Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

'It's our turn to respond': All Blacks out to avoid Lions repeat

Jordie Barrett. (Photo by David Davies/PA Images via Getty Images)

This weekend, the All Blacks will take on Ireland in the first mid-year series decider the team has played since squaring off with the British and Irish Lions in 2017.

ADVERTISEMENT

In that series, New Zealand scored a comfortable victory in the first test, triumphing 30-15 at Eden Park, before suffering a surprise defeat in Wellington just one week later, going down 24-21. In that second test, Sonny Bill Williams was red-carded for a dangerous tackle in the 24th minute, forcing the All Blacks to play down a man for almost three-quarters of the match. In the final game of the series, some controversial refereeing decisions in favour of the visitors ensured a tied game and a drawn series.

The All Blacks’ current series with Ireland has followed a similar pattern, with NZ earning a 42-19 victory in the first test at Eden Park before tasting defeat in Dunedin after prop Angus Ta’avao was handed a red card for a dangerous tackle. Now, the final match in Wellington will decide the series victor – and All Blacks fullback Jordie Barrett certainly doesn’t want to traverse the same road he did in 2017 in his debut series for New Zealand national side.

Video Spacer

Why Sam Cane is the starting No 7 for the All Blacks.

Video Spacer

Why Sam Cane is the starting No 7 for the All Blacks.

“There are some obvious comparisons but I don’t want to go into it too far because hopefully, we don’t draw this next test,” Barrett said on Thursday.

“I think in terms of what’s at stake, for sure, anyone can draw their own comparisons and it’s do or die.”

Related

25-year-old Barrett made his test debut in the opening game of the Lions series but didn’t feature in the other two matches. Now, five years on, Barrett is a key member of the All Blacks backline and will make his third start at fullback this weekend.

While Barrett and his teammates naturally wanted to go through the series undefeated having been well and truly acccounted for by Ireland in Dublin late last year, the success of Andy Farrell’s side over the weekend adds some extra spice to the final fixutre of the series.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Obviously, we didn’t want to get it to a decider but that’s the way it is,” Barrett said. “It’s where you want to be, particularly as an All Black – a series decider, at home, against a quality opposition. The game can’t come quick enough for me, personally.”

While New Zealand were able to blow their opposition away at Eden Park with a slight change of tactics from their previous encounters, shifting pods of forwards wider on attack, Ireland were able to effectively counter the change-up in the second test – and the All Blacks had no response. Now, Barrett and his teammates will be hoping to turn the tables on the visitors.

“Ireland are a quality side and we spoke a week ago and the boys knew there was going to be a response from them so in some ways it’s our turn to respond now,” said Barrett, “and we feel a lot of it is in our control in the way we can influence this match so our preparation’s been great.

“But that’s not everything, we’ve still got to put a performance on the park and get the job done because it’s not going to be easy.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Barrett says that while it might have initially been difficult to turn around following last weekend’s loss and kick back into gear, the All Blacks are now well-placed heading into Saturday’s decider.

“Right now [the mood] is good. We’re deep into a week of great preparation. There’s no hiding there was some obvious disappointment Saturday night, Sunday morning, and even leaking into Monday.

“It’s a fresh week, an exciting opportunity, a series decider against a quality side. There’s some positive faces and positive moods in camp at the moment so we’re rearing to go.”

Saturday’s clash is due to kick off at 7:05pm NZT at Sky Stadium in Wellington.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

2 Comments
J
Jmann 887 days ago

Let's not forget that the 3rd Lions test was lost on the back of an egregious and well-documented referee error.

Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 37 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

47 Go to comments
f
fl 52 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

47 Go to comments
J
JW 55 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Generally disagree with what? The possibility that they would get whitewashed, or the idea they shouldn't gain access until they're good enough?


I think the first is a fairly irrelevant view, decide on the second and then worry about the first. Personally I'd have had them in a third lvl comp with all the bottom dwellers of the leagues. I liked the idea of those league clubs resting their best players, and so being able to lift their standards in the league, though, so not against the idea that T2 sides go straight into Challenge Cup, but that will be a higher level with smaller comps and I think a bit too much for them (not having followed any of their games/performances mind you).

Because I don't think that having the possibility of a team finishing outside the quarter finals to qualify automatically will be a good idea. I'd rather have a team finishing 5th in their domestic league.

fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen.


The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime.

47 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

47 Go to comments
f
fl 2 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Yes I was the one who suggested to use a UEFA style point. And I guessed, that based on the last 5 years we should start with 6 top14, 6 URC and 4 Prem."

Yes I am aware that you suggested it, but you then went on to say that we should initially start with a balance that clearly wasn't derived from that system. I'm not a mind reader, so how was I to work out that you'd arrived at that balance by dint of completely having failed to remember the history of the competition.


"Again, I was the one suggesting that, but you didn't like the outcome of that."

I have no issues with the outcome of that, I had an issue with a completely random allocation of teams that you plucked out of thin air.

Interestingly its you who now seem to be renouncing the UEFA style points system, because you don't like the outcome of reducing URC representation.


"4 teams for Top14, URC and Prem, 3 teams for other leagues and the last winner, what do you think?"

What about 4 each + 4 to the best performing teams in last years competition not to have otherwise qualified? Or what about a UEFA style system where places are allocated to leagues on the basis of their performance in previous years' competitions?

There's no point including Black Lion if they're just going to get whitewashed every year, which I think would be a possibility. At most I'd support 1 team from the Rugby Europe Super Cup, or the Russian Championship being included. Maybe the best placed non-Israeli team and the Russian winners could play off every year for the spot? But honestly I think its best if they stay limited to the Challenge Cup for now.

47 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Former All Blacks coach offers progress report on Joseph Manu's preseason Former All Blacks coach confident in Joseph Manu's progress
Search