The beauty of a blog is that you can say what you think, so here goes: if Robinson walks it's a cop out, but I think results will improve before that has to happen.

You can't blame Robinson for Scotland's opening losses in this year's Six Nations. He may have made selection errors, but I can live with that.

If he goes he'll be making a big mistake; if Scotland sack him they are making a big mistake.

I see better ruck clear outs, a more abrasive attitude, better offloading, more enterprise, and a higher tempo under Robinson.

I watched the game against Wales and that was Scotland and their players playing to their limit. If you were to design a gameplan to suit Scotland then that was it.

An early second-half mistake and then two yellow cards weren't Robinson's fault.

We always blame coaches, especially Scotland rugby team coaches, but he's been let down by players in key moments.

That game in Cardiff was as intense a Scottish performance as I've seen in recent years: planned and executed with precision.

Andy Robinson is aiming to improve Scotland's Six Nations fortunes

The World Cup wasn't managed properly and I believe selection and substitution errors were made there as well.

And little has been made of failing to qualify for the knockout stages, but I wonder if anyone might have managed these first two games any better.

I've spoken to Andy on a handful of occasions and he has one quality that I like: he's blunt.

You know that what you get to your face is what he thinks, unless it's on TV where few people give you the whole truth anyway.

The TV pictures of his furrowed brow hint at an, at times, anguished man who is much more intense than the happy-go-lucky interviews might suggest.

Like all coaches he's loyal to the players who have helped him along the way.

Perhaps the easiest thing for us as "watchers" is to believe that our players are among the best and should be winning most of their games.

History suggests that the Robinson's win ratio in test matches to date, 50%, lags only behind Bill Dickinson in the 1970's at 52%, Ian McGeechan in the late 1980s and early nineties with 58%, and Jim Telfer with 52% in the mid 80s.

Interestingly, he's fared better than in Telfer's second spell: 40% and McGeechan's second spell, 42% both about 10 years ago; and a fair bit better than Matt Williams at 18%; Frank Hadden at 39%; and Nairn McEwan in the 70's with 7%.

And you might argue that it's more difficult to win rugby games now as smaller teams become stronger.

So, I get the feeling that he's doing OK and that there aren't many coaches in the world who would get a better performance out of his players than him.

This is a big game against France; Robinson's picked the best players, they are principally coached at their clubs and he has given them a shape.

If Scotland beat France on Sunday then Robinson should rightly be praised, if we lose I actually don't think it's his fault.

And if he walks away it's actually a cop out as his influence should extend more to both professional teams and our grass roots.

But, hey, what do I know? What do you think?

How do you feel about the game today? I feel sick as we did well and this taxi is rocking from side to side. How do you feel?

My faith in Andy Robinson is back. His tactics were spot on, application was spot on - so what happened?

Players made a couple of mistakes. Could Andy Robinson's career be judged on some dropped balls and loose passes?

Ach, possibly, but I think the coaches, on this performance, got it right and to watch the anguish on Robinson's face was sad.

I liked what I saw and it was just lapses of composure let Scotland down. Robinson's men changed their tactics and played a one-pass smash-up game.

We can score tries. Greig Laidlaw and Stuart Hogg burst on to the scene. The ref was a joke in denying Hogg a try.

Can I be brutally honest? One mix up between David Denton and Chris Cusiter changed the game.

At 3-3 Scotland were in the game, then Wales had a lineout and sniffed a weak point in the armour.

Then two mistakes. A Nick de Luca wobbly pass then a tackle on a man without the ball and he was sin-binned. Rory Lamont followed for an equally foolish indiscretion.

On the plus-side Ford, Laidlaw and both Lamonts smashed their hearts out. Big Richie Gray would start in a Lions team, Ross Rennie was everywhere, and I felt proud of them.

That may sound crazy to you but they played their hearts out.

I'm sad though because we need to win. Now that we can score tries, that will come next.

I'll come back on here with more tomorrow. Here we are at the airport.

We've found a couple more lads who can play international rugby.

What did you think?

As a journalist and a fan I feel tarnished by this in a way I find hard to explain.

I think he retired after the World Cup but was persuaded to come back to help Scotland in this Six Nations as Ruaridh Jackson was injured and neither Greig Laidlaw nor Duncan Weir were deemed ready.

And he got most of the blame.

He is, I am told, a great bloke and he told his team mates he was leaving in a tear-filled speech.

If I am totally honest I suspect that even Dan Parks knew during his time in a blue jersey that he had limitations, but then so have we all and in all walks of life.

But, because he was of Australian descent, I think Dan Parks has always been a more fragile target than he might otherwise had been.

I know that might be an unacceptable thing to say, but just as in the treatment of Matt Williams, the Aussie who coached Scotland, the target was always easier because, probably, the target wasn't going to stay in Scotland.

A stand-off handles the ball as much as anyone, Parks was the goal-kicker and drop-kicker too.

He never looked like the hardest tackling player in the business. Dan Parks, in short, was high profile.

I watched him single-handedly win games for Glasgow. I watched him win games for Scotland - remember that last minute touchline penalty in Dublin?

And I've watched him pat what appeared to be the bottom of every team mate during games. He has an extraordinary mind, honed from memorising car number plates as a wee boy.

How to end this?

I feel that a player who wanted to retire and get away from the (only sometimes) negative attention then found himself invited back into the squad, parachuted into the team for the first Six Nations, and then subject to criticism when the team lost with him in the starting fifteen.

We'll find out very soon whether he knew he had been dropped or whether the bad press became too much... and my suspicion is that it was the former.

Two things come to mind: the first is that he has been a superb servant to Scotland who won games for Glasgow and Scotland with some extraordinary play, usually involving a precision kick of one type or another.

The second is that all things must pass and a new man will play in the Number 10 jersey.

Whatever, I can't help but feeling that of all the players Scotland has ever fielded, Dan Parks is the one player who has had more unwarranted criticism than any other.

I don't feel very proud.

It's time for Scotland to blood a new generation.

Easy bit to say: David Denton is a find, Ross Rennie had a magnificent game apart from one bit of dodgy distribution that a rugby league player would have ensured resulted in a try, Richie Gray and Jim Hamilton were at the heart of a pack that, apart from at scrum time, won their personal battles, and one crazy exit strategy from the team resulted in a charge-down kick and the game being lost.

Scotland players look dejected after losing against England. Pic: SNS

Aside from that score, neither side looked capable of crossing the other's try line. Scotland's attacked and dominated but couldn't score a try.

So to the difficult topic, which is the coach Andy Robinson. I think Andy's a proud man with a tough mind. He's also a fantastic coach who took Edinburgh to second in the then Magners League and he has engineered wins over Argentina (away twice) and both South Africa and Australia.

But he must look at the way the team isn't scoring tries despite bossing games - in this weekend's game it was against England - and wonder what's happening.

Here's where I think Andy Robinson is different too; if the Scotland team has another bad Six Nations tournament he will walk. I just don't see him as the kind of bloke to stick around and hang in for four more salaried years at Murrayfield.

Robinson could transform any English club.

I always think these things are fairly simple. You lose games either because your systems, selections and practices aren't right, which is the fault of those coaching, or because the players aren't up to it which is to do with player gene pool and the coaching and training those players have had since they were seven years old.

So - do we have the players? It's hard to tell, but most of the Scottish players hold down places in top teams and yet, I know, that we don't have many players who would get into a world team.

Perhaps the fairest thing to say is that we have some functional players who, while never matching the All Blacks, have pulled off some remarkable wins.

Selection? I'm not sure that was right and you'll have spotted that last week I knew the team that was to be named as the team is always leaked.

After watching Edinburgh I thought Mike Blair and Greig Laidlaw would have started at half-back and, after the A team demolition of England Saxons, Duncan Weir and Stuart Hogg must be much closer to the squad.

I'd thought the selection of Dan Parks would mean a game of early territory but, instead, Scotland ran the ball from the 22 a few times.

The problem areas in recent years have been the front row and the midfield. I suspect that the likes of Ed Kalman and Geoff Cross offer more in mobility at tight-head and Ryan Grant and Jon Welsh offer greater bulk on the loose.

The second row is fine but Robert Harley needs schooled there.

The back rows are fine. We always produce back row forwards but I am a fan of Richie Vernon and he might offer more pace and zip from blindside flanker and Kelly Brown was missed.

As I said earlier, Laidlaw and Weir are ready to play in the 10 slot, I can't pick between our three scrum-halves, though Chris Cusiter is back on his game.

I'd stick the Lamonts on each wing despite a fine debut from Lee Jones, and Tim Visser is eligible to play for Scotland in the summer but Stuart Hogg is ready to be put in at full-back right now.

Which leaves the troublesome midfield. From what I've seen Matt Scott is practically ready, and Clermont's Mark Bennett should be monitored. We need a distributing midfield.

And lastly the system. The current Scotland system is based around the supposition that when the ball is in very wide channels there is a hit up off the scrum-half, but in general the ball goes scrum-half to stand-off and then gets to a runner.

I'm just not sure it's working especially since Scottish stand-offs, in Saturday's case Parks, glide out with the ball they are giving and invite defenders to smash the receiver.

The Aussies used to say you have to go "north-south" before you can go "east-west".

Maybe, just maybe, the Scotland game-plan needs to have more punch to go forward and have punishing hits closer to the original breakdown working a path to creating space for a back attack.

The English, to be fair, showed what can happen with a simple game-plan and a change of personnel. We might do the same.

And can I make one final point? There is a clamour to increase the budgets of Edinburgh and Glasgow Warriors to attract 'marquee' players but, looking through the squad lists, I'd rather we were blooding our own players to get them ready for international rugby.

Because I rather think that the search for the next generation of Scottish players for the next World Cup is on.

Oh, and I believe in Andy Robinson, I like it when a man hurts and cares like he does, but I think his selection and system need tweaked.

Oh, and for what it's worth, I think this new-look England team will have no sense of "arrogance" when they come to Murrayfield on Saturday.

But the visitors will have to fight that sense of being caught in the headlights that has forced teams wearing the rose to founder when they might otherwise have won in Edinburgh in the past.

We Scots like to believe that England's weaknesses are a combination of arrogance and over-confidence.

But the reality is that England's more recent flaws have been stodginess, predictability, lack of conditioning among the older and lazier players, and fear. You can sometimes watch an English team go into its shell and start to question itself. And then they lose.

OK, let's look at a possible Scotland team selection. There are sharp choices to be made between established players and newcomers, but only in certain positions. So, here goes. And one of my guesses is a first cap for Lee Jones, the former Selkirk winger.

Can Scotland get to grips with a new-look England team at Murrayfield?

The first two members of the front row, Alan Jacobsen and Ross Ford are probably certainties as one is the new captain and the other his trusted lieutenant. The tight-head prop could be Geoff Cross who has been outstanding, but my guess is that Robinson will pick Ewan Murray for his scrummaging bulk.

Not naming Al Kellock as captain suggests big Al won't start, so it will be Jim Hamilton and Richie Gray in partnership in the second row.

In the back row there are more options. Richie Vernon isn't starting for Sale so will probably miss out and Kelly Brown is injured. Then there is a battle royal between the open-side wing forwards; Ross Rennie and John Barclay.

Robinson will likely seek to partner Al Strokosh and Barclay at either side of the back row and bring in David Denton at number eight. I can't pick between Rennie and Barclay but perhaps the more experienced man, Barclay, will get the nod.

In the backs it gets very interesting. Mike Blair and Greig Laidlaw have been instrumental in Edinburgh's recent Heineken Cup run but I think pragmatism will rule the day and Chris Cusiter's performances against Edinburgh in his head-to-head with Blair and the ability of Dan Parks to slot goals and make ground could edge them ahead as a pairing.

What to do with the midfield? Graeme Morrison is a key player but I think Sean Lamont will start at 12 with Jo Ansbro at 13. That leaves Rory Lamont at full-back and Max Evans on one wing.

What about the other wing? You pick players on form and Edinburgh dynamo Lee Jones is red hot right now.

That's my guess. Jacobsen, Ford, Murray, Hamilton, Gray, Strokosh, Denton, Barclay, Cusiter, Parks, Evans, Lamont, Ansboro, Jones and Lamont.

Now for tactics. Scotland need to get the English, some of whom won't have played under the floodlights at Murrayfield, distinctly upset.

If England think they have the power advantage, then it should be rolling mauls to persuade them that they don't, with Richie Gray, David Denton and Jim Hamilton running at them to invite them to remember their tackling technique.

Add to that mix the Lamont brothers and you begin to see that this is a very powerful Scottish team.

In our own danger area Parks will clear territory and, no matter the weather, my suspicion is that there will be more of a smash-up game than in the past.

All designed to force the English to become predicable, stodgy, and more and more scared.

Thank you, oh force of nature, for bringing the Six Nations around again. it's my reason for living - which started as a kid with a glass of milk and a ham and mustard roll listening to Bill McLaren.

I think Scotland will win, but as it's in the future and I don't have a flux capacitor I can't be sure. All I know is that my band is playing in Edinburgh at night time.

Right, you pick your team and tell me who you think will win.

Kelly Brown was to be captain of Scotland, but because of his injury, Ross Ford steps in. Well done to him.

I can't pretend to know Ross that well other than to say that he seems a straightforward, hard-working and somewhat quiet bloke. He doesn't appear to be the kind of man who would throw dwarves around a bar, nor dive from a boat about to dock in harbour.

So here's my list of an international team captain's roles - and your job is to add to it.

Ford (pictured) must now invent answers to questions along the lines of what it felt like when Andy Robinson called him, how he feels for Brown, how big an honour it is for him, who are the captains he admires, what it will feel like to run out on to Murrayfield as captain, will captaincy divert him from his play, and so it goes on.

That'll be the biggest task, answering questions from people like me.

That will extend to pre- and post-match questions and possible features about him for TV, radio and the newspapers.

And, guess what? All along, he can't afford to put a foot wrong. Any little slip will be reported. I watch these blokes being interviewed and they know they just can't get it wrong.

And that brings me on to his second important role: saying precisely nothing. He needs to have diversionary tactics ready, including lines about how England are a great side and how Scotland will be concentrating solely on themselves. The reality is that Scotland will be looking as hard as possible for hints as to how England will play for the next 10 days or so.

Thirdly, he must be a unifying force in the squad and the team and be an ally of Robinson's. There will be other players making calls on the pitch, but when it comes to team huddle, kick for touch or post, and something needing said then he's the man from now on.

Fourthly, he should practice tossing a coin as there's nothing worse than if your captain gets it wrong. Why, I don't know, but it makes a difference.

And lastly, there's the speech at the post-match function.

Now, you think that all sounds easy. But can you imagine being a captain and all you really want to do is play? Especially for a hooker who has hundreds of lineout options drifting through his head at any one time and needs to be able to throw a ball like a dart when his pulse is at 180 beats per minute.

The choice of Ford suggests to me that Al Kellock is not seen as a man who will play 80 minutes and so this is a great statement of faith in the man from Kelso.

Ford is already a British Lion and is developing into the marauding loose player we all hoped he would be.

The role of international captain possibly doesn't sound like much, but it has diverted great men in the past from their role on the pitch and I hope Ford retains the 80 minutes on the pitch as the most important.

Good luck to him. Ya beauty, the Six Nations are just around the corner.

So, what do you make of Ford as captain, who have been the great captains, and what other roles does the captain perform?

They are through to the quarter-finals of the Heineken Cup after beating London Irish and they deserve it. Because here's what I think: Edinburgh are coached superbly by Michael Bradley and Tom Smith.

I watch the Edinburgh forwards and if that's from Tom Smith's input then, well, I really, really like what they do.

Laidlaw boosted his Six Nations chances with another fine performance Picture: SNS

Glasgow Warriors are faring better in the league, Edinburgh are lighting up the cup.

I've been in print before saying this: if you were designing a game plan for players and fans to enjoy then it's Edinburgh's. The forwards, among whom Geoff Cross and Natani Talei were outstanding, play a clever mixed up game of very speedy pick and go, one out bash and running off 10.

The backs, with Tim Visser and Lee Jones again full of fire, overload the open side and run in tries.

Everything is carried out at extraordinary pace. I watched last week's game against the Parisians and I was transfixed, and the same goes for this Murrayfield performance.

Ross Ford is throwing his muscle around, Stuart McInally is a bruiser, Roddy Grant a magnificent example of what work rate can do.

If anyone out there wants to look at a fairly simple but effective game plan then just video the way Edinburgh play and have a look at it. That's the key to this success. The micro- and macro-management of Edinburgh's game is spot on.

The beauty of the way Edinburgh attack is that they use short passes to get over the line and then as they tie in defenders they scream the ball wide.

And the Edinburgh defence is secure.

Mike Blair is back to the top of his game and Greig Laidlaw must be vying for top spot in the 10 jersey for Scotland as that pair are the generals in Bradley's army

But what does this all mean? It means that Bradley, who came into the job amid some howls of protest, is following in Andy Robinson's footsteps in getting an Edinburgh team playing with real tempo and conviction.

All those little offloads we see, all those driving rucks and small passes to runners changing the angle come from the direction of Bradley and Smith and I guess the players know that.

What we really need now is for Glasgow to keep their position in the league, and Edinburgh to do something truly remarkable against Toulouse.

Edinburgh restore faith in rugby.

What a prospect. Can Edinburgh beat Toulouse? Well, they've nothing to lose.

The trouble is in a world where more and more sportsmen and women are media-trained to be as bland as possible, I want my heroes to say things.

And the truth is that sometimes you can't actually say what you think - especially if the language is too strong.

Tweeters write a thought or a message, or capture someone else's, and put it up for the world to see.

Tweeters principally see messages scribbled by those they elect to "follow" and the reverse is true but, in general, any tweeter can look for the tweets of another member.

So, if a 12-year-old girl rugby fan "follows" you or even searches for your tweets she reads what you say.

Rory Lamont has apologised for any offence his Twitter comments may have caused

And that's Rory's trouble. Brian O'Driscoll, now with 131,000 followers wanting to read his tweets, was the world's most followed rugby player prior to the World Cup.

Rory is followed by more than 2,000 people but they, and anyone else who searched for his tweets, saw language he acknowledges was inappropriate.

There is a bigger picture here though.

The fastest advance in the relationship between players and fans has been through their ability to communicate directly with each other on new media platforms, crucially, away from the prying eyes of the PR departments of the various rugby unions.

All rugby fans, actually, want to know what Rory Lamont and other players just like him are up to and, to some extent, what they think.

Maybe you don't, but I do. And every day on Twitter I see Scottish rugby players messaging back to fans who are asking them questions, or helping charities who want profile, or just having a laugh with fans who, just two years ago, would not have been able to talk directly to them in any way whatsoever.

Let me take you back just under 10 years; the day rugby became professional the players involved in the game began to say less about life away from the pitch.

"It's going to be a very tough game" was soon heard; as was "the only pressure involved is the pressure we are putting on ourselves".

Other common phrases included: "We aren't thinking about what they are going to do just about our own game," "it's the performance that counts not the result" and
"we want the fans to get behind us".

There was a long list of other comments that had been agreed as being ready to trot out for the public.

They started saying in public, frankly, what they were allowed to say, or told to say.

Twitter, thankfully, changed all that.

The trouble with Twitter, though, is that it's broadcasting.

Words said on Twitter are more dangerous than those written in newspapers which, of course, can be soaked in salt and vinegar within a day.

Unless the tweeter deletes his or her comments they remain, on an internet page, for all to see.

I always think there are two levels to any discussion: there's the conversation you can have with a friend or a colleague on the understanding that it goes no further, and there's the edited version you can say on air or in a newspaper column.

Whether we like it or not the words we say in public have to be selected carefully.

You can only tweet what you'd be happy to broadcast. You see, I know, I've made a few errors.

Twitter inhabits a blurred line between what you would say on air, and, troublingly, what you would say in a pub.

But just to finish on this point: Twitter is a good thing for rugby.

Please let this be a little line in the sand. I really hope that the governing bodies don't clamp down and prevent modern players using modern media mechanisms to communicate with an increasingly young and media savvy modern rugby fan base.

What do you think?

The IRB say the fly-half is ineligible to play for Scotland and that he is tied to Wales, having played for their Under 20s - the stepping stone to the senior side.

Shingler, alarmingly, is on tape and on the BBC Sport website expressing his desire to play for Wales, although he has had an apparent change of heart since that interview.

I am so glad we are about to get a ruling on this. I just don't see it as right that you play age group rugby for one country and then change allegiance unless you live in your new country unless... Well, read on.

Freshly-selected England squad member Lee Dickson is a case in point as he played for Scottish age group teams but was always dual qualified; plays for Northampton and lives in England.

England and Scotland both have 'A' teams as well, so playing for our Under 20 team isn't as near the "top table".

The next step? Scotland and Wales can now enter into a formal process, or, as the IRB put it: "The SRU and WRU may wish the IRB Regulations Committee to consider this matter formally in accordance with IRB Regulation Two. The Unions are aware of the requirements of such a review."

Should Shingler be able to switch allegiance to Scotland? (pic: Getty Images)

I never liked this case from the moment it started. The whole element of dual-qualification is a painful one.

The Welsh are saying Shingler has panicked as he wasn't going to get an immediate game due to their strength in depth.

Scotland, so the argument proposed in Wales goes, was his second option but much more gratifying in the short term.

We Scots claimed him as one of ours and if ever a magician produced a bigger rabbit out of a hat, well, it was never caught on camera.

He, Shingler, has now said how much he wants to play for us and the SRU want to support him in that.

The search for talent from other countries is often unseemly and I don't agree with scouring the world for players as it makes a mockery of our production system. If it is to happen, then I'd rather we left it to others.

I never agreed with the thought that putting fifteen chimps in Scottish jerseys was fine as long as they were winning.

Let the Kiwis and Aussies offer scholarships to Samoan, Tongan and Fijiian kids and we can keep our hands off a Welsh production line.

The trouble is, of course, that nothing in the world is sharp in focus and according to the primary principle of qualification - parentage - Steven Shingler qualifies to play for Scotland, and, er Wales too.

On that point we can't argue. There is no problem here. Morally and legally the player can choose.

Where the murkiness comes is that my country, Scotland, will either have approached him or have been approached by him and at no time alerted the Welsh as to what we were up to while in full knowledge that Shingler had played for Wales Under 20s.

Perhaps it was just a straight decision with a quick look at the family bloodline but I rather suspect someone at Murrayfield must have known it would cause a problem.

The world is changing. Pacific island families make their way across Australasia and settle to new lives, which is why we see multi-racial Australian and New Zealand teams, and quite right too.

Manu Tuilagi qualifies for England through residency, Tim Visser will qualify for Scotland by the same route, but both Scotland (David Hilton) and Wales (Shane Howarth) have already fielded players who weren't eligible to play in any shape or form.

I can see both sides of the Shingler case, but I agree with the IRB on this one. He primarily qualifies for Wales.

So what would be a fair outcome? When Wales and Scotland meet with the IRB, the logical decision should be that Scotland have to formally apply for the release of Shingler, with the player's full backing, and then, if the Welsh agree, he becomes Scottish-qualified.

I actually think that the Welsh would agree to that request.

And that rule should apply worldwide for every further case like this. That's the step that has to be taken.

What do you think?

It's a powerful squad with some outstanding prospects but as I see it there are three problem areas.

The first one is captain. Who is he going to pick as captain? Robinson picked Al Kellock then dropped him for a key game at the World Cup.

In the back of his head the coach might be viewing a heavy duty second row partnership of Jim Hamilton and Richie Gray.

I see some are saying that John Barclay, Kelly Brown and Ross Ford are captains, but I like my captains to do it week-in, week-out. To me the best captain is Al Kellock.

The second headache area is stand off with no fewer than four picked in Duncan Weir, Rhuaridh Jackson, Greig Laidlaw and Dan Parks.

I'll leave you to pick one of those and Parks has to have been selected as his rivals have yet to put their hands up to demand selection.

And the third is at number 8. Richie Vernon isn't playing for Sale, Kelly Brown is an excellent 8 but is playing at wing forward for Saracens, and David Denton is the best ball carrier but, as with the others, isn't playing.

My suspicion is that it's a choice between Vernon and Brown, both excellent players, though Denton knows there is a gap there should he wish to fill it.

There are young players who may end up being versatile.

Robert Harley could end up in the second row at some stage in his career, and I am surprised that Jon Welsh has not made it into the squad.

It's a good squad with good players.

But I think the Six Nations games will be up a notch this year with England under a new coach especially dangerous at Murrayfield.

Let me go and think of a starting fifteen, I'll write it down here later, but tell me what you think of the squad and what would be your starting fifteen if the first game was next week?

I'll keep this blog brief. And it is such good news to hear of a player retiring before the ignominy of being pushed.

I think I first noticed him when he romped in from 80 metres at the Melrose Sevens when his pace was plainly out of the ordinary.

And he appeared to have that instinctive ability to ghost past players that the likes of John Rutherford and Gregor Townsend before him - both Borderers - had in spades.

To me, Chris was the last of the "old fashioned" rugby players in terms of his size. He was never over-developed in physique.

He was the lightweight runner, the sprinter, who could drag a man down rather than blast him out of the way. Chris seemed to be at top speed in three strides and nobody was going to catch him.

Paterson has retired from international rugby at the top of his game. Photo: SNS

In short he was, somehow, typically Scottish.

I've spoken to him and interviewed him and as a man he is unfailingly courteous.

The bad bit to the history is that he was mistreated by Scotland.

He never said it out loud but I suspect he wanted to play stand-off but was always told he didn't have the pass, or the kick from hand, or some other guff.

Instead, he played on the wing and at full back. He was superb there, but I think he could have been one of our finest ever stand-offs.

It's always sad to see a great man retire, but in this case he does so at the top of his game, with his body intact for the most part, and on his terms.

Chris Paterson, well done: a true servant to Scotland.

Right, leave a message for Chris here, and I'll make sure he reads it...

You'll have heard all the old jokes.

A table and chairs on a pavement in Edinburgh means it's a cafe, in Glasgow it's an eviction.

Glasgow people are friendlier and Edinburgh folk will say: "You'll have had your tea?".

And if you're looking for folk wandering around the East End in tracksuits who can't speak English there is no need to wait until Glasgow 2014.

And in recent times you'll have noticed they have a professional rugby team each.

Come the weekend it will be mayhem as they take each other on.

It's a trial for the Scotland team masquerading as a league game.

Let's look at the macro economics of it all first.

Edinburgh play a game interspersing a pick and go forward pack - I think they do that excellently using Jacobsen and Denton and the others - with a one pass game and then some width with big runners off stand off Greig Laidlaw and a willingness to find Tim Visser.

It's controlled and well-organised stuff.

Tom Smith has given them good technique at breakdown and in mauls and Michael Bradley has designed a game plan somewhere between Munster - hammer up as a pack and set up a back attack - and Andy Robinson's Scotland pattern.

Glasgow play a three pod system attacking both wings and the midfield depending on where they are in relation to the try line, and they throw in a one-pass game the closer they get.

Duncan Weir is edging closer to a cap call up, Jon Welsh and Ryan Grant get nearer their peaks, and enough has been said about the likes of Richie Gray.

Glasgow's defence and their scrummaging are their strong suits with Shade Munro providing a solid lineout platform as coach and Sean Lineen putting faith in a running game, Edinburgh's newly found abrasion and and individual firepower within a tidy game plan are theirs.

The interesting thing about the match is that all of the Scots on the pitch are good enough to play for their country.

There will be a head-to-head between Mike Blair and Chris Cusiter. Ross Ford will be put under pressure. Depending upon who lines up in the midfield the centres will be facing direct Scotland rivals, and as is tradition the biggest battle will be in the back row.

Edinburgh's David Denton is the man expected to make the biggest impact and wants to play Number 8, while his team mate Roddy Grant is a class open side who will want to take on John Barclay.

Barclay joins his prospective team mate Beattie from being under pressure from fellow Glasgow players Chris Fusaro and and Ryan Wilson and have been written off in some quarters.

I say all these names, of course, before I know the teams as I haven't mentioned Stuart McInally and Ross Rennie, both fine players.

Duncan Weir and Ruaridh Jackson will joust with Laidlaw.

It's all mouth watering stuff frankly.

Here's how I see the game at Murrayfield.

Edinburgh have the psychological advantage in that they do not hold the 1872 cup. It's always easier to try to win something than hold onto it.

Both sets of players - for some reason, and nobody will quite know why - will put their bodies on the line as never before this season.

Something about a local derby.

Can I simplify things? If Edinburgh contain the Glasgow scrum, get their pick and smash up through the likes of Denton, they'll win.

If Glasgow can dominate at scrum time, nullify the Edinburgh threats, and get some smash up rugby going, they'll win.

I just don't know though.

There are reputations to be made or broken. I'll be there. Can't wait.

Right, where's that cafe...?

Who do you think will win?

The first point is that, as always, the quality of Scottish players is as good as any in the UK. For far too long we have been told by a succession of coaches that they are working with a certain, perhaps lesser, quality of player.

Actually, that's nonsense. The English league is full of Scottish players and there's a crop of young players who are as good as anything out there. I would say that Duncan Weir and Harry Leonard at stand-off are international class.

I first saw Duncan Weir playing at school level, and he was extraordinary.

The Glasgow Warriors players show their delight at Richie Gray's match-winning try at Firhill. Photo: SNS

Let's look elsewhere and think of Robert Harley who, as a youngster at West, was plainly going to play for Scotland one day. You've got Richie Gray, the two young Ryans - Grant and Wilson - Stuart Hogg at full-back and Pat McArthur at hooker.

That's Glasgow, and Edinburgh are similarly equipped. Tim Visser will play for Scotland when his residency is up, Lee Jones scored one try, while David Denton and Stuart McInally, who scored the other, are obviously international class.

And I haven't named the existing internationals. We have great players in this country, always have done.

Jim Telfer's success with Scotland and then the Lions proved the value of a coach.

What the players always needed was a structure. This season they've got it.

Both teams are better prepared physically this season too. There has been much more running in pre-season and that's been too much for the more stodgy English teams in this first round of the Heineken Cup.

Glasgow's game plan has changed completely, with a three-pod system which must have been copied during the summer from the likes of Saracens, Gloucester and Canterbury.

And that intersperses a one-pass game and players who are keen and know clearly where they are meant to be on the pitch.

Edinburgh, for their part, played a smash-up, one-pass game and then got it wide.

Both were sufficiently intelligent to ensure they kept the ball, and both sufficiently structured to ensure that when it all broke down there were plenty of bodies at the right place at the right time.

Neither system is the same as the one employed by the current Scotland team, though. Maybe they don't need to be.

And in defence, too, there was more bite. I know Scottish defence coach Graham Steadman was put in to help Glasgow during the week. I don't know who asked for that and don't know what he contributed but the defence was admirable and has been good to date in any case.

I think we have the players to win top-level games. If they are prepared properly and given the right structure to play on the pitch within a positive environment, they can win.

And that applies at international level too. I think we have players who are good enough to win at that level.

It's a great feeling, because if you don't teach your players and don't give them a structure they believe in, then they leave and go elsewhere. LIke Richie Gray.

This weekend was a massive step in the right direction.

And is the English Premiership that attractive?

Why is Scotland's most marketable player walking out the door?

Frankly, I'd like to have seen him either stay at Glasgow to gallop across Scotstoun when Glasgow move there, or go and sample the life of wine, pate, some strange pain (their word for the staff of life) and the odd fight in the sunshine.

I am surprised he didn't go to France.

Glasgow will struggle to find another player as marketable as Richie Gray. Photo: SNS

I'm a big fan of Gray's. A huge, quiet man, he was playing Scottish First Division (Premiership) rugby in his teens, found himself in a tug of love between several clubs and then was snapped by by the professionals at Glasgow.

In a recent speed test at Glasgow he was the fastest forward over ten yards. That's probably two big paces for him.

Jeremy Guscott took a guess that he was slow and got it spectacularly wrong.

It's incredible that a youngster who was playing amateur club rugby just a couple of years ago is now one of the most sought-after players and Andy Robinson has briefed journalists that he believes Gray to be world class.

Had Scotland fared better in the World Cup he might have commanded even more interest.

But his departure south next summer has me asking the question: why would he leave Glasgow for Sale?

Putting myself in his shoes, I would leave a place if I didn't like it, or I felt I wasn't learning anything where I was, or didn't like the league I was involved in, or I could earn more money elsewhere.

I hope he is leaving to broaden his horizons elsewhere. Sale must have made him some offer to overtake the overtures of the French clubs.

I hope there is nothing about Glasgow he dislikes but it sends a strange message when such a marketable player leaves for, it is said, an offer close to the Glasgow one.

In fact, he may even be going for less money. I guess we will never find out.

It's certainly a big blow for Glasgow. He would have been able to bolster the pack for a few years. His face is on the masks the kids wear at the ground. He must have been responsible for at least a few hundred extra people turning up to watch.

Now the task is to find others to help with the marketing effort. Gray will be missed. Al Kellock should start renegotiating his contract. Glasgow now have a few quid spare in the budget.

But it all makes me feel a little strange, this one. It wasn't expected in my book. What do you think?

It strikes me that to win things you have to be positive. You have to have an optimistic outlook on life, relationships and sport.

And maybe that's what's wrong with us Scots, perhaps even us Brits - we are just too cynical, too sneering, and too negative. And that permeates into our sport - scared as we are, actually, of even allowing people to take part in sport.

So I am going to skip by some of the more obvious comments about refereeing inconsistencies which can stay on twitter and talk of the tournament instead.

The All Blacks held off France to win the Rugby World Cup final 8-7. Pic: Getty Images

It's been a wonderful world cup, and I am so happy for New Zealand to have won it. Hit by an earthquake, a mining disaster and now a tanker on the rocks they pulled off a friendly and successful tournament.

Watching the games on TV you could, frankly, almost hear Sean Fitpatrick's voice crack as he spoke of his pride, and it was the same as when Francois Pienaar almost burst into tears as well.

My player of the tournament was Richie McCaw who is surely one of the world's greatest players in rugby history, and to see Brian Lochore walk out with the cup took me back to my own hero worship days when All Blacks appeared to walk as though leaning into a wind. Just before they kicked someone.

Sean Fitzpatrick hit upon something in his post-match comments. He talked of rugby being a by-product in a country that has been putting on a show of friendship. It was more than just a game.

I recall an old saying that if in Scotland you want to build a fence, paint the house or re-roof a shed you get a contractor in. The Kiwis get their mates round and drink some beers as they do it. Health and safety? Timidity? They probably aren't in the New Zealand dictionary.

The French brought so much to the final after a preparation seemingly ruined by in-fighting. They went for it. The French, actually, are more Kiwi in their approach to life than British.

You get the feeling in the UK now that, very soon, they will ban kids from playing in trees.

Positivity runs through everything. It even applies as to how players run into contact - the more positive they are then the harder they'll go at it and, as I said last week, there's a timidity to the way we play.

You and I know that I love rugby. OK, I find it hard to defend the terrible injuries and the sadness along the way, but there is so much that is good about a sport that is, frankly, sore.

And every four years rugby gives us a glimpse into the world game, and in fact the relative health of 20 teams.

OK, so France nearly won. I was supporting France. They were adventurous, playing between the fifteens, hitting up to generate quick ball and then using a deep and double back-line to get wide - or a short ball for punch. In fact the same as the All Blacks who seemed nervous.

France had superiority in the lineout, at least parity in the scrums, and passion.

New Zealand's lineout move was straight out of a training manual from about 10 years ago for Woodcock's try.

In the end it was brilliant.

But the lesson for us? Until we become more positive, more ambitious and tougher - not just as a team but as a country - we won't be able to live with a team like the All Blacks.

I really want us to ditch this obsession with carping, sitting still for long periods, and the prevention of enjoyment if in the least bit sporty and dangerous.

Oh, OK, I'll be drawn on the refereeing - it was inconsistent during the World Cup.

Mind you, back to the Sir Richie McCaw thing, he would sneak up behind the Queen during the ceremony just slightly offside and nick the sword while staying on his feet.

Right, think positive - off for a run.