I”l have to concede your point, penguin. My apologies to the Eagle’s family and friends for any hurt I have inadvertantly caused.

You raise an interesting point. I think that some of us remain seriously addicted to sport precisely because we were never good enough to be given the opportunity to get it out of our system. By contrast many outstanding ex-athletes can’t be bothered even to watch it. They have had their fill and more.

I don’t think you can take anything away from Brothers or from Brisbane Easts last year for that matter. Each of the three clubs put their best sides available at the time on the paddock and Sydney Uni got touched up both times. No argument, no excuses. Congratulations to the Queenslanders.

Fair enough, rf, but look at how many of you want to line up to put the slipper into him.

He’s not an Eddie the Eagle who’s an obvious target for scorn. He’s a very hardworking professional footballer that makes the most of what talents he has. To my knowledge he’s never claimed to be a world beater; he just goes out and does a very consistent job each week. He shoulders an enormous work load that makes things a lot easier for the team mates around him.

I’m not about to “lighten up” because I might be spoiling the mob’s fun. I might equally suggest that some of the posters here need to “grow up”. They’re not in the schoolyard now picking on the kid that doesn’t fit in.

Brett, you’ve managed to infuriate the Carter-haters:

“Brett, please rectract your libelous comments regarding A. Faingaa. He in no way resembles Tom Carter.”
“He’s more in the mould of Wynand Olivier – great in defence, speed to burn (unlike carter) and knows how to run lines (unlike carter).”
“Great post Brett – one point of disagreement however A Faingaa is a class above T Carter.”
“I agree RK re Faingaa being a class above Carter with the later seemingly lost on occasions when in space and although large in size doesn’t seem to have the leg drive of a Mortlock. … Faingaa … has a better read of the game and his defence … seems to be very accurate and punishing.”

It doesn’t take much; just mention his name without ridiculing him and they resume their battle.

Let’s pursue the comparison between Anthony Faingaa and Tom Carter using the stats provided at the rugbystats.com.au site for the first five rounds of the Super 14:

Minutes played: Faingaa 392; Carter 373
Tackles: Faingaa 30; Carter 40
Tackles missed: Faingaa 9; Carter 4
Runs: Faingaa 18; Carter 32
Metres gained: Faingaa 102; Carter 208
Linebreaks: Faingaa 1; Carter 2
Offloads: Faingaa 0; Carter 4
Rucks & Mauls; Faingaa 11; Carter 28
Penalties: Faingaa 3; Carter 2
Turnovers: Faingaa 1; Carter 1

Most fair-minded people would agree with you, Brett, that Anthony is a fine young player. But fair-minded people would not think it “libelous” to compare him to Tom.

Brett, just a couple of points in relation to Dave Dennis who I thought had a sensational game against the Lions. I agree with you that he is very much a player of the future.

You state that “Robbie Deans took him to Europe at the end of 2009 after a starring season captaining Sydney University’s premiership side.” It should be noted that Dave captained the side for the first half of the season before stepping aside when “the Skipper”, Tim Davidson, came back from England. Davidson, undoubtedly the most successful captain in Uni’s long history, then went on to notch up his fifth successive Premiership as captain.

You also mention that Dennis’s “strong form on [the ‘Tahs] South African tour was enough to consign long-standing lock Will Caldwell to the bench.” In fairness to Will he is still regaining strength and condition after a very serious and debilitating illness that saw him drop 25kg of bodyweight. I think it is very much in his interests that he is not presently being called upon to play 80 minutes. By the end of the Super 14 he too is likely to be in strong contention for the national squad.

I’m not exactly into hockey but I think you have touched on a way in which the sport could be made much more interesting to watch and play, PG. Let the players use their natural hand and there would be much less predictability in the sport.

Excellent rebuttals of my arguments, gerald and Rick. And very clever of Rick to work out the club connection.

Predictably, Spiro continues his witch-burning crusade, inflaming the mob to destroy his bête noire, Tom Carter:

“It’s time, too, to start Tom Carter, a favourite of coach Chris Hickey who re-signed him last week for a couple more seasons. Carter was caught from behind in one dash to the line. His passing is ponderous and when Rob Horne comes on at centre he gives the back attack a sharpness that has been lacking this season.”

This time Spiro has got himself so apoplectic that he can barely get the words out. What does “It’s time, too, to start Tom Carter” mean? It’s certainly not consistent with the rest of his rant.

He pours scorn on coach Hickey for re-signing the player before triumphantly proclaiming, “Carter was caught from behind in one dash to the line.” Presumably Spiro is referring to Carter’s run in the 50th minute. By this time, less than two-thirds into the game, the “ponderous” Carter had made 17 tackles, a massive number in arguably the most difficult defensive position in rugby, without missing one. He had also had numerous kick chases, after one of which he tackled the ball receiver and forced a turnover. And of course he had performed his usual busy involvement at the breakdown.

Rob Horne replaced Tom Carter after 52 minutes of the fastest paced rugby we have seen this season. Not surprisingly, given that he is a prodigiously talented young player, he gave the “back attack a sharpness”. Most of those who had played from the start of the match were buggered by this time.

If a very senior rugby journalist were focussed on analysis rather than personalities, he might have noticed after two-and-a-third seasons that Carter has been a real innovator in terms of how the two centre positions can be played. He is the willing work horse, absorbing a huge defensive work load, consistently leading the kick chases, and playing as an extra backrower at the breakdowns. At the same time, something which is never noted is that his very high-range strength and power enables him to continue to impose himself physically on the opposition backs, wearing them down so that they make mistakes from fatigue.

Of course Tom Carter has serious limitations as a player, something that Spiro and the rest of the Carter-haters take great delight in drawing attention to. But I doubt that any other player works harder to make the most of the abilities that he has. Fortunately his coaches seem to have realised that there is a need for someone who consistently does the hard graft, creating opportunities for the Flash Harries to work their magic. The fact that we have seen so little magic in recent seasons is not necessarily the fault of the honest toiler. Perhaps we should be looking elsewhere.

But then a lot of people thought that John Howard was a cricket man until he tried to roll his arm over.

Tony at least has a front rower’s head

A correction. Barnes had 18 tackle attempts not 28.

Thanks to the keen-eyed Onceinawhile.

Whaler, I will have to work out how to flag more clearly when I am being sarcastic.

You certainly have a clear idea of what you are looking for in a centre; “we might as well buy Anthony Watmough if that is all we need, big tackles and a few strong runs”. Instead we want “a quick 12 /13 who is light on their feet can burn people with pace, put a step on etc etc”.

After four rounds we can look at the stats from rugbystats.com.au to compare “poor old Tommy .. flaffing around” with the “quick 12/13[s]” who are so prevalent in the Australian franchises.

Let’s get the irrelevant Watmough characteristics out of the way first. On tackles – as if anyone cares about defence – Carter has made 28 and missed 4, a missed percentage of 14.3%. Then we have Cross 13, 2, 15.4%; Mortlock 23, 5, 17.9%; Tatupu 14, 3, 21.4%; Faingaa 22, 6, 27.3%; Beale 16, 5, 31.3%; Lealifano 17, 6, 35.3%; Inman 13, 5, 38.5%; Turinui 13, 5, 38.5%; and Barnes 28, 9, 50%

Would that be the same Barnes who was “‘HOWLING’ at Carter on Saturday night [after} he orchestrated a great hole for Carter to hit”? Mister 50% himself.

Carter has made 27 runs for a total gain of 181 metres. Let’s compare that to the light-footed ones who “can burn people with pace”: Turinui 12 (157m); Lealifano 17 (125m); Cross (2 games) 10 (112m); Mortlock 18 (104m); Tatupu (2 games) 9 (81m); Beale 12 (73m); Inman (2 games) 11 (72m); Barnes 9 (55m); and Faingaa 11 (46m)

Carter is credited with 26 ruck and maul involvements. Then come: Lealifano 18; Mortlock 16; Turinui 13; Inman 11; Beale 10; Faingaa 9: Cross 8; Barnes 8; and Tatupu 5.

Carter is credited with 4 off-loads. Faingaa had 2; Barnes, Turinui, Mortlock and Tatupu had one each. The rest didn’t trouble the scorer.

But it is on penalties and turnovers where Carter goes missing. He hasn’t been penalised and he has had no turnovers. Among the more notable performers on these measures of excellence are Beale penalised 3 times and turning the ball over 5 times; Barnes, Lealifano and Mortlock all recorded 3 of each; Cross had 3 turnovers in two games; Turinui 3 turnovers; and Fangaa and Inman one of each.

Whaler, we all had a good chuckle at your witticism: “When everyone was getting injured before and on the end of year tour, Dingo Deans was virtually pulling blokes out of the pub, before calling on Tom Carter”. And haven’t some of those picked ahead of him really kicked on since and justified the selectors’ faith in them.

Justin says of the Barnes/ Carter mixup:

“It was one of the worst misreads of a gap you will ever see.

It was pretty funny in the end and Barnes did his nana a treat (its about all he did all night actually).”

You’re the only one I’ve seen, Justin, who’s commented on Barnes’s extremely limited participation in the game.

But what of the universally ridiculed Carter? These are my minute-by-minute notes of his involvements excluding things like support play at breakdown or assistance in tackles:

1 claimed ball after Sharks fumbled kickoff reception

5 got 2m over advantage line and threw around the corner pass

6 pressured Sharks kicker who kicked out on full

8 received pass when double-teamed, got 1m over adv line

15 strong tackle

19 took ball forward slowly, threw forward pass

22 miscommunication with Barnes, spilled poor pass

36 inside pass from Burgess, ruled knock on but deflection by Sharks player

39 try after strong carry through defenders

42 tackle

51 strong run forward, stumbled, regained feet and gained more metres, led to try next phase

54 tackle

56 drove 5m over adv line

63 great kick chase and sacked ball receiver

66 gained 5m over adv line

75 big tackle

76 tackle

So he committed two significant errors. In the 19th minute he took the ball forward, then slowed and looked for support which took a long time to arrive. Then in the 22nd minute he missed an opportunity to exploit an inside gap.

Against this he scored a try; created another; made more metres over the advantage line with defenders hanging off him than any other back and almost any forward; had a long kick chase and sacked the ball receiver; and didn’t miss a tackle all night.

I think that should be worth at least a pass mark.

Thanks, Bill.

As I get older I am tending to indulge myself more. I try not to waste the opportunity to have a stir.

You are fortunate to live in a beautiful part of our country. “Jazz & Blues festivals around. … fine food, good wine, beautiful rivers, magnificent waterfalls”. Can’t ask for much more.

Blinky Bill provides us with a very erudite analysis of Tom Carter’s failings, but then spoils the impression that he might actually know what he is talking about by posing the question, “Was he one of the form 13’s in the Shute?”

Are you still on the pedal radio up there, Bill? Don’t you get ABC TV in Bellingen? You must do, because I always observe when travelling on the Pacific Highway through your area that more than one of the motels still proudly display signs that they have “Colour TV”. How about that? Talk about a tourist attractor!

According to Wikipedia, “In the 1830s, Bellingen was literally a backwater …” Since then nothing much has changed. Bellingen sits on the Bellinger River. The discrepancy has been pointed out to the locals but they just sit on the river bank watching twigs float past.

In answer to your query, Bill, Tom Carter’s form in the Shute Shield at 13 has not been particularly noteworthy; possibly because for quite a few years he has dominated that competition at 12. He also played in that position in last year’s Grand Final winning the Man of the Match award.

Dave said: “This is huge for rugby in the Pacific Islands and I hope its going to include the Cook Islands, Niue, Tahiti, Solomon Islands, PNG, Tokelau and New Caledonia.”

$3 million a year spread across “multi-sports”. I wouldn’t get too excited, Dave.

Andrew, as you might suspect I wasn’t really taking issue with you, but rather using your comment as a vehicle to get across some basic points about a player who has been unfairly maligned. I think we would all agree, however, that he had really lost his way.

Still, any player’s only as good as his next performance, so I concur with your closing statement: “Let’s see if he can repeat the performance again tomorrow.”

and Even looser’s: “Facts are he did better and the fans want to see more of it.”

and Hoy’s: “Good for him to play like he can… finally. Hope he can keep it up.”

I think that Hoy has made a very good point about him being “overcoached”. He is very much an instinctive player and rugby has too few of them.

Andrew, an interesting and insightful article, but I would take issue with one of your observations, namely:

“The most surprising development was the rebirth of halfback Luke Burgess, who revived the flickering embers of his rapidly fading Wallaby career by taking a few lessons from his usurper. Will Genia’s stock-in-trade is the judicious snipe, combined with the laserish shift from the ruck to 10-plus-one. ”

What I saw was not Burgess imitating Genia, but rather him going back to the very distinctive style he developed playing at the colts level; frenetic activity together with an unusual emphasis on lateral movement whether chasing his pass cross-field or running wide before gliding into a gap. The coaches who guided him at that time, principally Todd Louden and Nick Ryan, are to be commended for giving him the freedom and encouragement to express himself on the field.

By contrast, when the Brumbies bought him they wanted him to fit into a Gregan-type role and so he spent four seasons holding hit shields.

Luke Burgess and Stephen Larkham stand out for me as the two players in Australian rugby who have instinctively capitalised on the potential advantages offered by lateral movement.

I was very impressed by Onceinawhile’s comment: “I can’t get past the fact that with Burgess playing with more urgency and tempo against the Bulls, the rest of the team followed suit, I know it’s more complicated than that, but geez it helps.”

The statement that I described as rubbish was that “the top clubs from most of the Provinces would easily challenge the best on offer in the Shute shield.” That is “most of the Provinces” would have at least one team that is at least as strong as the best teams in the Sydney Premiership.

That is so manifestly absurd that it hardly warrants arguing against. But let’s give it a try.

The top club in Sydney from last year, Sydney Uni, will this weekend field nine starting players in Super 14 teams. Eight of the nine have been developed through Uni’s own Colts program.

Now can either Ora or Hammer identify the clubs in the various NZ provinces which are of similar standard? Not just in Auckland but in “most of” the other provinces.

The Sydney Premiership competition which is at best semi-professional is nevertheless of high standard. It does not deserve to be rubbished.

Spiro, as you might have guessed, my comment was not intended to be taken seriously. But It seems that I have ended with egg on my face as possibly the only one on the forum who didn’t realise that the Kiwis had a separate spelling.

On Stirling, I might also be provocative and ask whether he really has “great defence” when he averaged 33% missed tackles in last season’s Super 14.

Of course, defence is often regarded as an optional extra in a five-eighths.

Thanks, Lindommer, I’ve learnt something new today. But isn’t it the 10 who would be the “five-eighths” and the 12 the “second-five”, meaning of course “second-five-eighths”?

No offence taken, Um. My post was tongue-in-cheek anyway.

Actually I like the idea of New Zealanders doing things their own way. The rest of the world uses “five-eighth” while they use “five-eighths”, well most of the time.

Just like I like the idea that they stand up to the Yanks while we slavishly follow them into disastrous adventures.

Life is a voyage of discovery.

But it still seems a little weird to talk about “a five-eighths”.

I see, pothale, it’s a Kiwi thing. Looking further I notice an alternation between “five-eighth” and “five-eighths” in different articles in the NZ Herald.

Apologies to Spiro who IIRR came from New Zealand. Now if someone will just explain why the plural form is used.

Most peculiar people, Kiwis.

Ora said: “The Shute Shield is equivalent to the New Zealand Club competition, the top clubs from most of the Provinces would easily challenge the best on offer in the Shute shield.” Rubbish!

DingoBob said: “The Canberra Vikings tried playing in both the Brisbane and NSW Premierships but got booted when they won.” In what year did the Vikings win the Sydney Premiership?

I know that it is considered poor form on forums such as this to criticise people’s grammar or spelling. However given that Spiro is a very experienced journo, I find it intriguing that on all but one of the nine times he uses the word, Spiro misspells “five-eighth” as “five-eighths”.

Big night out, perhaps?

And was Zac hesitant about correcting the old man’s copy?