On Kirifi in particular, there are already numerous options at openside in the current squad. I’d prefer they pick a some of the emerging talent at blindside and/or number eight.
@frugby said in All Blacks 2026:
In Kirifi's favour, is on last night's 'numbers' the midweek side needs an openside. Now obviously that team which played Ireland does not guarantee the side which plays South Africa, but I think they see Jacobson and Lakai as their top two opensides, and I'd say both a highly likely to play the test matches.
Against Kirifi, is they may see a bigger future for someone like Lucas Casey, who can offer an option at seven or at eight.
Given Parker hasn't had a look in, I'd be quite surprised if they brought a Barnes, STT, etc. type.
Assuming the loose forwards included in the top 23 are:
Vaa'i, Jacobson, Savea
Segner/Lakai
Then I imagine one of Segner or Lakai will partner up with Parker and Sititi in the midweek 23 and will play on the openside flank, with the other covering from the bench.
Barnes (or another blindside flanker) is, for me, more of a long-term option than Kirifi.
But ultimately there'll be enough coverage within the squad that whether they go for an openside or blindside flank, it won't much of a difference regardless of whether there's an injury or not.
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@canefan said in All Blacks 2026:
@antipodean said in All Blacks 2026:
@canefan said in All Blacks 2026:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks 2026:
I haven't seen much of Pledger at all yet, but one thing I'll say is Fozzie made the mistake of not giving Roigard nearly enough minutes in the lead up to the 23 WC despite his obvious talent, and that was costly as Roigard was exactly the kind of HB we could have used in the final after going a man down. Like others I want to see a lot more bravery from the coaches (we already are TBH), where if they see someone that is obviously a special player they get them in and give them meaningful minutes to develop them. I dont want situation like Love where he is 25 years old before he even gets a meaningful shot despite being obviously better than the incumbents.
It's been said many times, if Cam plays the final we probably win RWC23
Said by whom?
I wasn't the only one to say it at the time. But I'm far too lazy to go back and get you a list from a three year old thread
I've started it for you.
I’ve never said we would have won but he should have been the reserve halfback over Christie.
@Canes4life said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@canefan said in All Blacks 2026:
@antipodean said in All Blacks 2026:
@canefan said in All Blacks 2026:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks 2026:
I haven't seen much of Pledger at all yet, but one thing I'll say is Fozzie made the mistake of not giving Roigard nearly enough minutes in the lead up to the 23 WC despite his obvious talent, and that was costly as Roigard was exactly the kind of HB we could have used in the final after going a man down. Like others I want to see a lot more bravery from the coaches (we already are TBH), where if they see someone that is obviously a special player they get them in and give them meaningful minutes to develop them. I dont want situation like Love where he is 25 years old before he even gets a meaningful shot despite being obviously better than the incumbents.
It's been said many times, if Cam plays the final we probably win RWC23
Said by whom?
I wasn't the only one to say it at the time. But I'm far too lazy to go back and get you a list from a three year old thread
I've started it for you.
I’ve never said we would have won but he should have been the reserve halfback over Christie.
I was just making a Canes joke - I too, obviously, would have rather Roigard was the bench halfback than the ginga.
To me it is clear this All Blacks team wants to move the ball quickly, and move it wide. This is not actually dissimilar to how Robertson started out, but I think the use of the forward pack, and a better running 10 makes the strategy look 10 times better.
It also feels like we are using our midfield as crash ball runners far less, which begs the question, assuming he was going to be picked, where would Leicester Fainga'anuku have played in this ABs side?
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
If Rennie wants to pick Mo'unga and Frizell, I think NZR are missing a trick by not letting him. OK, we don't pick from overseas, but do we need to be puritanical about it?
Yes. They knew the cut off dates for returning and selection and decided not to return by those dates.
Yeah - but, I couldn't care less about these arbitrary dates and rules. They're signed to play in NZ and that should be enough - we risk shooting our feet off by being pedantic.
Of course you don't, you want your boy Friz in the team.
I couldn't actually give a fuck if Frizz is in the team or not - aside from the fabulous wind-up potential here!
If he's playing how he did when he left, he'll be quite useful for Ta$man. But, I would like us to have the best possible chance of winning in South Africa, so I think Dave should be able to pick who he wants - within reason.
If he's going to put them on a plane with the first injury (see Big Leicester last year) it's a bit farcical.
It's slippery slope, if you let the players start dictating their availability then what's the point having regulations at all?
I think it is a pointless regulation. "You must have played Super or NPC"... why not just be signed to play Super or NPC?
I'm pretty sure that used to be the way it worked.
Meanwhile, the Jaapies will roll out all their Japanese players with little compunction about their domestic players who are busting their arses...
If they give us a beating it will do a lot more to keep rugby thriving in SA than us carting along a couple of guys to play midweek will do for us.
But, my original point stands for me, the regulations are the regulations and the players know them, if you want to advocate for SA rugby rules then that's a whole other argument (and one that ends with a dead domestic game and the leaguie's feeling very happy).
I'm not advocating for SA rules. But, Captain Kirk could change that elegibility rule as I suggest tomorrow - and I'm advocating for that.
Someone should ask him how it is that Rennie and Blair can happily finish out their Japanese coaching season and have seats at the front of the plane to SA, but players can't?
What about all the poor coaches in NZ busting their arses....?
Like I said, that's the start of the slippery slope.
Also, trying to make the coaches and players analogous is pretty silly.
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
If Rennie wants to pick Mo'unga and Frizell, I think NZR are missing a trick by not letting him. OK, we don't pick from overseas, but do we need to be puritanical about it?
Yes. They knew the cut off dates for returning and selection and decided not to return by those dates.
Yeah - but, I couldn't care less about these arbitrary dates and rules. They're signed to play in NZ and that should be enough - we risk shooting our feet off by being pedantic.
Of course you don't, you want your boy Friz in the team.
I couldn't actually give a fuck if Frizz is in the team or not - aside from the fabulous wind-up potential here!
If he's playing how he did when he left, he'll be quite useful for Ta$man. But, I would like us to have the best possible chance of winning in South Africa, so I think Dave should be able to pick who he wants - within reason.
If he's going to put them on a plane with the first injury (see Big Leicester last year) it's a bit farcical.
It's slippery slope, if you let the players start dictating their availability then what's the point having regulations at all?
I think it is a pointless regulation. "You must have played Super or NPC"... why not just be signed to play Super or NPC?
I'm pretty sure that used to be the way it worked.
Meanwhile, the Jaapies will roll out all their Japanese players with little compunction about their domestic players who are busting their arses...
If they give us a beating it will do a lot more to keep rugby thriving in SA than us carting along a couple of guys to play midweek will do for us.
But, my original point stands for me, the regulations are the regulations and the players know them, if you want to advocate for SA rugby rules then that's a whole other argument (and one that ends with a dead domestic game and the leaguie's feeling very happy).
I'm not advocating for SA rules. But, Captain Kirk could change that elegibility rule as I suggest tomorrow - and I'm advocating for that.
Someone whould ask him how it is that Rennie and Blair can happily finish out their Japanese coaching season and have seats at the front of the plane to SA, but players can't?
What about all the poor coaches in NZ busting their arses....?
We'd be picking from a very small group if we could only select from NZ. It's an acknowledgement of the state of the world. South Africa select from aboard because their economy is terrible. France have a strong economy and a thriving competition so they don't.
I know - and Rennie would probably have told them to get fucked if they'd said he had to spend a season coaching NPC. But, the rule is not consistent.
Because it's a different scenario completely? You can't coach both an international team and a club side at the same time. There are also a huge number of player spots in NZ while there are only a small number of coach spots. It's just not a comparable scenario so why would the rules be the same?
Certainly not a completely different scenario.
We know for a start that NZR in its wisdom used to have a rule that you couldn't coach the ABs unless you were coaching in NZ. I'm sure Sir Ted was initially appointed under this rule and pretty sure it was still in force in 2007. Subsequently, Hansen, Foster and Robertson were all NZ based coaches when appointed, so Rennie is presumably the first ever overseas-based head coach coach we've appointed. Luckily, someone didn't see that rule as handed down from God and inscribed on an indelible stone tablet - they just thought, why shoot ourselves in the foot!
I'd say every professional team has one Head Coach and various assistants. Broadly, each also has a starting first five and a couple of back-ups.
For the ABs, most of the NPC coaches and first fives will never be within a bulls roar of the ABs. We have a very small pool of contenders - we've let Rennie and Blair through the net, but we're sitting Mo'unga in the naughty chair. If he's at all close to as good as he was when he left, IMO this is a bit foolhardy.
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
If Rennie wants to pick Mo'unga and Frizell, I think NZR are missing a trick by not letting him. OK, we don't pick from overseas, but do we need to be puritanical about it?
Yes. They knew the cut off dates for returning and selection and decided not to return by those dates.
Yeah - but, I couldn't care less about these arbitrary dates and rules. They're signed to play in NZ and that should be enough - we risk shooting our feet off by being pedantic.
Of course you don't, you want your boy Friz in the team.
I couldn't actually give a fuck if Frizz is in the team or not - aside from the fabulous wind-up potential here!
If he's playing how he did when he left, he'll be quite useful for Ta$man. But, I would like us to have the best possible chance of winning in South Africa, so I think Dave should be able to pick who he wants - within reason.
If he's going to put them on a plane with the first injury (see Big Leicester last year) it's a bit farcical.
It's slippery slope, if you let the players start dictating their availability then what's the point having regulations at all?
I think it is a pointless regulation. "You must have played Super or NPC"... why not just be signed to play Super or NPC?
I'm pretty sure that used to be the way it worked.
Meanwhile, the Jaapies will roll out all their Japanese players with little compunction about their domestic players who are busting their arses...
If they give us a beating it will do a lot more to keep rugby thriving in SA than us carting along a couple of guys to play midweek will do for us.
But, my original point stands for me, the regulations are the regulations and the players know them, if you want to advocate for SA rugby rules then that's a whole other argument (and one that ends with a dead domestic game and the leaguie's feeling very happy).
I'm not advocating for SA rules. But, Captain Kirk could change that elegibility rule as I suggest tomorrow - and I'm advocating for that.
Someone should ask him how it is that Rennie and Blair can happily finish out their Japanese coaching season and have seats at the front of the plane to SA, but players can't?
What about all the poor coaches in NZ busting their arses....?
Also, trying to make the coaches and players analogous is pretty silly.
As I've pointed out above, NZR used to have precisely the rule that you couldn't coach the ABs if you weren't in NZ.
And when Sir Ted went to Wales they put him in a similar, but much worse, naughty chair as Mo 'unga.
We just need to use our heads and be a bit pragmatic.
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
but we're sitting Mo'unga in the naughty chair.
He's sitting on solid gold chair counting his NZ pesos converted from yen after deciding, of his own volition, to come back at a time that ruled him out of contention for this tour, despite his champion Razor trying to get him back earlier. Blame NZR all you want, Mo could have been here this whole time, it was his choice not to be.
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
but we're sitting Mo'unga in the naughty chair.
He's sitting on solid gold chair counting his NZ pesos converted from yen after deciding, of his own volition, to come back at a time that ruled him out of contention for this tour, despite his champion Razor trying to get him back earlier. Blame NZR all you want, Mo could have been here this whole time, it was his choice not to be.
Yes, he could've. And I reckon he's at least as responsible for Razor getting sacked as Kirk. 
He did the same as Rennie - honorably saw out his Japanese contract.
But, he's here now. If he's good enough we should take off our traffic cop hat and pick him.
This has nothing to do with mercenary little Richie. This is everything about me wanting to win against those bastard Boks!
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
but we're sitting Mo'unga in the naughty chair.
He's sitting on solid gold chair counting his NZ pesos converted from yen after deciding, of his own volition, to come back at a time that ruled him out of contention for this tour, despite his champion Razor trying to get him back earlier. Blame NZR all you want, Mo could have been here this whole time, it was his choice not to be.
Yes, he could've. And I reckon he's at least as responsible for Razor getting sacked as Kirk.
He did the same as Rennie - honorably saw out his Japanese contract.
But, he's here now. If he's good enough we should take off our traffic cop hat and pick him.
This has nothing to do with mercenary little Richie. This is everything about me wanting to win against those bastard Boks!
I'm not calling your boy a mercenary, just think he made his choice not to come back early (IIRC he re-signed rather than would have needed to break his contract? Or am I misremembering that).
Plus, I don't think we need him to win (and he's not DC). So I'm happy for him to come back in under the rules (and the chance of an injury is pretty high) rather than make an exception for one player. Also, if NZR want to change rules to "just a contract" in the future then I'm not against that - but you need to talk to Kirk about that.
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
If Rennie wants to pick Mo'unga and Frizell, I think NZR are missing a trick by not letting him. OK, we don't pick from overseas, but do we need to be puritanical about it?
Yes. They knew the cut off dates for returning and selection and decided not to return by those dates.
Yeah - but, I couldn't care less about these arbitrary dates and rules. They're signed to play in NZ and that should be enough - we risk shooting our feet off by being pedantic.
Of course you don't, you want your boy Friz in the team.
I couldn't actually give a fuck if Frizz is in the team or not - aside from the fabulous wind-up potential here!
If he's playing how he did when he left, he'll be quite useful for Ta$man. But, I would like us to have the best possible chance of winning in South Africa, so I think Dave should be able to pick who he wants - within reason.
If he's going to put them on a plane with the first injury (see Big Leicester last year) it's a bit farcical.
It's slippery slope, if you let the players start dictating their availability then what's the point having regulations at all?
I think it is a pointless regulation. "You must have played Super or NPC"... why not just be signed to play Super or NPC?
I'm pretty sure that used to be the way it worked.
Meanwhile, the Jaapies will roll out all their Japanese players with little compunction about their domestic players who are busting their arses...
If they give us a beating it will do a lot more to keep rugby thriving in SA than us carting along a couple of guys to play midweek will do for us.
But, my original point stands for me, the regulations are the regulations and the players know them, if you want to advocate for SA rugby rules then that's a whole other argument (and one that ends with a dead domestic game and the leaguie's feeling very happy).
I'm not advocating for SA rules. But, Captain Kirk could change that elegibility rule as I suggest tomorrow - and I'm advocating for that.
Someone whould ask him how it is that Rennie and Blair can happily finish out their Japanese coaching season and have seats at the front of the plane to SA, but players can't?
What about all the poor coaches in NZ busting their arses....?
We'd be picking from a very small group if we could only select from NZ. It's an acknowledgement of the state of the world. South Africa select from aboard because their economy is terrible. France have a strong economy and a thriving competition so they don't.
I know - and Rennie would probably have told them to get fucked if they'd said he had to spend a season coaching NPC. But, the rule is not consistent.
The rule is consistently applied to the specified groups. Thankfully the adults running rugby in NZ aren't so given to logical fallacies that hiring a bus driver, physiotherapist, cook etc. also need to have provided those services in NZ at NPC/SR level before they can be engaged for the All Blacks.
@Nepia Almost certain he signed for three years from the outset.
Frizz, I think, renewed for a third year - he's not as important as Richie, who was clearly our best first five when he left.
TBH, I've seen virtually nothing of RM since he left - but, Rennie has. If he wants him, I think he should have him.
I think Kirk should've changed that rule to "just a contract" the day he was appointed.
I guess Rennie won't want to piss his board off by picking someone who is patently injured already, but I'd applaud him if he did!
@antipodean said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
If Rennie wants to pick Mo'unga and Frizell, I think NZR are missing a trick by not letting him. OK, we don't pick from overseas, but do we need to be puritanical about it?
Yes. They knew the cut off dates for returning and selection and decided not to return by those dates.
Yeah - but, I couldn't care less about these arbitrary dates and rules. They're signed to play in NZ and that should be enough - we risk shooting our feet off by being pedantic.
Of course you don't, you want your boy Friz in the team.
I couldn't actually give a fuck if Frizz is in the team or not - aside from the fabulous wind-up potential here!
If he's playing how he did when he left, he'll be quite useful for Ta$man. But, I would like us to have the best possible chance of winning in South Africa, so I think Dave should be able to pick who he wants - within reason.
If he's going to put them on a plane with the first injury (see Big Leicester last year) it's a bit farcical.
It's slippery slope, if you let the players start dictating their availability then what's the point having regulations at all?
I think it is a pointless regulation. "You must have played Super or NPC"... why not just be signed to play Super or NPC?
I'm pretty sure that used to be the way it worked.
Meanwhile, the Jaapies will roll out all their Japanese players with little compunction about their domestic players who are busting their arses...
If they give us a beating it will do a lot more to keep rugby thriving in SA than us carting along a couple of guys to play midweek will do for us.
But, my original point stands for me, the regulations are the regulations and the players know them, if you want to advocate for SA rugby rules then that's a whole other argument (and one that ends with a dead domestic game and the leaguie's feeling very happy).
I'm not advocating for SA rules. But, Captain Kirk could change that elegibility rule as I suggest tomorrow - and I'm advocating for that.
Someone whould ask him how it is that Rennie and Blair can happily finish out their Japanese coaching season and have seats at the front of the plane to SA, but players can't?
What about all the poor coaches in NZ busting their arses....?
We'd be picking from a very small group if we could only select from NZ. It's an acknowledgement of the state of the world. South Africa select from aboard because their economy is terrible. France have a strong economy and a thriving competition so they don't.
I know - and Rennie would probably have told them to get fucked if they'd said he had to spend a season coaching NPC. But, the rule is not consistent.
The rule is consistently applied to the specified groups. Thankfully the adults running rugby in NZ aren't so given to logical fallacies that hiring a bus driver, physiotherapist, cook etc. also need to have provided those services in NZ at NPC/SR level before they can be engaged for the All Blacks.
Yeah - I'm terrified our bus driver is going to fuck off with some critical IP on the benefits of double de-clutching.
As pointed out, the supposed adults running NZR had precisely the same restriction on coaches needing to be coaching in NZ to coach the ABs. Someone woke up and changed it..
@frugby said in All Blacks 2026:
To me it is clear this All Blacks team wants to move the ball quickly, and move it wide. This is not actually dissimilar to how Robertson started out, but I think the use of the forward pack, and a better running 10 makes the strategy look 10 times better.
It also feels like we are using our midfield as crash ball runners far less, which begs the question, assuming he was going to be picked, where would Leicester Fainga'anuku have played in this ABs side?
Left right out for me.
I wouldn't select him on any position over any of the current squad.
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@antipodean said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
If Rennie wants to pick Mo'unga and Frizell, I think NZR are missing a trick by not letting him. OK, we don't pick from overseas, but do we need to be puritanical about it?
Yes. They knew the cut off dates for returning and selection and decided not to return by those dates.
Yeah - but, I couldn't care less about these arbitrary dates and rules. They're signed to play in NZ and that should be enough - we risk shooting our feet off by being pedantic.
Of course you don't, you want your boy Friz in the team.
I couldn't actually give a fuck if Frizz is in the team or not - aside from the fabulous wind-up potential here!
If he's playing how he did when he left, he'll be quite useful for Ta$man. But, I would like us to have the best possible chance of winning in South Africa, so I think Dave should be able to pick who he wants - within reason.
If he's going to put them on a plane with the first injury (see Big Leicester last year) it's a bit farcical.
It's slippery slope, if you let the players start dictating their availability then what's the point having regulations at all?
I think it is a pointless regulation. "You must have played Super or NPC"... why not just be signed to play Super or NPC?
I'm pretty sure that used to be the way it worked.
Meanwhile, the Jaapies will roll out all their Japanese players with little compunction about their domestic players who are busting their arses...
If they give us a beating it will do a lot more to keep rugby thriving in SA than us carting along a couple of guys to play midweek will do for us.
But, my original point stands for me, the regulations are the regulations and the players know them, if you want to advocate for SA rugby rules then that's a whole other argument (and one that ends with a dead domestic game and the leaguie's feeling very happy).
I'm not advocating for SA rules. But, Captain Kirk could change that elegibility rule as I suggest tomorrow - and I'm advocating for that.
Someone whould ask him how it is that Rennie and Blair can happily finish out their Japanese coaching season and have seats at the front of the plane to SA, but players can't?
What about all the poor coaches in NZ busting their arses....?
We'd be picking from a very small group if we could only select from NZ. It's an acknowledgement of the state of the world. South Africa select from aboard because their economy is terrible. France have a strong economy and a thriving competition so they don't.
I know - and Rennie would probably have told them to get fucked if they'd said he had to spend a season coaching NPC. But, the rule is not consistent.
The rule is consistently applied to the specified groups. Thankfully the adults running rugby in NZ aren't so given to logical fallacies that hiring a bus driver, physiotherapist, cook etc. also need to have provided those services in NZ at NPC/SR level before they can be engaged for the All Blacks.
Yeah - I'm terrified our bus driver is going to fuck off with some critical IP on the benefits of double de-clutching.
Predictably you've missed the point.
As pointed out, the supposed adults running NZR had precisely the same restriction on coaches needing to be coaching in NZ to coach the ABs. Someone woke up and changed it..
You're assuming the player rule and the coaching situation exist for the same purpose. They don't.
The overseas player rule is an economic policy designed to keep elite players contracted to New Zealand franchises and unions for as much of the year as possible. Every exception weakens that incentive because future players will expect similar treatment.
Coaches don't create that market dynamic. There isn't an exodus of hundreds of New Zealand coaches every year threatening the viability of Super Rugby or NPC. The head coach is a single appointment made once every four years. Treating that as an exception has essentially zero impact on the domestic coaching pathway.
So the fact NZR became more flexible about an informal policy on coaching appointments tells us almost nothing about whether player eligibility should be relaxed. They're solving different problems. When NZR opened coaching recruitment, it did not suddenly allow anyone from anywhere to coach the All Blacks. The successful candidate was still a New Zealander with extensive experience in the NZ high-performance system, with a consistent record of success.
What NZR didn't do was lower its standards when it changed its coaching policy. Likewise, it shouldn't bend a clearly written eligibility rule for a player who knowingly made himself ineligible. Especially one that went missing in a World Cup final.
@Nepia said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
but we're sitting Mo'unga in the naughty chair.
He's sitting on solid gold chair counting his NZ pesos converted from yen after deciding, of his own volition, to come back at a time that ruled him out of contention for this tour, despite his champion Razor trying to get him back earlier. Blame NZR all you want, Mo could have been here this whole time, it was his choice not to be.
Or, we could listen to Chris B which would result in Mo playing 10 and Love missing out in yet more development.
If Mo is still good enough he'll be here for the WC.
Until then we need to play a 10 for the first time in too many years who isn't Mo, BB or Dmac. I think it might have been 2017!!!!
@antipodean Honestly, do you think I don't understand the principle of all that? Though some of what you say about coaches is debatable.
The question is - what is the point of making Mo'unga wait until the EOYT?
If he's good enough, he'll supplant our other first fives and play the big games at RWC. In which case, all we're doing is reducing our chances of winning this coming tour and RWC2027.
Do you actually think that making him play NPC (at least until someone gets injured) is going to dissuade our other players from signing overseas? There's a heap of people have fucked off regardless of seeing how Richie has been treated.
And we're talking about a guy who has been our first five at the past two RWCs and took us to a final.
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@antipodean Honestly, do you think I don't understand the principle of all that?
Yes.
@antipodean said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@antipodean Honestly, do you think I don't understand the principle of all that?
Yes.
You're wrong again - but, no worries!
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@antipodean said in All Blacks 2026:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
@antipodean Honestly, do you think I don't understand the principle of all that?
Yes.
You're wrong again - but, no worries!
I'm not wrong - you've consistently failed to appreciate that it's a retention mechanism. You approach it as a selection handicap, but that's not what it is. A retention mechanism that disappears whenever the player may good enough is not a retention mechanism.
The Jordie - Tupaea centre pairing has the potential to be the worlds best. Need to keep playing them together as much as possible so Tupaea can get comfortable defending outside Jordie. I think that is one of the most exciting thing out of these three matches, though there's a lot to get excited about again.
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks 2026:
I think it is a pointless regulation. "You must have played Super or NPC"... why not just be signed to play Super or NPC?
I'm pretty sure that used to be the way it worked.
Meanwhile, the Jaapies will roll out all their Japanese players with little compunction about their domestic players who are busting their arses...
If they give us a beating it will do a lot more to keep rugby thriving in SA than us carting along a couple of guys to play midweek will do for us.
think you summed the situation up quite well there
and the saffers are winning world championships and the game is thriving there
i dont really give a fuck about SR and the NPC
both competitions have been well and truly superseded, in just about every way you can think of, and probably nothing NZR can do about that
still got hope that the ABs are not guna get completely superseded tho; if they play it smart
and that is the main thing
Wouldn't mind seeing this team get a run before year end
- Ethan De Groot
- Samisoni Taukei'aho
- Fletcher Newell
- Sam Darry (cc)
- Fabien Holland
- Tupou Vaai
- Luke Jacobson
- Peter Lakai
- Cam Riogard
- Reuben Love
- Josh Moorby
- Jordie Barrett
- Quinn Tupeau
- Will Jordan (cc)
- Damien Mackenzie
Reserves
16. Xavier Numia
17. Asafo Aumua
18. Pasilio Tosi
19. Patrick Tuipoluto
20. Ardie Savea (cc)
21. Kyle Preston
22. Leicester Fainga'anuku
23. Caleb Clarke
Would like to see Callum Harkin selected for SA. He is the next best potential 10 we have currently in NZ and it would be criminal not to develop him.
Beauden Barret is finished. Damien Mackenzie we can all see now is nothing more than cover in the 10 position and Richie Mounga we don't know how committed he is given his past record of choosing the money over the All Blacks.
the south african economy is twice the NZ
and i'd say it isn't terrible for everyone
probably 5 mil are doin ok; and they are the ones that think rugby is just great
if you look at it from that POV, it's probably very similar to NZ
with that one difference as far as NT rugby is concerned, a difference which seems to be gaining more importance
and when japies are winning world championships, i'd say all the rest of the saffers think rugby is pretty good too
I dont think France have their own special residency requirements for their NT
the majority of the French soccer NT (who were the favorites for the WC) ply their trades outside of France
@mohikamo said in All Blacks 2026:
and the saffers are winning world championships and the game is thriving there
For now.
Short term picking from overseas is great. But it takes time to filter through to dilute the comps and undermine the structure. NZR have done this well with Super - expanding when the talent wsan't there, taking players out to save them for the ABs. The comp has deteriorated. If you pick overseas players you diminish it further, just when it may be turning a corner.
NZR's strength is alignment through the NPC Super and ABs. Players getting flogged by clubs overseas means you just don't know what condition they get back in - and combine the travel factor as well. We are not in the same time zone as Europe (the SA are) - so it's damn hard to bring people back, get them into the environment and playing within a week. Remember the Paul brothers in league? They used to do that - come over for a one off test. Not easy.
Just a random thought, with our depth in locks , I can see why you might not select patty to start when you are selecting 2 locks and our smaller loosies . The taller options probably make more sense .
But if you are going to select Tupou at 6 , I think you get away with his lack of height more and then you get the added bonus of his physicality and strong Carries . The qualities you might get from a traditional 6, so there is some balance to the pack.
His selection makes more sense to me now .
I think if Tuipulotu keeps playing like he did on Saturday then you probably want him in the 23. I also think Darry played exceptionally well in his two matches. I think Lord and Holland are fighting it out for the other starting berth (assuming that Vaa'i is at 6 and that a lock is selected on the bench). Given Holland is coming back from injury, Lord has the inside running.