Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

'I had one of my worst performances in the black jersey': Dan Carter's post-Lions lesson

(Photo by Ross Land/Getty Images)

Former All Black first five-eighth Dan Carter had to bid his time when he first joined the side, learning under the two prominent 10s of that generation in Carlos Spencer and Andrew Mehrtens.

ADVERTISEMENT

Carter’s first 11 starts with the All Blacks were at second five-eighth wearing the 12 jersey, with a handful of bench appearances at 10 behind the experienced pair.

Speaking with Jason Pine on Newstalk ZB’s DRS promoting his new book 1598, Carter attributed much of his success as an international 10 down to the fact that he spent his first year and a half in test rugby playing in the midfield, a position he also played with the Crusaders.

Video Spacer

All Blacks head coach Ian Foster discusses preparations for USA

Video Spacer

All Blacks head coach Ian Foster discusses preparations for USA

“I put a lot of my success in the 10 jersey down to the fact that I did play 12 for the first year and a half of my international career,” Carter explained on the DRS.

“Playing alongside the likes of Carlos Spencer, Andrew Mehrtens, was two completely different number 10s. I felt like I was able to learn the best from those two.

“When my time came on the end of season tour in 2004, I felt like I was ready even though I couldn’t believe the coaches had left out a couple of these legends and put so much faith in a young little 22-year-old.

“But I was able to learn so much from those two, so a lot of my success comes down to learning from the best.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Carter went on to help the All Blacks to three wins over Italy, Wales and France on the 2004 tour, scoring 19, 11 and 25 points in those games as the starting first five. Although few at the time would have realised what the Cantabrian would go on to achieve.

Just eight months later the British & Irish Lions would tour New Zealand where Carter announced his potential to the world, but it was on that November tour where Carter was already feeling at home.

He insisted it was the first game against Italy where he settled in and became comfortable playing 10 for the All Blacks.

“No, it was almost right from my first test match. I still remember it, it was against Italy in Italy. I was extremely nervous I felt like there was a new sense of responsibility for me and my game,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“But as soon as the game started, I thrived on that, I absolutely loved that pressure and that ability to have more control of the game, to be making the decisions. You make a lot more in the 10 jersey than one place out.

“I knew from that moment that was the position that I wanted to continue for the rest of my career. It was a great learning process leading up to there, but as soon as I got a chance to put on the 10 jersey it felt home straight away.

Carter became a household name in the rugby world with his 33-point haul in Wellington against the British & Irish Lions in the second test, which put him on the map globally as a rising star of the game at 23-years-old.

He said it was a ‘very special game’ that put the world on notice to what he was capable of, but he soon learnt that the spotlight comes with added pressure to perform.

“It was a pretty special moment, a very special game. I think if anything it put me on the world stage a little bit more, probably not many international rugby supporters had heard of me,” he said.

“After a series like that, and a game like that in the second test match a lot more people in the global rugby circles, all of a sudden knew about me and what I was capable of.

“With things like that comes added pressure. There’s that expectation that every time you put on the jersey after that game, that you are expected to play at that level. That’s something that I had to learn to deal with.

“In the end, I actually thrived on it, which was something I actually needed.

Clinching the Lions series in Wellington meant Carter had won his first six starts as the All Blacks flyhalf, but he then missed the third and final test match of the Lions tour as Luke McAllister debuted.

His next start was against the Springboks in Cape Town which Carter called a ‘reality check’ as he was soon ‘brought back down to Earth’. The All Blacks were beaten 22-16 in a game Carter described as ‘one of his worst’ for the All Blacks.

“There was a good reality check. If you look through the book, I had that fantastic night in Wellington, the second test match against the Lions and my next test was in South Africa and I was brought right back down to Earth,” he recalled.

South Africa raced out to a 13-0 lead before the 10-minute mark after two penalty goals and a Jean de Villiers intercept try. A try to Rico Gear brought the All Blacks within touching distance by halftime behind 13-16, but they couldn’t cut the deficit as Percy Montgomery landed two more penalty goals.

“I had one of my worst performances in the black jersey. It was a great learning for me that when you do have fantastic games, you actually need to go through this process to have consistency and try to get to that level each week.

“I wasn’t able to do that on that occasion.”

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 17 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?

46 Go to comments
f
fl 32 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.

46 Go to comments
J
JW 36 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.

46 Go to comments
J
JW 54 minutes 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.

46 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour 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.

46 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Ian Foster: 'You kid yourself that we were robbed' Ian Foster: 'You kid yourself that we were robbed'
Search