However, as you mentioned Nonu as being a non distributer, I challenged this.

To state that I’m ‘bashing down everyone’s throat how good NZ are’, is surely yr being defensive & to miss my point abt a what constitutes being a ‘distributer’ is.

Having distribution skills as being a distributer is not the same thing.

If you really feel the need to take articles out of context for the sake of bashing down everyones throat how good NZ are then feel free; but it is completely missing the intended point of the article.

And if Nonu’s ‘added passing skills’ to his game, then surely this is a ‘distribution’ skill!?

Why do you get so hung up on positional restrictions for a player to be a ‘distributer’?

You seem to infer that only a fly1/2 can be thus described, when for instance, Ford (presumably a ‘distributer’ in yr book), kicked aimlessly for Bath v Saracens & v France down the oppo f/backs throats when he ought to have retained possession & actually ‘distributed’ the ball? It’s a mind thing too & NOT just a posi thing.

The NZ tight 5 are @ times ‘distributers’; i.e., when they pass the ball… like backs.

IMO Nonu is a ‘footballer’, with the best set of all round skills @ centre in world rugby & as demoed during this WC. Perhaps this is why NZ persevered with him.

To state that he’s mainly just a ball carrier is to surely misunderstand his skill set.

It’s not a ‘semantics’ thing, distribution is a actual skill preformed wherever a player finds himself on the field of play.

Perhaps if Lancaster had understood this point better, England may not have gone out of their own WC so early & found themselves 8th in the rankings.

How on earth Barritt could have played 10 if beyond me. He can pass a ball, but he can’t distribute at all, his decision making is so poor. He’d be more suited to played at 6 than 10.

The Aussies have the widest choice with Cooper and Foley as out and out 10’s, but then have Giteau, Beale and Toomua who can all play at 10, but usually play somewhere else in the back line.

If you think of having Farrell and Ford as you’re 10’s, but then have Slade, Cips and Goode playing somewhere across the back line (as we’ve seen they can), this gives you a bigger option for the extra playmaker.

Even Barritt can pass a ball, but it doesn’t make him a distributor. (Scary thought that Barritt used to play 10 for the Sharks!!)

I believe the quote was something along the lines of Brown is a very good Six Nations player, safe under the ball in the rain, runs the ball back well, hard yards, big boot, but Goode is the style of player (if not the calibre of player) we need to be playing a world-beating game.

With Manu, JJ and Goode as your 12/13/15, you have that second playmaker and someone to take a bit off your 10 and call some of the shots. Even if Goode doesn’t quite have the attributes you need, it is better playing the gameplan you want, developing a player in that mould and then possibly looking at the clubs for the next best option.

On that note, let’s ignore Brown, Watson et al. Who are our options as playmaking 15s? There’s Goode and that fella playing at 10 for Sale. Any others?

I guess this is where we get to the club vs country debate. Hansen wanted Beaudon Barrett at 15 for his club and got his way. If Eddie Jones comes in and wants Cipriani at 15, will Sale co-operate?

In trying to define how you would consider a centre a “real” distributer, for me would be his ability to pretty seamlessly play at 10. I’m sure it would be defined in a million different ways though.

That being said, I think the point you are trying to make is fairly irrelevant. This article doesn’t say you could pick one player who can pass and one player who can pass, which appears to be how you have taken it. What is does say is that there are different styles of centres, and simply raises the question as to how they should be used.

Of course someone who can do both is the best option but in the absence of that option, a combo of power and guile is best

Btw I don’t think anyone would describe kicking as one of Nonu’s talents

A prime distributer could be classed as the 1/2back, as he’s the 1st receiver who decides whether to distribute.

The 1st 5 or fly1/2 is often perceived as a distributer, but would you class Farrell as such & would you play say, Ford, @ centre?

Nono isn’t a fly1/2, but to say because he’s not a fly1/2, doesn’t mean that he can’t distribute just as effectively as 1.

And it’s not just abt shovelling the ball on either. It’s also about timing, accuracy & deciding whom to distribute to. You may recall THAT Nonu cut out pass to his wing man to score in the r.h. corner during the WC? Any fly1/2 might have done the same of course,… or might not have done.

Roles are much more multi tasking these days too & to pigeon hole 1 as such is perhaps missing a trick here.

You MUST get away from this ‘either or’ thinking in England.

Players need to be altogether more multi skilled & drilled & esp, capable of making on the spot decisions for themselves.

Then you’ll see an all round improvement in play.

This is where Andrew should earn his £.25m(?) salary & neg a system which incentivises clubs to play ball (no pun). Currently the clubs espouse a hands off policy, yet without radical surgery, what’s going to fundamentally change in England’s Int’al fortunes? Some sort of merger, or reverse take over may be req’ed, but can anyone see this happening with the moribund Andrew & ‘Tennis’ Ritchie @ the helm?

There’s also the (2 big a) gap between club & country level that somehow needs addressing.

G’luck Eddie!

I think to be classed as a distributer, it needs to be asked, could the player actually be a test level fly half as well as a centre? Giteau, yep. Nonu, no.