BEING beaten by Scotland at Murrayfield is not normally a cause for concern. However, the margin of defeat and the ease with which it was attained by Scotland and above all the dreadful display by the Irish side are worrying.

After the English match we found some comfort in the belief that we had been beaten by a far stronger and more skillful side. We believed that our win against Wales, who had hammered the Scots, pointed to an Irish success in Murrayfield. We now find ourselves at the bottom of the table with the wooden spoon, with no more matches to play and with the unwanted distinction of having suffered record defeats against France, England and Scotland all in the one season.

Apart from the opening few minutes and the try which we scored, we were never really in the game. There is no doubt that the conditions made handling, kicking and throwing into the lineouts difficult, but this applied equally and cannot be used as an excuse. I would even venture that had the conditions been perfect the winning margin for Scotland might have been even greater.

The simple facts were that the Scots won far more possession, and what they won they used to better effect; they had far better play-makers in their half-backs, in particular in Gregor Townsend, who always looked like he had an extra second to spare, which is always a sign of a top-class sportsman in any game. The Lions selectors should build their team around this gifted play-maker.

Before the match, I felt that organisation and passion would be the critical areas between two teams of similar standard. We fell down badly on both. Here was very little sign of any great passion, and this was best reflected in the number of half-hearted and missed tackles that became more critical as the game progressed.

But it was in the area of organisation that we were most lacking. To play a one-out defence (where the man inside takes your opposite man) on a wet and windy day against the side whose main strengths were at half-back and midfield defied logic.

Furthermore, the Scots looked far better organised in their lineouts and set pieces than we did. The one exception was the movement which led to the Irish try, which was a great piece of football but which was not repeated.

In the second-half, at seven-all and facing into a strong wind, we had to carry the ball rather than kick to touch. In his postmatch interview, Brian Ashton, said that he had told the team to do so and they failed to follow his instructions. This may explain why David Humphreys was moved to the wing when Paul Burke came on as a replacement for Kurt McQuilkin.

It is always a disruption to lose players in a match. McQuilkin had been the outstanding defender up until his departure, and, while O'Meara had done reasonably well and Staples had created the try, we would be grasping at straws in suggesting that their departure affected the result. None of them were first-team choices at the start of the season.

Scotland had far more players capable of making critical decisions in key situations. They also seemed to be playing to a game plan with which they were all familiar and comfortable. That does not happen by accident.

The Scots were, simply, repeating at international level the style of game which their "wise men" have decided a long time ago is best suited to promote the strengths and camouflage the weaknesses of their game. This policy has been instilled right through their system. Thus, even if they don't get the results at under-age and A level, they still produce enough players of quality to feed into the national side.

Their resources are probably more limited than ours. We, on the other hand, continue to produce excellent schoolboy, under-21 and college sides, but we do not seem to be producing the quality at top level. I hope Ashton's brief will include the requirement for him to address this problem.

The positive aspects of the past season have been the emergence of Denis Hickie and Eric Miller and the maturing of Jeremy Davidson. Ashton must be wondering about the size of the task which faces him, but might I respectfully suggest he spend the rest of the season watching matches in the All-Ireland League, where he will find quite a few players of great potential who have not been brought to his attention.

France, despite all their injuries both before and during the match against England, have turned the tables upside down. Few will begrudge their success. It was a classic case of fortune favouring the brave. England's belief in their own infallibility after their huge wins over Scotland and Ireland was fundamental to their downfall.

They deserted their previous style and, by trying to silence their critics by playing an expansive game from the start, they fell victim to the same arrogance as when they played Australia in the World Cup final in 1991.

The doubts about Grayson's temperament were finally shown to be justified. Under real pressure his place-kicking suffered, as did his general play, and in the end this was the deciding factor in a match which was in a totally different league from that in Murrayfield.

We have been playing France for more than a 100 years. In recent times we have had coaches from New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, England, Wales and Scotland involved in Irish rugby at various levels. Maybe the French style is more suited to the Irish temperament. It is an idea worth exploring.