Confirmed-Carter gone.

by disneychilly Sat 01 Oct 2011, 10:10 pm

First topic message reminder :

NZ's chances just took a huge hit. I'd say South Africa are the favourites now. Gutted.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 7:20 am

Its a squad game remember that. The kiwis are getting there excuses ready. Its sad that carter is out- but sad for him and him only(aty this moment in time)- NZ are still in the show!

by TheGreyGhost Mon 03 Oct 2011, 9:28 am

Oakey - not even a good WUM.

If NZ fail to win then a legitimate part of that reason would be the absence of the world's greatest player.

It is sad for Carter, it is sad for NZ, it is sad for the All Blacks, it is sad for the world cup, it is sad for the advertisers, it is sad for the sponsors, it's even sad for my girlfriend who likes to watch DC because he's pretty even though she doesn't understand rugby at all, and finally it is sad for any fan of rugby that we won't see his talents participate and in the tournament.

On yer bike, son.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 9:32 am

"

If NZ fail to win then a legitimate part of that reason would be the absence of the world's greatest player."

no its not- people dont like hearing excuses all the time, they dont mean anything. its a squad game- all bases need to be covered. If you loose because of one player you hjavent prepared properly.

Also the attitude of allways needing an excuse is a losers mentality- its not good grounding for the future.

by TheGreyGhost Mon 03 Oct 2011, 9:34 am

If you want to believe that Oakey, then you're entitled.

Most people would accept that when one of the best players ever to play the game is ruled out, then it might play a part in any potential loss.

Did you put something bitter on your cornflakes this morning? Relax man, it's another nice day out there.

by Taylorman Mon 03 Oct 2011, 10:26 am

Only one using the excuse word is you mysti.
We havnt even lost a match yet and your rolling out the excuse mat.
Geez. And you preach not being able to discuss potential deserved finalists.
Pot. Kettle? Or is it nh. chip. shoulder?

by doctor_grey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 10:56 am

I just saw the papers this morning and noticed the comment that if Carter and Wilkinson are both out due to injury, then the two of the highest points scorers in Rugby history will miss the rest of the RWC. I hadn't looked at it this way before. In my opinion, that is bad for Rugby. Especially at Rugby's premeir showcase. Imagine the terrific, off-the-wall, out of control media hype had they met in the Final?

I saw Carter's diagnosis and its really tough luck for him. These injuries are difficult to diagnose early on and can be very damaging after the fact. Good news is a near complete recovery can be expected.

Hopefully Wilkinson can recover from his injury as the scan showed no injury of significance. But the bruising/sweling can cause other problems.

by TheGreyGhost Mon 03 Oct 2011, 10:59 am

What's the story with Wilkinson? I saw him go off in his clutching-shoulder position, but haven't heard anything about it. Shame for him, because he just seemed to be coming into some form. Thought he was good value on the weekend.

by Guest Mon 03 Oct 2011, 10:59 am

shame for new zealand, i think they can still win the world cup, but will there be pshycholigal impact from this injury?..

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Mon 03 Oct 2011, 11:02 am

As a neutral, I think it's a huge shame that fans will be denied the chance to see a player like Carter execute his sublime skills for the remainder of this RWC - it's not just a loss for NZ, it's a loss for all fans of the game. Gutted for the player too, but he's young enough to hopefully still be around for 2015

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 11:07 am

"Only one using the excuse word is you mysti.
We havnt even lost a match yet and your rolling out the excuse mat.
Geez. And you preach not being able to discuss potential deserved finalists.
Pot. Kettle? Or is it nh. chip. shoulder"

er what are you talking about GG has been using the excuse word. I am telling him how sad it is- i think yuou are confussed or something, my argument is the same as yours but directed to the person using the pre empted excuses- just take a look back

by doctor_grey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 11:08 am

Ghost,
According to the reports, Wilkinson took a contusion, with severe bruising on the forearm, near the elbow. The tv showed him holding his upper arm for a moment which gave rise to rumours he damaged his shoulder again.

A scan of the forearm showed no evidence of a fracture. What I would have wanted to hear was if they scanned the shoulder as well, but that either didn't happen or is not being reported.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 11:09 am

TheGreyGhost wrote:Yes, if NZ go out then a lot of NZ fans will talk about the absence of Carter. As would any side who had lost one of their best players to injury prior to a loss.

I don't really see what's wrong with that.

I agree, I prefer to see a world cup where all the top players are playing. But we can't all be the French selectors

by TheGreyGhost Mon 03 Oct 2011, 1:15 pm

Ah the old invisible reply. Mods are on to that one oakey.

by GunsGerms Mon 03 Oct 2011, 2:39 pm

It was inevitable really. Kiwis went to the 07 WC with no plan b and it seems they may have made the same mistake again this time in terms of back up oh. Still favorites for the title though.

by TheGreyGhost Mon 03 Oct 2011, 2:42 pm

Sorry Leinster but that's just rubbish.

by GunsGerms Mon 03 Oct 2011, 3:34 pm

TheGreyGhost wrote:Sorry Leinster but that's just rubbish.

In 07 they were knocked out because their attack from anywhere, score tries, no drop goal policy failed v France and they couldn't adapt to what was in front of them because there was no back up plan.

In the lead up to this WC it was always clear that Carter would be pivotal to NZs chances because Slade is very inexperienced. He only has 9 caps.

Other reserve 10s still in the tournament:

Tobias Flood 42 caps
Jonny Sexton 23 caps
Morgan Parra 19 caps Damien Traille 74
Berrick barnes 31 caps
Butch James 40 caps
Stephen jones 102 caps

Slade is the most inexperienced OH at the WC bar maybe Priestland. For such an important position it will be a lot of pressure on him. Why is my post rubbish?

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 3:41 pm

"In the lead up to this WC it was always clear that Carter would be pivotal to NZs chances because Slade is very inexperienced. He only has 9 caps"

so the kiwis problem is that they havent used the backup player enough, even if can cost you points in other games.

not losing carter.

look at england. i have been questioning this constant changing between flood and wilko- but in light of all this it looks intellegent

by disneychilly Mon 03 Oct 2011, 3:44 pm

So what you're saying is Oakey that we should call up Stephen Donald because NZ HAVE used him as backup enough?

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 3:52 pm

didnt he have problems with bath because although he is one hellova player NZ have hardly picked him!

yep offcourse he should be a part of your set up. crazy not to be

by disneychilly Mon 03 Oct 2011, 3:56 pm

I take it you didn't see the last 20 mins of the Hong Kong test.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 3:59 pm

chop and change at your peril- look at englands cricket team as soon as they stopped doing that- thats all it took

by chewed_mintie Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:03 pm

Mystiroakey – the coaches have publicly said that they backed the wrong horse in Stephen Donald. They invested 20 odd tests in him and they thought he would come good with experience and he didn’t. I feel they messed up big time last year by not taking either Cruden or Slade to Europe but there we go, we are where we are and we can’t turn back time.

Slade will step up, mark my words

by GunsGerms Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:04 pm

disneychilly wrote:I take it you didn't see the last 20 mins of the Hong Kong test.

I saw it but if a guy only gets to play 10 minutes every ten matches what do you expect. Maybe Henry should have shown some more faith in Donald and involved him in more games them maybe his decision making might have been better v Oz in HK.

In any case I thought the reaction to Donalds game that day was ridiculous. He had very little to with Australia being in the position to win that game yet he copped nearly all the blame. Really poor show.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:04 pm

is 20 tests enough- maybe this one world cup would have been all it took.

look i dunno either way, but all i know is that plenty of professionsl teams chop and change to much for a quick fix.

by chewed_mintie Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:09 pm

leinsterbaby wrote:
disneychilly wrote:I take it you didn't see the last 20 mins of the Hong Kong test.

I saw it but if a guy only gets to play 10 minutes every ten matches what do you expect. Maybe Henry should have shown some more faith in Donald and involved him in more games them maybe his decision making might have been better v Oz in HK.

In any case I thought the reaction to Donalds game that day was ridiculous. He had very little to with Australia being in the position to win that game yet he copped nearly all the blame. Really poor show.

Leinster - the reaction was OTT but here are the facts of that game

1. Donald had a penalty with about 5 mins left to put a win beyond doubt. Australia would have had to score twice to win. He missed, from practically in front

2. NZ up by 5 with 10 secs left, kick to touch would have ended the match. Donald kicked straight to Beale and the rest is history.

In those two moments, Donald proved that he cannot step up when the pressure is on

by disneychilly Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:10 pm

You exaggerate Leinsterbaby. Carter has had a few injuries and Donald has played a lot of his games in full. He's a good player and a top bloke. Just not international level-I really felt for the guy. He's had enough chances over three years though. We didn't need a backup before 08 as Evans was in the fold.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:13 pm

"1. Donald had a penalty with about 5 mins left to put a win beyond doubt. Australia would have had to score twice to win. He missed, from practically in front

2. NZ up by 5 with 10 secs left, kick to touch would have ended the match. Donald kicked straight to Beale and the rest is history.

In those two moments, Donald proved that he cannot step up when the pressure is on"

wow i didnt know that- that is crazy stuff

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:14 pm

well i suppose we shall see if NZ's faith in slade is warranted wont we

by jbeadlesbigrighthand Mon 03 Oct 2011, 4:57 pm

TheGreyGhost wrote:If you want to believe that Oakey, then you're entitled.

Most people would accept that when one of the best players ever to play the game is ruled out, then it might play a part in any potential loss.

Did you put something bitter on your cornflakes this morning? Relax man, it's another nice day out there.

I agree with you that undoubtedly the loss of one of the greatest players of all time would affect any team's chances.

However, NZ have been here before. They should have learn their lesson from '07. Fair enough, they backed the wrong horse in Stephen Donald, and that took time away from another player. However, they've had 4 years. All the other big teams have an experienced back-up option.

With all that said, I still think NZ will win it.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 5:29 pm

GG if you lose this world cup. and i honestly mean lose not fail to win(you are trading at 1.7, 2nd is aus at 9.2!!) I will allow you one whinge about the loss of carter!

World cups are all about the squad- there is no I in TEAM.

by TheGreyGhost Mon 03 Oct 2011, 5:36 pm

I've figured it out. It took me a while, but I got there.

This is part of Henry's master plan.

Carter was never going to play in the knock out phase. It's *always* been Slade. It's genius.

First, we show the world the lack of depth of AB 10's, by fiddling around with Donald and Cruden, and persisting even when they are clearly never going to cut it.

Then we tell the world how lost NZ would be without DC.

Then we roll out Slade, give him a bit of game time, but he makes suspicious "errors" at crucial times.

The game was almost out of the bag when he mistakenly broke the defence and fed that astonishing pass to Guildford, then converted from the side line. So he went back and dropped the ball a few times.

Now, thing is, that Slade is really probably the best first five the world has ever seen.

It's like that movie with Devil's Advocate with Keanu Reeves and Al Pacino...the problem with Carter is that they saw him coming. Slade on the other hand, they'd never suspect.

by mystiroakey Mon 03 Oct 2011, 5:47 pm

yeah that would be it

by Taylorman Tue 04 Oct 2011, 4:02 am

As good a theory as any GG...

by majesticimperialman Tue 04 Oct 2011, 5:23 am

I thought Slade went off limping the other day?

Peri Weepu seemed to panic and throw a blind pass to Conrad Smith
which Smith missed that led to Canadas try.

So with Carter out and Slade limping off and Weepu not 100%fit who will play 10 in the knock out stages?

by Otagolad Tue 04 Oct 2011, 6:21 am

mystiroakey wrote:GG if you lose this world cup. and i honestly mean lose not fail to win(you are trading at 1.7, 2nd is aus at 9.2!!) I will allow you one whinge about the loss of carter!

World cups are all about the squad- there is no I in TEAM.

But there is a ME if you look closely enough Whistle

by Glas a du Tue 04 Oct 2011, 6:29 am

Look he's no Phill Bennet anyway.

by TheGreyGhost Tue 04 Oct 2011, 10:23 am

majesticimperialman wrote:I thought Slade went off limping the other day?

Peri Weepu seemed to panic and throw a blind pass to Conrad Smith
which Smith missed that led to Canadas try.

So with Carter out and Slade limping off and Weepu not 100%fit who will play 10 in the knock out stages?

It was Cowan, not Weepu. He thew the pass to Slade, but it went over his head. mad

Stop getting the All Blacks wrong. mad

by Glas a du Tue 04 Oct 2011, 4:23 pm

OK so Dean Carter is injured. The Kiwi's always insist that they have the best three outside halfs in the world so lets see what his understudy Kevin Slade can do.

by kiakahaaotearoa Tue 04 Oct 2011, 5:07 pm

Are you intentionally getting those names wrong or have you been living a hermit´s existence and someone has put wireless access in your cave?

by TheGreyGhost Tue 04 Oct 2011, 5:12 pm

Suspect he's taking the michael from majestic.

by majesticimperialman Tue 04 Oct 2011, 6:58 pm

TheGreyGhost wrote:
majesticimperialman wrote:I thought Slade went off limping the other day?

Peri Weepu seemed to panic and throw a blind pass to Conrad Smith
which Smith missed that led to Canadas try.

So with Carter out and Slade limping off and Weepu not 100%fit who will play 10 in the knock out stages?

It was Cowan, not Weepu. He thew the pass to Slade, but it went over his head. Stop getting the All Blacks wrong.

GG, please check again, Weepu never even looked were the ball was going he just threw it blind.

by Otagolad Tue 04 Oct 2011, 11:17 pm

majesticimperialman wrote:
TheGreyGhost wrote:
majesticimperialman wrote:I thought Slade went off limping the other day?

Peri Weepu seemed to panic and throw a blind pass to Conrad Smith
which Smith missed that led to Canadas try.

So with Carter out and Slade limping off and Weepu not 100%fit who will play 10 in the knock out stages?

It was Cowan, not Weepu. He thew the pass to Slade, but it went over his head. Stop getting the All Blacks wrong.

GG, please check again, Weepu never even looked were the ball was going he just threw it blind.

I concur that it was Weepu - he looked pretty poor at first-five when he came on and threw a number of rubbish passes and his kicking from hand was ordinary at best. Slade had a far better game, tackled well, passed well, kicked from hand pretty well and broke the line a number of times - his goal kicking was a bit off (and apart from Steyne whose kicking isn't) in terrible conditions into the wind in the firs half.

Slade is the man to do the job and he'll have a great bunch of guys around him so I wouldn't worry too much - let's see how he goes this weekend with a whole week running with the first team.

by TheGreyGhost Tue 04 Oct 2011, 11:42 pm

Cowan did the same thing, but without resulting in a try. My mistake.

They have to go with Slade. Apart from anything else, Weepu is too valuable at 9.

I don't agree that Weepu was poor at 10 though, he made some nice touches, just took him a while to get into the game. He's not in the form he was before the leg break though, and carrying a few too many cheese burgers.

I'm pretty confident about Argentina. And as other posters have suggested, I think the semi-final will be the actual final.

As competent as the NH sides have looked, they don't look to have made any real progess since we whipped their collective arses last year.

England are messy in the back row and the back line, their mid field is weak and neither Wilkinson nor Flood are in form.

Ireland lack a cutting edge, and Wales are well, just Wales. France have already imploded having been robbed of their AB slaying identity. They just want to go home and get on with club rugby as far as I can tell.

by TheGreyGhost Tue 04 Oct 2011, 11:50 pm

Gegor Paul seems to have buckled under the pressure already.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby-world-cup-2011/news/article.cfm?c_id=522&objectid=10756680

by emack2 Wed 05 Oct 2011, 2:58 am

whats so strange about it it was/is commonpractice to have 5/8 cover 10,12,15.Dagg could probably do it but has even less experience than Slade.Muliana,Cory jane and Toeva have the same skill set.
BUT arguing doing something desperate and you don`t care if you lose
is easy to say for a journalist.
The pressure on the coaches and players already is bad enough.
Do it win the RWC heroes,lose and Slade wil know he can never be trusted again.Dagg too would be soured the coaches sacked,the choking jibes start up again.
Its only a game another RWC,if it`s written.it`s written you can only do your best and build again.

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 7:21 am

Come on mun, it's the 10 shirt not the 7 shirt. Are you Welsh?

by Sponsored content