New All Blacks locks squeezing captain Barrett out of contention

We haven’t heard the last of the Scott Barrett discussion. Not by a long chalk.

Barrett, the All Blacks captain, has been injured. And while his calf’s been recuperating, Fabian Holland and Patrick Tuipulotu have been outstanding.

That’s not hyperbole, that’s not creating drama where none exists. That’s two blokes in the second row who were among the top handful of All Blacks in both the second and third tests of the just-completed series against France.

Carlos Spencer on touring South Africa with Black Ferns XV

Carlos Spencer on touring South Africa with Black Ferns XV

Life’s good when the All Blacks captain is a first-choice option. My word, Richie McCaw spoiled us in that regard.

Week in week out, year in year out, McCaw was consistently excellent. Durable, industrious and undoubtedly the first name on the team sheet.

I don’t seek to undermine Barrett or to cast doubt about his status in the team. I just look at how integral Holland has quickly become to the All Blacks and how compelling Tuipulotu’s performances have been and wonder where the skipper deserves to sit in the pecking order.

Then there’s onfield leadership. If Barrett’s absence has created a vacuum, I haven’t seen it.

In fact, I’d suggest the stature of stand-in captain Ardie Savea has only grown in the last couple of weeks.

I think this is an opportunity to maybe reconsider what captaincy and leadership actually is.

The position of All Blacks captain has long been regarded as an exalted one. In my lifetime, men such as Wayne Shelford, Sean Fitzpatrick and McCaw have been legendary leaders.

Guys whose playing ability and competitiveness set a standard for their teammates to aspire to. Players gained confidence from knowing these men would be leading them out.

Things evolve, particularly from when Shelford and Fitzpatrick were around. There’s any number of coaches and committees within the All Blacks that have spread the burden of responsibility.

The captain still does the coin toss and talks to the referee, but there are leaders everywhere across the group.

I guess what I’m driving at is can Barrett be the senior leader of this squad without playing 80 minutes every week? Or does that diminish what it means to be the All Blacks captain?

Can he be subbed after 50 minutes? Can he come off the bench? Or, because of his status, does Barrett play ahead of teammates who are potentially better than him?

And, to be honest, does it make any difference either way?

That’s why I wonder about stripping away some of the mythology and reverence that surrounds the captaincy.

The last thing the team needs or wants is a protracted debate about whether Barrett is worth his place in the team. But if players such as Holland and Tuipulotu continue to play so well – or if Tupou Vaa’i is considered at lock again – people will wonder aloud about whether they’re better options than the skipper.

Ultimately, the desire of everyone is to see the team play well and to win. If no player is bigger than the jersey, then it shouldn’t matter who the specific personnel are.

Had Holland been out of his depth against France or Tuipulotu’s ageing body hadn’t been up to the rigours of test football, then this wouldn’t have been up for discussion.

And, who knows, injuries might make this a moot point sooner rather than later.

It’s just that, to my eye, Holland and Tuipulotu demand selection in the All Blacks’ best XV at the moment. The only problem is we’re wedded to the idea that the captain’s place is sacrosanct.

I don’t imagine there’s any debate in coach Scott Robertson’s mind. I assume he’ll pick Barrett as soon as he’s fit and declare that his position is assured.

It’s just that the rest of us can’t unsee what we’ve seen Holland and Tuipulotu do in Barrett’s absence.