Fox Sports puts the boot into New Zealand Rugby

Christy Doran is the Fox Sports rugby and cricket correspondent. He cites arrogance, muddled selection and the continued improvement of opposition sides.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/all-blacks/arrogance-and-contempt-how-all-blacks-went-from-rugbys-kings-to-a-punching-bag/news-story/d629e602a3a39499b1ddc4cbd8c98cb6

It's been on the cards for a few years now to be fair, NZ just aren't bringing through the top class players that they always have done in the past.

Cane is obviously seen as the focal point on this and rightly so in many regards. I've had many a debate with NZ posters over the years over Cane's lack of quality and his quite bizarre selection as captain.

I'm sure they'll come back at some point, but this is a dark time for NZ rugby indeed.

The ABs have been the focus of every other international side as the gold standard they need/want to achieve. It's been this way for as long as I can remember. There have been fleeting moments when the crown teetered but it never quite fell off. Now however things have changed. The other leading nations have caught up and for now the crown is up for grabs. This is new to New Zealand and I'm sure it's difficult to deal with, I'm also sure they'll get back on the horse but it's not going to be a fleeting instance this time. Their fight back to the top will take time and perseverance, the other runners are more able to keep up than ever before.

Get used to it Kiwis, this is the new world rugby order.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's been on the cards for a few years now to be fair, NZ just aren't bringing through the top class players that they always have done in the past.

I dunno they've got a lot of exceptional players quite a few most international coaches would love to have. I think the issue is more that they are reliant on those special players coming up with something in order to make the attack or defence work. The structures don't seem to have changed much since 2019, bar the one game where Schmidt took charge and they played off 9. If they had a better structure and set up I think they'd be pretty hard to beat.

Sure some of the selection is a bit odd and maybe there's a lack of top level 12s available to them but before the series Vs Ireland if you'd stacked the starting XVs up man for man you wouldn't have given Ireland a massive edge or maybe an edge at all. Afterwards yeah the Irish players outplayed them so maybe it would be different but the NZRU refusing to move with the times and wanting the safe option or insisting on the dream of the Hansen era still being there is more detrimental to AB chances at the world cup than the current batch of players.

Have New Zealand actually got that much worse or is it a case that the rest of the Tier One countries have finally caught up with them? In the pre-professional era the ABs were head and shoulders above everyone else and had a massive head start because of that.
Now everyone from Argentina to Japan have full time players, dedicated coaching staff, fitness experts, data analysts, etc. so the gap is going to narrow and eventually close.
Would there be this massive self flagellation if the ABs had lost a series 2-1 to South Africa? Or is it a case that having lost a RWC semi to "the poms" before losing a home series to "little" Ireland that's brought this on?

Ian Foster has the worst win rate in the last forty years of AB head coaches. He's lost 7 of his 24 games, Hansen lost 10 of his 107 games. I think the stats and then a home series loss are really making it easy for the press to put the boot in.

He has a 60% win rate, same as the Boks under Jacques N. and slightly below Eddie Jones with 65. Wales and Australia are around 35% win rates and Ireland and France are in the 70s. Scotland 50%.

Hansen inherited a star-studded team with plenty of players coming through however, despite his good record the rot began with him with numerous losses to Ireland and a semi final exit to England and a failure to improve NZs dicipline to account for new rule changes.

Hansen did struggle (comparably) towards the end of his tenure compared to early years. Makes the selection of a continuity candidate in Foster an even worse appointment in hindsight. Foster has plenty of world class talent available he just makes little use of it. His refusal to drop Came, develop a 12 or add any sort of innovation to attack or defence is a fairly damning endorsement of his span in charge.

Foster hasn't played a game Vs England yet but has enjoyed some win percentage buffing games against USA, Fiji and Tonga. Add in a first ever loss to Argentina and the home series loss to Ireland. I can't see Foster lasting past the world cup of he doesn't start showing some of the world leading Innovation the ABs are normally famous for.

Gotta be said the quality of player has dropped through the floor for NZ when comparing Hansens full tenure and the start of Fosters. Going to be very interesting tomorrow, I would not be surprised if NZ win but it would be a he'll of a turnaround. Those last 2 games vs Ireland are the worst NZ teams I've seen. They went mentally as much as anything else.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Gotta be said the quality of player has dropped through the floor for NZ when comparing Hansens full tenure and the start of Fosters.

Props are a bit average.
Hookers - Dane Coles and Codie Taylor are still quality and getting on a bit now but were in their prime three years ago when Foster took over.
Locks - Retallick and Whitelock have been in their prime years and there's a few quality locks been around to back them up.
Flankers - Savea, Papalii, Frizell are all quality the odd decision to stick with Cane is a Foster fault.
8 - Hoskins Sotutu somehow only has 10 caps, presumably because Savea has been shunted here to keep Cane involved. Ioane is a class option as well.
9 - Smith one of the two best 9s in world rugby then Christie, Kerr-Barlow and Perinara have all been kicking around as backups. No weakness there.
10 - Barrett and Mo'unga nearly every nation in the NH would love to have one of those two at 10. The backups are pretty handy as well.
Centres - mix of players who are all decent but maybe missing a stand out option though Ioane could be that at 13.
Wings - they've always got good wingers to pick from, such is the depth at 15 they could put out a back three of them.
Fullback - McKenzie and Jordan would walk into most international sides, Barrett is a useful utility option who maybe should have spent time adapting to 12.

I'm not seeing a fall in quality enough for it to be an excuse for Foster's inability to develop either the attack or defensive structure. If the ABs we're trying to play a complex game plan which demanded a high skill level they were struggling to find players who could adapt to I'd feel for Foster a bit but he's still playing an attack that's not really changed from 2019 and is heavily reliant on Barrett, DMac or Jordan coming up with a moment of genius.

Fair enough then Sam. I've just had a quick gander at the 2012 team from the start of Hansens reign. I still see that as a lil step up from the guys they're putting out now.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Fair enough then Sam. I've just had a quick gander at the 2012 team from the start of Hansens reign. I still see that as a lil step up from the guys they're putting out now.

I think the main difference was the leaders in that side though obviously you've got some generational talent in there as well. We'd all take the 2012 squad given the choice of the two definitely agree with you on that.

And agree on that point re leaders. You wouldn't see anyone's head go like it did a few weeks ago.

Have to say although Rettallick and Whitelock have been a superb combo in the boiler room I haven't been impressed with the next cabs off the rank.
IMO Scott Barrett appears to get game time because he is a Barrett. I don't see him as a dominant lineout jumper, scrummager or ball carrier. What is his point of difference? Apart from putting in high tackles on a regular basis I don't see what he offers to the front five.
He certainly isn't an international 6, not quick or agile enough to play back row.
Dropping S Barrett and S Cane would make the AB pack significantly more potent.

sensisball wrote:Have to say although Rettallick and Whitelock have been a superb combo in the boiler room I haven't been impressed with the next cabs off the rank.
IMO Scott Barrett appears to get game time because he is a Barrett. I don't see him as a dominant lineout jumper, scrummager or ball carrier. What is his point of difference? Apart from putting in high tackles on a regular basis I don't see what he offers to the front five.
He certainly isn't an international 6, not quick or agile enough to play back row.
Dropping S Barrett and S Came would make the AB pack significantly more potent.

I think Retallick at his peak had a claim to being the best rugby player on the planet. However his form has fallen off a cliff since his stint in Japan and he was largely anonymous in the series against Ireland. In fact the 2nd row pairing of Retallick and Whitelock were complete dominated by Ireland's 2nd row, which is something I would have never dreamed of. Agree with your point regarding S Barrett, I really don't understand what the hype is around him

Bit odd they persevere with Barrett when Tuipolutu the Blues captain is in the squad as well. I think Barrett could still come good, he has been a mainstay in the all conquering Crusaders squad which can't have been by accident.

I still think you've got to be asking the questions of the leadership. I guess we won't know for sure until after the world cup when someone else takes charge. I can see NZRU doubling down on experience and going Schmidt and not Robertson though.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Gotta be said the quality of player has dropped through the floor for NZ when comparing Hansens full tenure and the start of Fosters.

Props are a bit average.
Hookers - Dane Coles and Codie Taylor are still quality and getting on a bit now but were in their prime three years ago when Foster took over.
Locks - Retallick and Whitelock have been in their prime years and there's a few quality locks been around to back them up.
Flankers - Savea, Papalii, Frizell are all quality the odd decision to stick with Cane is a Foster fault.
8 - Hoskins Sotutu somehow only has 10 caps, presumably because Savea has been shunted here to keep Cane involved. Ioane is a class option as well.
9 - Smith one of the two best 9s in world rugby then Christie, Kerr-Barlow and Perinara have all been kicking around as backups. No weakness there.
10 - Barrett and Mo'unga nearly every nation in the NH would love to have one of those two at 10. The backups are pretty handy as well.
Centres - mix of players who are all decent but maybe missing a stand out option though Ioane could be that at 13.
Wings - they've always got good wingers to pick from, such is the depth at 15 they could put out a back three of them.
Fullback - McKenzie and Jordan would walk into most international sides, Barrett is a useful utility option who maybe should have spent time adapting to 12.

I'm not seeing a fall in quality enough for it to be an excuse for Foster's inability to develop either the attack or defensive structure. If the ABs we're trying to play a complex game plan which demanded a high skill level they were struggling to find players who could adapt to I'd feel for Foster a bit but he's still playing an attack that's not really changed from 2019 and is heavily reliant on Barrett, DMac or Jordan coming up with a moment of genius.

I'm not on the same page with this Sam.

When you reel off a world XV, NZ would get at least 5 or 6 in there and be in contention for another 5 or 6. With current form, could you argue a case for more than 3 or 4 being in contention?

Hookers - not playing well.
Props - ok but nothing world class
Locks - Whitelock and Retallick not in good form and a big drop after those 2
Backrow - Savea...all others are pretty average or not experienced

HB - Smith is a shadow and others not great
10 - Again not getting the platform and not in form
Centres - Nothing anywhere near the quality of Nonu, Smith, SBW etc...
Back 3 - Some real talents but getting asked to do too much

When you look past the first XV, it's pretty slim too....especially in the pack and centres.

NZ for me have just never got close to replacing Kaino, McCaw and Read or having viable alternative to the locks. Cane shouldn't be near an AB jersey, he's an absolute passenger at Int level. I recall having a debate with a NZ poster about Cane on here when he first broke through.....I've not seen much of him for a while now

Cane is making the back row very uncompetitive.
Savea is almost always their best forward and Cane is usually the worst.
Drop Cane, move Savea to 7 where he would be even more effective than he is now, making even more turn overs, and bring in a big 8 to share the ball carrying duties.
Seems obvious but the NZ management seem unable, or unwilling, to do the obvious.
Suspect they will double down on" Cane is the captain " and continue, losing, as if all is well.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Gotta be said the quality of player has dropped through the floor for NZ when comparing Hansens full tenure and the start of Fosters.

Props are a bit average.
Hookers - Dane Coles and Codie Taylor are still quality and getting on a bit now but were in their prime three years ago when Foster took over.
Locks - Retallick and Whitelock have been in their prime years and there's a few quality locks been around to back them up.
Flankers - Savea, Papalii, Frizell are all quality the odd decision to stick with Cane is a Foster fault.
8 - Hoskins Sotutu somehow only has 10 caps, presumably because Savea has been shunted here to keep Cane involved. Ioane is a class option as well.
9 - Smith one of the two best 9s in world rugby then Christie, Kerr-Barlow and Perinara have all been kicking around as backups. No weakness there.
10 - Barrett and Mo'unga nearly every nation in the NH would love to have one of those two at 10. The backups are pretty handy as well.
Centres - mix of players who are all decent but maybe missing a stand out option though Ioane could be that at 13.
Wings - they've always got good wingers to pick from, such is the depth at 15 they could put out a back three of them.
Fullback - McKenzie and Jordan would walk into most international sides, Barrett is a useful utility option who maybe should have spent time adapting to 12.

I'm not seeing a fall in quality enough for it to be an excuse for Foster's inability to develop either the attack or defensive structure. If the ABs we're trying to play a complex game plan which demanded a high skill level they were struggling to find players who could adapt to I'd feel for Foster a bit but he's still playing an attack that's not really changed from 2019 and is heavily reliant on Barrett, DMac or Jordan coming up with a moment of genius.

I'm not on the same page with this Sam.

When you reel off a world XV, NZ would get at least 5 or 6 in there and be in contention for another 5 or 6. With current form, could you argue a case for more than 3 or 4 being in contention?

Hookers - not playing well.
Props - ok but nothing world class
Locks - Whitelock and Retallick not in good form and a big drop after those 2
Backrow - Savea...all others are pretty average or not experienced

HB - Smith is a shadow and others not great
10 - Again not getting the platform and not in form
Centres - Nothing anywhere near the quality of Nonu, Smith, SBW etc...
Back 3 - Some real talents but getting asked to do too much

When you look past the first XV, it's pretty slim too....especially in the pack and centres.

NZ for me have just never got close to replacing Kaino, McCaw and Read or having viable alternative to the locks. Cane shouldn't be near an AB jersey, he's an absolute passenger at Int level. I recall having a debate with a NZ poster about Cane on here when he first broke through.....I've not seen much of him for a while now

"Not in form", "not playing well", "no platform" all playing a large part in your summary. Most if not all the players were playing well for the their clubs. If it were one or two players struggling for form you'd point the finger at the individual when it's 20 odd players then you've got to point the finger at the coaching set up. The attacking structure the brought in Vs SA was woefully basic.

How do we ultimately judge if they're playing well for their club? Super rugby is nowhere near as strong as it used to be.....it's a massive step up to Int rugby.

If it were one or two players struggling for form you'd point the finger at the individual when it's 20 odd players then you've got to point the finger at the coaching set up

The top players aren't having anywhere near the impact that used to.....whether that be age, injuries or form. You can't tell me players like Retallick and Whitelock are getting close to previous years.

The attacking structure the brought in Vs SA was woefully basic

They're getting schooled up front...the backs have very little platform to work with....hard to recall a poorer centre combination either.

https://twitter.com/TheKiffness/status/1556197550792839168?t=YyBEu6UTbbK3fD7DZRTkcQ&s=19

Bring back this haka as well.

I think Goodhue and Lienert-Brown both struggling with injuries has really hit NZ. It's affected their development as well as the team. ALB in particular I think is a fabulous player. ALB and Goodhue covering 12/13 with Ioane at 13 would be a very good place to be.

I don't think Cane is a bad player just worse than Ardie and that it's damaging them to shoehorn both in.

1.Moody
2.Taylor
3.Lualua
4.Retallick
5.Whitelock
6.Ioane
7.Savea
8.Sotuto

9.Smith
10.Barrett

11.Reece
12.Lienert-Brown
13.Ioane
14.Jordan
15.McKenzie

16.Coles
17.Bower
18.Ta'avao
19.Tuipolotu
20.Cane
21.Christie
22.Mo'unga
23.Goodhue

Something like that for instance looks very good to me. So I'm not sure about less talent. More not adapting to improvements from other nations and improvements in defence especially. Kick chases as a whole have improved enormously in the last few years. When dominant the ABs were the masters of getting into kick tennis battles then punishing sloppy kicking or chasing with lethal counter attacking.

One thing I would say is that when Brodie is unavailable I think Tuipolotu has been underutilised at times. I think big Pat is a brilliant player who is somewhat underrated having sat behind Retallick and Whitelock.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:How do we ultimately judge if they're playing well for their club? Super rugby is nowhere near as strong as it used to be.....it's a massive step up to Int rugby.

If it were one or two players struggling for form you'd point the finger at the individual when it's 20 odd players then you've got to point the finger at the coaching set up

The top players aren't having anywhere near the impact that used to.....whether that be age, injuries or form. You can't tell me players like Retallick and Whitelock are getting close to previous years.

The attacking structure the brought in Vs SA was woefully basic

They're getting schooled up front...the backs have very little platform to work with....hard to recall a poorer centre combination either.

Did you watch the game yesterday?

"The Man who Cursed the All Blacks"