What to do with Beauden Barrett?

[Jimmy Smallsteps]

I'm considering putting this stupid troll on ignore.

I wonder which of the SA morons this guy was/is on Planet Rugby.

[Amethyst]

You all know that BB is going to play an absolute blinder in the North/South game at 10?

That'll be on the South Island loosies then. Barrett only plays well at 10 when he has time and space.

Yawn

[Amethyst]

I'm considering putting this stupid troll on ignore.

I wonder which of the SA morons this guy was/is on Planet Rugby.

yawn

[Amethyst]

I'm considering putting this stupid troll on ignore.

Join the club, it gets bigger every day.

[Carter's Choice]

I'm considering putting this stupid troll on ignore.

I wonder which of the SA morons this guy was/is on Planet Rugby.

He probably thinks that he's being terribly clever by not telling anyone. His posting style is absolutely moronic.

[Amethyst]

I'm considering putting this stupid troll on ignore.

I wonder which of the SA morons this guy was/is on Planet Rugby.

He probably thinks that he's being terribly clever by not telling anyone. His posting style is absolutely moronic.

[Carter's Choice]

Amethyst,
It's just a dumb troll schtick. NZ Rugby is as parochial as anywhere yet, and we often argue amongst ourselves about AB selections, but there literally isn't a single Blues or Hurricanes supporter who genuinely thinks that BB is the best no.10 in NZ.

[Amethyst]

Amethyst,
It's just a dumb troll schtick. NZ Rugby is as parochial as anywhere yet, and we often argue amongst ourselves about AB selections, but there literally isn't a single Blues or Hurricanes supporter who genuinely thinks that BB is the best no.10 in NZ.

Has the biggest troll in PR history just called me a troll? Bro, I must be doing something right to irritate you. Have you put me on ignore, yet?

[Jb1981]

Amethyst,
It's just a dumb troll schtick. NZ Rugby is as parochial as anywhere yet, and we often argue amongst ourselves about AB selections, but there literally isn't a single Blues or Hurricanes supporter who genuinely thinks that BB is the best no.10 in NZ.

Has the biggest troll in PR history just called me a troll? Bro, I must be doing something right to irritate you. Have you put me on ignore, yet?

I’ll be honest, you did irritate me but there’s no variety. Where’s something different, something to keep us guessing? Now it’s just boring, lazy even.

[Amethyst]

Amethyst,
It's just a dumb troll schtick. NZ Rugby is as parochial as anywhere yet, and we often argue amongst ourselves about AB selections, but there literally isn't a single Blues or Hurricanes supporter who genuinely thinks that BB is the best no.10 in NZ.

Has the biggest troll in PR history just called me a troll? Bro, I must be doing something right to irritate you. Have you put me on ignore, yet?

I’ll be honest, you did irritate me but there’s no variety. Where’s something different, something to keep us guessing? Now it’s just boring, lazy even.

You guys seem a bit precious not wanting to entertain a diiferent view (especially when that view originates from a foreign poster it seems). Bit sad but predictable.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Barrett moved to 15 with Mo'unga coming in after the struggles against the Lions, giving a 2nd playmaker allowing NZ to stretch the defence with the options at first receiver which Hansen deemed a needed update to the side without some power carriers in the pack or in the centres. To go back to just one of them suggests Foster sees the game differently to Hansen, which would be odd given his previous job, or that they think they now have better carriers available.

The eventual selection of Mo’unga was forced on Hansen and Foster when MacKenzie did his knee. They were already wedded to the dual playmaker idea. Half of NZ was screaming for Mo’unga to be selected for his more refined approach to playing at 10 over the other two who play as individuals crowding their backlines more.

It had nothing to do with available power runners and everything to do with the stubborn adherence to preferred selections from the coaching team.

Fair enough the dual play maker started before Mo'unga, but my recollection is Barrett didn't move until Mo'unga came in. Whatever I think if there was a young Nonu and Umaga available in the centres they wouldn't have tried to map a system onto the team that was quite so premeditated, but once they didn't have carriers in the centres and they didn't have them in the pack even after letting Franks go there are only so many options.

I don't know if it was the right one, but the Lions experience didn't seem to leave them happy with the options to play off 9 or 10. Fwiw I thought thy looked good playing off Smith at 9, and Barrett did have to put up with a Lions side that didn't exactly wait to push up in defence. Maybe they could have tried to rely on SBW and Laumape more but both had issues, perhaps they were a tad unfortunate Fifita burst into the squad and then back out of it but even then one carrier is too easy to contain.

[Guy Smiley]

Barrett moved to 15 with Mo'unga coming in after the struggles against the Lions, giving a 2nd playmaker allowing NZ to stretch the defence with the options at first receiver which Hansen deemed a needed update to the side without some power carriers in the pack or in the centres. To go back to just one of them suggests Foster sees the game differently to Hansen, which would be odd given his previous job, or that they think they now have better carriers available.

The eventual selection of Mo’unga was forced on Hansen and Foster when MacKenzie did his knee. They were already wedded to the dual playmaker idea. Half of NZ was screaming for Mo’unga to be selected for his more refined approach to playing at 10 over the other two who play as individuals crowding their backlines more.

It had nothing to do with available power runners and everything to do with the stubborn adherence to preferred selections from the coaching team.

Fair enough the dual play maker started before Mo'unga, but my recollection is Barrett didn't move until Mo'unga came in. Whatever I think if there was a young Nonu and Umaga available in the centres they wouldn't have tried to map a system onto the team that was quite so premeditated, but once they didn't have carriers in the centres and they didn't have them in the pack even after letting Franks go there are only so many options.

I don't know if it was the right one, but the Lions experience didn't seem to leave them happy with the options to play off 9 or 10. Fwiw I thought thy looked good playing off Smith at 9, and Barrett did have to put up with a Lions side that didn't exactly wait to push up in defence. Maybe they could have tried to rely on SBW and Laumape more but both had issues, perhaps they were a tad unfortunate Fifita burst into the squad and then back out of it but even then one carrier is too easy to contain.

You seem to be trying to force history to fit your narrative.

Barrett didn’t move until Mo’unga came in... yes. That’s the fucking point here. Mo’unga is a specialist 10 and a good one. Barrett’s role for the ABs was originally utility off the bench playing either 10 or 15. Can you understand why he would move once the decision was belatedly made to include Mo’unga? The coaches were fixated on a dual pivot axis built on MacKenzie playing 15 sometimes 10 and Barrett playing 10.... they had to bring Mo’unga in to replace the injured MacKenzie and there was nowhere else for Barrett to go.

As for a young Nonu or Umaga type... uhhhh, Laumape is the player criticised by Hansen for not offering enough verbal assistance to Barrett in midfield. They weren’t looking for impact style centres as much as they were after decision making pivot type players (to assist the inadequacies of their chosen one at 10).They had Jack Goodhue emerging at 13 offering fantastic defensive organisation skills and clever attack with Anton Lienert Brown providing genuine guile and pace at 12 when fit. Then there was Crotty able to hold down either role.

You seem fixed on a model featuring large ball running centres in defiance of the way the ABs were clearly trying to play the game. Despite his availability we were moving away from SBW as a first choice selection. The idea that you need heavy ball carriers hitting it up through midfield as a template for success is laughable when you’re discussing the All Blacks of the last decade.

Or 5.

The other guys have covered various deficiencies in Hansen’s selections across the park. This thread is primarily discussing Barrett. A lot of us Kiwis don’t share the bedazzlement that so many seem to experience when discussing his ability at 10 and your posts seem to reflect a similar dynamic here with the added twist of misrepresenting what was going on within the team to support your view of his role and the emergence of Mo’unga.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

The eventual selection of Mo’unga was forced on Hansen and Foster when MacKenzie did his knee. They were already wedded to the dual playmaker idea. Half of NZ was screaming for Mo’unga to be selected for his more refined approach to playing at 10 over the other two who play as individuals crowding their backlines more.

It had nothing to do with available power runners and everything to do with the stubborn adherence to preferred selections from the coaching team.

Fair enough the dual play maker started before Mo'unga, but my recollection is Barrett didn't move until Mo'unga came in. Whatever I think if there was a young Nonu and Umaga available in the centres they wouldn't have tried to map a system onto the team that was quite so premeditated, but once they didn't have carriers in the centres and they didn't have them in the pack even after letting Franks go there are only so many options.

I don't know if it was the right one, but the Lions experience didn't seem to leave them happy with the options to play off 9 or 10. Fwiw I thought thy looked good playing off Smith at 9, and Barrett did have to put up with a Lions side that didn't exactly wait to push up in defence. Maybe they could have tried to rely on SBW and Laumape more but both had issues, perhaps they were a tad unfortunate Fifita burst into the squad and then back out of it but even then one carrier is too easy to contain.

You seem to be trying to force history to fit your narrative.

Barrett didn’t move until Mo’unga came in... yes. That’s the fucking point here. Mo’unga is a specialist 10 and a good one. Barrett’s role for the ABs was originally utility off the bench playing either 10 or 15. Can you understand why he would move once the decision was belatedly made to include Mo’unga? The coaches were fixated on a dual pivot axis built on MacKenzie playing 15 sometimes 10 and Barrett playing 10.... they had to bring Mo’unga in to replace the injured MacKenzie and there was nowhere else for Barrett to go.

As for a young Nonu or Umaga type... uhhhh, Laumape is the player criticised by Hansen for not offering enough verbal assistance to Barrett in midfield. They weren’t looking for impact style centres as much as they were after decision making pivot type players (to assist the inadequacies of their chosen one at 10).They had Jack Goodhue emerging at 13 offering fantastic defensive organisation skills and clever attack with Anton Lienert Brown providing genuine guile and pace at 12 when fit. Then there was Crotty able to hold down either role.

You seem fixed on a model featuring large ball running centres in defiance of the way the ABs were clearly trying to play the game. Despite his availability we were moving away from SBW as a first choice selection. The idea that you need heavy ball carriers hitting it up through midfield as a template for success is laughable when you’re discussing the All Blacks of the last decade.

Or 5.

The other guys have covered various deficiencies in Hansen’s selections across the park. This thread is primarily discussing Barrett. A lot of us Kiwis don’t share the bedazzlement that so many seem to experience when discussing his ability at 10 and your posts seem to reflect a similar dynamic here with the added twist of misrepresenting what was going on within the team to support your view of his role and the emergence of Mo’unga.

I'm not too fussed if you pick Mo'unga or Barrett, and I've no issue with the idea many people get carried away with Barrett's running and lose focus on the idea he doesn't always lead his team from 10. Nonetheless the dual playmakers, even to the point of not picking Smith once McKenzie was out injured, is for me in large part a solution to not having carrying options in the pack or the centres. I think it was a bit of an over reaction given what NZ's record was under Hansen, how much the Lions series influenced them I don't know, maybe it was all about developing what NZ could offer on attack and not a response to the failings against the Lions, maybe a bit of both.

[Carter's Choice]

Fair enough the dual play maker started before Mo'unga, but my recollection is Barrett didn't move until Mo'unga came in. Whatever I think if there was a young Nonu and Umaga available in the centres they wouldn't have tried to map a system onto the team that was quite so premeditated, but once they didn't have carriers in the centres and they didn't have them in the pack even after letting Franks go there are only so many options.

I don't know if it was the right one, but the Lions experience didn't seem to leave them happy with the options to play off 9 or 10. Fwiw I thought thy looked good playing off Smith at 9, and Barrett did have to put up with a Lions side that didn't exactly wait to push up in defence. Maybe they could have tried to rely on SBW and Laumape more but both had issues, perhaps they were a tad unfortunate Fifita burst into the squad and then back out of it but even then one carrier is too easy to contain.

This is Rugby revisionism at its very worst.

The dual playmaker concept was introduced by Steve Hansen to protect Beaudan Barrett because he has never, ever been an effective playmaker. He is a brilliant ball runner, but he has always struggled to create time, space and opportunities for his teammates. Hence the need to bring in someone else to take the play-making pressure off BB. When a team has an effective playmaker at 10 they don't need to bring in more play-makers. That's why the Crusaders have won four titles in four years with just Richie Mo'unga at first five calling the shots.

The dual playmaker concept was also in response to BB being a relatively inconsistent goal kicker. Steve Hansen found a way to take that responsibility off him as well by picking first McKenziie, and then Mo'unga, to do the goal kicking. He preferred to pressure these youngsters with the added responsibility of kicking goals so the more experienced BB could swan around without having to carry that burden

Also, you mentioned Franks as a ball runner. Are you taking the piss? Owen Franks would be the slowest and least effective ball runner ever to don the AB jersey. He was an excellent scrummager though.

[Un Pilier]

Mo’unga has really impressed me in the Aotearoa comp and must be a shoo-in at 10. I still expect to see BB at 15 though (maybe 23?) and have been surprised by the fairly negative press he has received on this fred. Obvs, I don’t follow NZ Rugby as closely as you guys and I might have missed stuff. Seems to me he’s being judged a tad harshly though? It’s as if he is positively disliked as many dislike Farrell in English Rugby.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Fair enough the dual play maker started before Mo'unga, but my recollection is Barrett didn't move until Mo'unga came in. Whatever I think if there was a young Nonu and Umaga available in the centres they wouldn't have tried to map a system onto the team that was quite so premeditated, but once they didn't have carriers in the centres and they didn't have them in the pack even after letting Franks go there are only so many options.

I don't know if it was the right one, but the Lions experience didn't seem to leave them happy with the options to play off 9 or 10. Fwiw I thought thy looked good playing off Smith at 9, and Barrett did have to put up with a Lions side that didn't exactly wait to push up in defence. Maybe they could have tried to rely on SBW and Laumape more but both had issues, perhaps they were a tad unfortunate Fifita burst into the squad and then back out of it but even then one carrier is too easy to contain.

This is Rugby revisionism at its very worst.

The dual playmaker concept was introduced by Steve Hansen to protect Beaudan Barrett because he has never, ever been an effective playmaker. He is a brilliant ball runner, but he has always struggled to create time, space and opportunities for his teammates. Hence the need to bring in someone else to take the play-making pressure off BB. When a team has an effective playmaker at 10 they don't need to bring in more play-makers. That's why the Crusaders have won four titles in four years with just Richie Mo'unga at first five calling the shots.

The dual playmaker concept was also in response to BB being a relatively inconsistent goal kicker. Steve Hansen found a way to take that responsibility off him as well by picking first McKenziie, and then Mo'unga, to do the goal kicking. He preferred to pressure these youngsters with the added responsibility of kicking goals so the more experienced BB could swan around without having to carry that burden

Also, you mentioned Franks as a ball runner. Are you taking the piss? Owen Franks would be the slowest and least effective ball runner ever to don the AB jersey. He was an excellent scrummager though.

The best test level defences present more of a challenge, there are less soft edges to exploit. So what works at one level doesn't obviously mean it transfers in all ways, though I also don't watch enough of the Crusaders to know where they'd be as regards carriers at that lower level. The point about goal kicking is a reasonable one, I think there's more to it, and fwiw I thought it at the time too. I might have been wrong about it all along, but it's not revisionist. If there was nothing to my line of thinking I'd have expected to see more of Smith at 15 with Mo'unga at 10, keeping the two playmakers wasn't needed just to have someone other than Barrett kicking

And the point about replacing Franks was they dropped him in part to bring in someone younger, more mobile, and hopefully someone who could add more on the carrying front, not that Franks was as a carrier

[eldanielfire]

Hansen always had his favourites (Mackenzie and Barrett at 10) being his worst tendency (as this ridded the team of stable, level-headed 10 who could organise and direct the backline - instead of hogging the ball and running/crabbing sideways away from all support players like an under 9's team) and stubbornly insisted his way was correct. Henry and Smith would've never allowed such a directionless, helter-skelter style of rugby with gameplan revolving around two erratic players Barrett and Mackenzie running the cutter, fulfilling dual playmaker roles. We ended up with zero-cohesion in the backline and (more often than not) individual brilliance to scrap home ugly wins.

Hansen's selections when it mattered were atrocious.

Wasn't it when Smith was in the All Blacks set-up Barrett was 10, then after that Hansen in his last 2 solo years who moved Barrett away from 10 and brought in Richie to 10? Why assume it was all down to Hansen.

[Guy Smiley]

Wasn't it when Smith was in the All Blacks set-up Barrett was 10, then after that Hansen in his last 2 solo years who moved Barrett away from 10 and brought in Richie to 10? Why assume it was all down to Hansen.

WUT

[Gumboot]

Just to digress for a sec, it looks like Amethyst has been banned. Anyone know who he was on ye olde bored?

[Wild Beef]

Mo’unga has really impressed me in the Aotearoa comp and must be a shoo-in at 10. I still expect to see BB at 15 though (maybe 23?) and have been surprised by the fairly negative press he has received on this fred. Obvs, I don’t follow NZ Rugby as closely as you guys and I might have missed stuff. Seems to me he’s being judged a tad harshly though? It’s as if he is positively disliked as many dislike Farrell in English Rugby.

He is the victim of occupying a position many believe another deserved. He gets a lot of unfair flack for it and is a better player than some are making out. Mo’unga is clearly the better player right now but quite a few people get carried away claiming BB has a running game and nothing else.

Also, the media whipped up a huge storm stoking the BB vs Mo’unga fire during the RWC year and earlier. It’s almost like politics and people get quite unhinged defending their player. I’m still surprised at how quickly some go off their rocker defending Mo’unga. He doesn’t need defending, he’s in immense form and anyone debating that is obviously a troll. I think they forget the war has been won and Mo’unga is the AB 10.

[Jb1981]

Just to digress for a sec, it looks like Amethyst has been banned. Anyone know who he was on ye olde bored?

No idea. He asked to go so presumably that’s a flouncing rather than banning.

[Gumboot]

Just to digress for a sec, it looks like Amethyst has been banned. Anyone know who he was on ye olde bored?

No idea. He asked to go so presumably that’s a flouncing rather than banning.

Shame, I think he's Beauden's biggest fan.

[Jb1981]

Mo’unga has really impressed me in the Aotearoa comp and must be a shoo-in at 10. I still expect to see BB at 15 though (maybe 23?) and have been surprised by the fairly negative press he has received on this fred. Obvs, I don’t follow NZ Rugby as closely as you guys and I might have missed stuff. Seems to me he’s being judged a tad harshly though? It’s as if he is positively disliked as many dislike Farrell in English Rugby.

He is the victim of occupying a position many believe another deserved. He gets a lot of unfair flack for it and is a better player than some are making out. Mo’unga is clearly the better player right now but quite a few people get carried away claiming BB has a running game and nothing else.

Also, the media whipped up a huge storm stoking the BB vs Mo’unga fire during the RWC year and earlier. It’s almost like politics and people get quite unhinged defending their player. I’m still surprised at how quickly some go off their rocker defending Mo’unga. He doesn’t need defending, he’s in immense form and anyone debating that is obviously a troll. I think they forget the war has been won and Mo’unga is the AB 10.

I don’t think Barrett is disliked by anyone and think a lot of the criticism (sometimes exaggerated) is down to the almost cult like faith that Hansen had in him near the end. Looking back on some of Hansen’s comments I don’t think I have ever seen a player as talked up and excused by a coach as Beauden Barrett. The flip side is that those favouring Mo’unga (who was talked down by Hansen as much as Barrett was talked up) naturally highlighted the issues they saw.

[Jb1981]

Just to digress for a sec, it looks like Amethyst has been banned. Anyone know who he was on ye olde bored?

No idea. He asked to go so presumably that’s a flouncing rather than banning.

Shame, I think he's Beauden's biggest fan.

Steve Hansen adopting a South African persona? Stranger things have happened.

[Jimmy Smallsteps]

I don't know who Amethyst was on PR but here's how his banning played out.

Over on the Thieving Cunts thread he indulged in some good old fashioned victim blaming after a poster was burgled.

Amethyst wrote: ↑Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:48 am
The way you describe the whole incident and the use of a stick makes me think you actually saw what was happening but to afraid to do anything. Either piss poor vigilance or an insurance bluff.

I called him on it (but didn't report him), accurately calling him a "fuckwit", and then a Mod stepped in.

wind your neck in please, consider this a friendly warning

Amethyst stamped his feet and flounced.

I want to deregister. Please do the necessary. Thanks and cheers.

ASMO obliged. Game over.

Done

He was a dickhead. No loss.

[Wild Beef]

Mo’unga has really impressed me in the Aotearoa comp and must be a shoo-in at 10. I still expect to see BB at 15 though (maybe 23?) and have been surprised by the fairly negative press he has received on this fred. Obvs, I don’t follow NZ Rugby as closely as you guys and I might have missed stuff. Seems to me he’s being judged a tad harshly though? It’s as if he is positively disliked as many dislike Farrell in English Rugby.

He is the victim of occupying a position many believe another deserved. He gets a lot of unfair flack for it and is a better player than some are making out. Mo’unga is clearly the better player right now but quite a few people get carried away claiming BB has a running game and nothing else.

Also, the media whipped up a huge storm stoking the BB vs Mo’unga fire during the RWC year and earlier. It’s almost like politics and people get quite unhinged defending their player. I’m still surprised at how quickly some go off their rocker defending Mo’unga. He doesn’t need defending, he’s in immense form and anyone debating that is obviously a troll. I think they forget the war has been won and Mo’unga is the AB 10.

I don’t think Barrett is disliked by anyone and think a lot of the criticism (sometimes exaggerated) is down to the almost cult like faith that Hansen had in him near the end. Looking back on some of Hansen’s comments I don’t think I have ever seen a player as talked up and excused by a coach as Beauden Barrett. The flip side is that those favouring Mo’unga (who was talked down by Hansen as much as Barrett was talked up) naturally highlighted the issues they saw.

Jdog hates him

You’re bang on with your Hansen comment though. As much as the media stoked the fire, some of the things Hansen said were worse. I think it was a weakness of his, he probably wanted to be seen to be defending his players but he did it in a pretty appalling way.

[Jimmy Smallsteps]

I don't hate Beauden Barrett at all. I rate him as a world-class attacking rugby player and a shoo-in for any All Blacks squad.

Just not as the starting 10.

Unfortunately, Barrett fans have a rare medical condition that involves hearing this:

Beauden Barrett is a world-class talent who is best utilised at fullback or as a super sub covering most of the backline.

as this:

Beauden Barrett is a no talent who is a piss weak fullback and has no place even as a sub as he is no good anywhere in the backline.

[Carter's Choice]

I don't hate Beauden Barrett at all. I rate him as a world-class attacking rugby player and a shoo-in for any All Blacks squad.

Just not as the starting 10.

Unfortunately, Barrett fans have a rare medical condition that involves hearing this:

Beauden Barrett is a world-class talent who is best utilised at fullback or as a super sub covering most of the backline.

as this:

Beauden Barrett is a no talent who is a piss weak fullback and has no place even as a sub as he is no good anywhere in the backline.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is the most accurate post I've ever read on the internet. I rate BB highly. I screamed louder than Justin Marshall when he scored 'that try' in the 2015 RWC final. But he's not a tier 1 international no.10's arse-ring.

[FujiKiwi]

I don't hate Beauden Barrett at all. I rate him as a world-class attacking rugby player and a shoo-in for any All Blacks squad.

Just not as the starting 10.

Unfortunately, Barrett fans have a rare medical condition that involves hearing this:

Beauden Barrett is a world-class talent who is best utilised at fullback or as a super sub covering most of the backline.

as this:

Beauden Barrett is a no talent who is a piss weak fullback and has no place even as a sub as he is no good anywhere in the backline.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is the most accurate post I've ever read on the internet. I rate BB highly. I screamed louder than Justin Marshall when he scored 'that try' in the 2015 RWC final. But he's not a tier 1 international no.10's arse-ring.

Have you or have you not suggested that Beauden Barrett is arrogant for saying he prefers 10 to 15?

[Carter's Choice]

Have you or have you not suggested that Beauden Barrett is arrogant for saying he prefers 10 to 15?

He can say he wants to play at Tighthead Prop for all I care. It's up to the coaches, who are all paid a million NZD bucks a year, to select the best team.

[FujiKiwi]

He starts at 15. The all blacks have never dropped quality and experience after one season of poor form in super rugby and the team has been much better because of it.

He wasn’t even that bad this year.

No he wasn't that bad this year. And whilst he may have been surpassed by his younger brother, I would be fine with him staying at 15. My understanding is that he wants to play 10, so it will be interesting to see how Foster manages BB's massive ego.

You've been earnestly suggesting you have nothing against Barrett but this pretty crass attempt at character assassination of a generally modest bloke suggests otherwise.

I don't think Barrett should play 10 for the ABs, but the recent posts about how there are no ill feelings towards him are self righteous hogwash.

[Carter's Choice]

He starts at 15. The all blacks have never dropped quality and experience after one season of poor form in super rugby and the team has been much better because of it.

He wasn’t even that bad this year.

No he wasn't that bad this year. And whilst he may have been surpassed by his younger brother, I would be fine with him staying at 15. My understanding is that he wants to play 10, so it will be interesting to see how Foster manages BB's massive ego.

You've been earnestly suggesting you have nothing against Barrett but this pretty crass attempt at character assassination of a generally modest bloke suggests otherwise.

I don't think Barrett should play 10 for the ABs, but the recent posts about how there are no ill feelings towards him are self righteous hogwash.

I really like BB. Just not as a 10 for the Ab's.

[FujiKiwi]

No he wasn't that bad this year. And whilst he may have been surpassed by his younger brother, I would be fine with him staying at 15. My understanding is that he wants to play 10, so it will be interesting to see how Foster manages BB's massive ego.

You've been earnestly suggesting you have nothing against Barrett but this pretty crass attempt at character assassination of a generally modest bloke suggests otherwise.

I don't think Barrett should play 10 for the ABs, but the recent posts about how there are no ill feelings towards him are self righteous hogwash.

I really like BB. Just not as a 10 for the Ab's.

It's really generous of you to look past BB's massive ego.

[Guy Smiley]

He starts at 15. The all blacks have never dropped quality and experience after one season of poor form in super rugby and the team has been much better because of it.

He wasn’t even that bad this year.

No he wasn't that bad this year. And whilst he may have been surpassed by his younger brother, I would be fine with him staying at 15. My understanding is that he wants to play 10, so it will be interesting to see how Foster manages BB's massive ego.

You've been earnestly suggesting you have nothing against Barrett but this pretty crass attempt at character assassination of a generally modest bloke suggests otherwise.

I don't think Barrett should play 10 for the ABs, but the recent posts about how there are no ill feelings towards him are self righteous hogwash.

Clues. You lack them.

[Sandstorm]

Just to digress for a sec, it looks like Amethyst has been banned. Anyone know who he was on ye olde bored?

No idea. He asked to go so presumably that’s a flouncing rather than banning.

Possibly a Handyman multi

[Jimmy Smallsteps]

He'll likely be back soon enough, posting as RG Snyman's Knee or some such.

[Carter's Choice]

It's really generous of you to look past BB's massive ego.

That comment really impacted on you, didn't it?

[Jerome_Kaino]

Just put BB on the wing. Mo'unga is a better 10 at the moment at Super level and has all the potential to become a better test 10, if he gets some gametime in that position. Jordie got trown into the deep to quickly but is a potential WPOY and 15 will be his position moving forward (otherwise he would have changed franchises). But BB is still one of the best players in the world and nobody will convince me that George Bridge is a better winger than BB. Put him on the wing, he will score plenty of tries, be good on defence, has a good kicking game and you don't have to worry about a 10 on the bench anymore.

[handyman]

Just to digress for a sec, it looks like Amethyst has been banned. Anyone know who he was on ye olde bored?

No idea. He asked to go so presumably that’s a flouncing rather than banning.

Possibly a Handyman multi

Can the mods check if this post is accurate?

[Gumboot]

Just put BB on the wing. Mo'unga is a better 10 at the moment at Super level and has all the potential to become a better test 10, if he gets some gametime in that position. Jordie got trown into the deep to quickly but is a potential WPOY and 15 will be his position moving forward (otherwise he would have changed franchises). But BB is still one of the best players in the world and nobody will convince me that George Bridge is a better winger than BB. Put him on the wing, he will score plenty of tries, be good on defence, has a good kicking game and you don't have to worry about a 10 on the bench anymore.

That hasn't been an issue for a while now, since they started using dual play-makers with McKenzie or B Barrett at fullback.