Big Vibe
Kennel Established
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2022
- Messages
- 713
- Reaction score
- 1,515
Bulldogs coach’s viral one-word reply is driving the NRL crazy
A question asked by a journalist after the Bulldogs’ Round 5 loss has kicked up a storm after coach Trent Barrett’s blunt response.
A snarky one-word reply from Trent Barrett somehow didn’t end up being the talking point to emerge from the Bulldogs coach’s post-match press conference.
After a 20-point loss to the Panthers following a week when he had been accused of mistreating playmaker Kyle Flanagan, Barrett appeared to show his fatigue when he dismissed a question about his team’s attacking structures.
The problem was his one-word reply came after an 84-word question from a journalist.
The prickly moment has since been a hotly-debated discussion in the footy media world.
At the end of the press conference, The Roar’s Mike Meehall Wood asked Barrett about the involvement of his halfback in the game.
Flanagan was selected to return to the side for the Round 5 clash after being dropped for an extended period. He had been training away from the Bulldogs’ top squad and appeared stuck in reserve grade after a bad form slump in 2021.
Trent Barrett didn't want to get into it. Photo: NRL
With Barrett flipping and flopping between his playmaker options, including Jake Averillo and Brandon Wakeham, he finally turned to Flanagan last week.
Some commentators accused Barrett of tossing Flanagan to the wolves after he was tasked with leading the Bulldogs’ attack alongside five-eight Matt Burton despite his extended stint away from the first grade squad.
It’s why Flanagan — and the Bulldogs’ much-maligned attacking structures — were the biggest talking point from the game. The Bulldogs have scored just four tries in their past three games.
It’s why some have passionately defended the question that was asked to Barrett after the loss.
“Trent, I was just looking it up there: Kyle touched the ball 21 times in that match — Wakeham averaged 29 and Averillo 33,” the question began.
“The first time you got into good ball – I think it was off the 40/20 – Kyle stationed himself out on the right and then three times the ball went that way and then came back inside with a forward. It’s something that I’ve noticed happens quite a lot.
“Do you think potentially you struggle to get your halfbacks involved in good ball?”
Faced with a long question at the end of a six-minute press conference at the end of a 20-point loss, the side’s fourth in a row, Barrett took the easy way out, replying simply: “No”.
It brought the press conference to an end.
Barrett on Tuesday announced Flanagan has kept his spot in the team for the Round 6 game against South Sydney on Good Friday.
But the video of the encounter was shared by The Daily Telegraph's The Oracle, which said: “One of the more ridiculous questions ever asked at a press conference. Trent Barrett answered it beautifully.”
That take appeared to be in the minority for sports reporters however as they quickly took to social media en masse to dispute the comment.
Fox Sports Football reporter James Dodd wrote: “Calling this a ‘ridiculous question’ and saying Trent Barrett answered it beautifully is such a poor take it’s actually funny …”
Former Channel 7 sport reporter Chris Garry added: “And the fans wonder ‘why don’t reporters talk more about gameplay!!’
“Because most coaches and players are reluctant to share insight. Robinson and Bellamy among the exceptions.
“Trent Barrett given perfect platform to discuss attacking strategy here but dismisses question.”
Trent Barrett hasn’t had a good time at the Bulldogs. Photo by Jason McCawley/Getty Images.
NRL.com’s Chris Kennedy opined: “Ridiculous that a journalist thinks he can just walk into a press conference and ask the coach a question about his tactics backed up by stats. What is the world coming to.”
AAP’s Scott Bailey eye-rolled: “Everyone: ‘We need more talk about actual football, rather than all the other rubbish.’ **Journalist asks question, backed up by stats, about halfbacks not getting hands on ball enough at a team ranked last in attack.** ‘RIDICULOUS QUESTION!!!’
AAP’’s George Clarke wrote: “For the record – as I have been asked three times today – this isn’t me. It’s @MikeMeehallWood asking a fair question. The only thing that’s ridiculous is that a team coached by an ‘attacking guru’ have scored fewer points than Ryan Papenhuyzen alone.”
Freelance journalist Neil Morrow said it reflected poorly on Trent Barrett.
“Very bad take. It’s Barrett who looks ridiculous. Scared to get into the details of why his side keeps getting thrashed,” he tweeted.
WWOS’ Matt Bungard posed: “It was a bit longwinded but I thought this was a good question? It wasn’t a personal criticism of Kyle Flanagan or anyone else, it was about the Bulldogs’ use of their playmakers as a whole. Give me this over ‘So Trent, not the result you wanted out there today?’”
Meehall Wood replied to the drama as well, writing: “Heaven forbid we ask an evidence-based question to a guy who averages 1.4 tries per game about why his creative players touch the ball less than everyone else’s creative players when we spent a week talking about his main creative player. (Trent can answer however he likes, btw)”.
A question asked by a journalist after the Bulldogs’ Round 5 loss has kicked up a storm after coach Trent Barrett’s blunt response.
A snarky one-word reply from Trent Barrett somehow didn’t end up being the talking point to emerge from the Bulldogs coach’s post-match press conference.
After a 20-point loss to the Panthers following a week when he had been accused of mistreating playmaker Kyle Flanagan, Barrett appeared to show his fatigue when he dismissed a question about his team’s attacking structures.
The problem was his one-word reply came after an 84-word question from a journalist.
The prickly moment has since been a hotly-debated discussion in the footy media world.
At the end of the press conference, The Roar’s Mike Meehall Wood asked Barrett about the involvement of his halfback in the game.
Flanagan was selected to return to the side for the Round 5 clash after being dropped for an extended period. He had been training away from the Bulldogs’ top squad and appeared stuck in reserve grade after a bad form slump in 2021.
Trent Barrett didn't want to get into it. Photo: NRL
With Barrett flipping and flopping between his playmaker options, including Jake Averillo and Brandon Wakeham, he finally turned to Flanagan last week.
Some commentators accused Barrett of tossing Flanagan to the wolves after he was tasked with leading the Bulldogs’ attack alongside five-eight Matt Burton despite his extended stint away from the first grade squad.
It’s why Flanagan — and the Bulldogs’ much-maligned attacking structures — were the biggest talking point from the game. The Bulldogs have scored just four tries in their past three games.
It’s why some have passionately defended the question that was asked to Barrett after the loss.
“Trent, I was just looking it up there: Kyle touched the ball 21 times in that match — Wakeham averaged 29 and Averillo 33,” the question began.
“The first time you got into good ball – I think it was off the 40/20 – Kyle stationed himself out on the right and then three times the ball went that way and then came back inside with a forward. It’s something that I’ve noticed happens quite a lot.
“Do you think potentially you struggle to get your halfbacks involved in good ball?”
Faced with a long question at the end of a six-minute press conference at the end of a 20-point loss, the side’s fourth in a row, Barrett took the easy way out, replying simply: “No”.
It brought the press conference to an end.
Barrett on Tuesday announced Flanagan has kept his spot in the team for the Round 6 game against South Sydney on Good Friday.
But the video of the encounter was shared by The Daily Telegraph's The Oracle, which said: “One of the more ridiculous questions ever asked at a press conference. Trent Barrett answered it beautifully.”
That take appeared to be in the minority for sports reporters however as they quickly took to social media en masse to dispute the comment.
Fox Sports Football reporter James Dodd wrote: “Calling this a ‘ridiculous question’ and saying Trent Barrett answered it beautifully is such a poor take it’s actually funny …”
Former Channel 7 sport reporter Chris Garry added: “And the fans wonder ‘why don’t reporters talk more about gameplay!!’
“Because most coaches and players are reluctant to share insight. Robinson and Bellamy among the exceptions.
“Trent Barrett given perfect platform to discuss attacking strategy here but dismisses question.”
Trent Barrett hasn’t had a good time at the Bulldogs. Photo by Jason McCawley/Getty Images.
NRL.com’s Chris Kennedy opined: “Ridiculous that a journalist thinks he can just walk into a press conference and ask the coach a question about his tactics backed up by stats. What is the world coming to.”
AAP’s Scott Bailey eye-rolled: “Everyone: ‘We need more talk about actual football, rather than all the other rubbish.’ **Journalist asks question, backed up by stats, about halfbacks not getting hands on ball enough at a team ranked last in attack.** ‘RIDICULOUS QUESTION!!!’
AAP’’s George Clarke wrote: “For the record – as I have been asked three times today – this isn’t me. It’s @MikeMeehallWood asking a fair question. The only thing that’s ridiculous is that a team coached by an ‘attacking guru’ have scored fewer points than Ryan Papenhuyzen alone.”
Freelance journalist Neil Morrow said it reflected poorly on Trent Barrett.
“Very bad take. It’s Barrett who looks ridiculous. Scared to get into the details of why his side keeps getting thrashed,” he tweeted.
WWOS’ Matt Bungard posed: “It was a bit longwinded but I thought this was a good question? It wasn’t a personal criticism of Kyle Flanagan or anyone else, it was about the Bulldogs’ use of their playmakers as a whole. Give me this over ‘So Trent, not the result you wanted out there today?’”
Meehall Wood replied to the drama as well, writing: “Heaven forbid we ask an evidence-based question to a guy who averages 1.4 tries per game about why his creative players touch the ball less than everyone else’s creative players when we spent a week talking about his main creative player. (Trent can answer however he likes, btw)”.
