only thing that matters then it makes sense to see the season as an individual event that culminates in a trophy (or not), whereas because I believe that trophies matter a lot, but that so does winning matches and making finals, it makes it easier for me to consider quality over an extended period.

24 Go to comments
M
MT 2 hours ago
Ex-Wallaby laughs off claims Bath are amongst the best in the world

As I said in one of my first replies to you - we can agree to disagree. If you want to leave it no problem. I completely disagree with your ranking of Leinster as the best team in the world. Now you have said you will change it if Bordeaux win the Top 14. Well as Leinster themselves prioritise the CC over the URC and Bordeaux won the CC, how are they not ranked higher by you? Are Leinster one of the best teams, yeah - never said they weren’t. But not the very best team, as the very best team have trophies to show for their seasons. They matter when you discuss the very best.


You can get frustrated and say I am not reading what you write, but when you quote me, then your first line is to say thats true (what I wrote), but by the end of the paragraph have stated something different, thats where you contradict yourself. Just so we are clear, you said you would too on my statement that I would rather be a fan of a team that won a trophy over the three seasons, but end the paragraph saying you would rather be a fan of the team that won the most matches but didn’t win a trophy. Both cant be true. Thats one example of where you contradict yourself.


Pointless comparison on Blackburn and Tottenham to this discussion as no-one includes them on a list of the best club. I would say that Blackburns title season was better than anything Tottenham have done in the Premier League. My reference to the league was that the team who finished second over two seasons are not better than the two other teams who did win the league each time. One of the best - of course, but not the best, which is relevant to my point here about Leinster, not comparing teams who won 30 years ago against a team that never won.


What I referred to in my Leinster wouldn’t say the were the best is your post earlier where you said Leinster were the best overall. You said that in two separate posts. Seasons dont work like that, they are individual. Unless the same team keeps winning then you can say they were the best over a period of time and group them, but thats not the case here.

24 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Chiefs name 10 All Blacks in starting XV for Super Rugby Pacific final Chiefs name Super Rugby Pacific final team
Search