Carter: Should he stay or should he go?

RugbyHeaven | Thursday, 17 April 2008

Get Carter! That's the catch-cry as the New Zealand Rugby Union and the cash-rich European clubs scramble for the signature of All Blacks star Dan Carter. But is he worth the fight?

In their regular debate slot, RugbyHeaven co-editors Duncan Johnstone and Marc Hinton put up cases for and against keeping Carter on the books of the NZRU.

 

HOLD ON TO HIM - Duncan Johnstone

It's time for the New Zealand Rugby Union to make a stand and who better to base a statement around than Carter, the talisman All Black and marketing mega-star?

Somehow New Zealand has to send a message to the north that they can't simply come down here with their chequebooks and whisk away every leading player to bolster clubs that are fast resembling the play-things of bored billionaires.

It may seem like we're plugging a leaking dyke with a finger and that the flood is inevitable. But make that the middle finger and raise it square in the greedy eyes of those looking this way.

Yes, you can do everyone a favour and pay the pensions of some aging players in their twilight years. But don't come and rape and pillage our stocks of players in their prime.

And you sense the best years are still to come from the 26-year-old Carter. He hit one peak in the 2005 series against the Lions but there must be even better ahead in the All Blacks jersey.

Some critics have been hard on his World Cup effort last year. I lay the blame for that squarely at the feet of the coaching panel who kept him in cotton wool when he was screaming out to be played in the lead-up to the tournament and during the event itself.

He needs to be tied down to a contract that sees him leading the backline in the 2011 World Cup.

Offering a deal that sees him head away for a year or so with the hope that he might return isn't good enough in these professional times.

It sounds like that Richard Bach quote: If you love someone, set them free. If they come back they're yours; if they don't they never were.

I'd say there would be little chance of Carter being back in black if he was set free in Europe now.

Carter is the biggest test-case facing the men in suits in Wellington.

The NZRU thought outside the square to try to retain Carl Hayman by offering to help him with something close to his heart - a piece of rural homeland. It was an imaginative ploy even though ultimately it failed.

Special people need special attention and no one would deny that Carter is special.

His marketability is incredible and if a private deal can't be stitched together to come up with the dollars to match those Euros, then something is wrong here.

But this isn't just about Carter - it's bigger than just one person.

This is about New Zealand flexing their rugby muscles and putting up a show of strength to let the rest of the 15-man world know that we won't be easybeats off the field.

 

LET HIM GO - Marc Hinton

Don't get me wrong. I'm as big an admirer of Dan Carter as the next man. Even if he hasn't managed to reproduce his test form of 2005 since. Undoubtedly his untimely World Cup injury was one of the contributing factors in that demise and New Zealand rugby is most definitely better for having him in its midst.

Certainly the glossy mags would miss his presence too, the pinup looks and the "gee-shucks" country boy attitude making him a favourite of the female fraternity.

He can play a bit too, and no one has ever questioned the young man's courage. He's a guy that appeals to the cross-section of rugby follower.

It's just that I don't think anyone should be bigger than the game in this country. Nor that anyone should hold us to ransom.

If money's what he's about, then he should head north and boost his already pretty healthy bank balance. And then join Justin Marshall in bleating about the closed selection shop for those plying their trade that way.

(By the way that should never change, despite the ill-informed views of some, mostly non-rugby, types. Once the NZRU start picking All Blacks from up north, any hope we ever had of retaining anything near our best players in this part of the world will dissipate.)

If it's about more altruistic motivations, such as seeing the world, experiencing a different "culture", then also fair play to him. I did my OE and who am I to deny Danny-boy his?

But let him go, say I. If playing for the All Blacks doesn't motivate him any longer, then let someone take his place for whom it does. There are plenty of contenders lining up.

Stephen Brett looks like a pretty handy sort of successor; Stephen Donald, if he can shake his yips, also has the goods; while, who knows, maybe Nick Evans could be persuaded to stick around and enjoy some time without Carter's shadow cast all over him.

If the coffers were full, or there were sponsors lining up, it would be different. I'd say dig deep and do what you have to do to keep him.

But these are parlous times for rugby in this part of the world and to break the bank to keep one player around for a couple more years just doesn't make any sense.

Besides Carter needs to do a little mental arithmetic as well. Doesn't he make a good deal of his income off his profile? And isn't that profile higher while he's playing test rugby instead of trundling round in the rain and wet of a northern club season?

Maybe the solutions in keeping Carter and his ilk in this part of the world aren't as simple as dollars and cents. Maybe a revitalised competition product, less travel pressures, a more substantial break and one less team to have to play for would do the trick.

But if he's not prepared to wait around for the NZRU and its fellow Sanzar unions to save the game, then let him head off. Plenty have gone before him, and they've all been replaced.

As Graham Henry is so fond of telling us the All Blacks win nearly all their matches. Even without so many of their so-called best players.