Wilkinson Was Better Than Carter, Says Woodward

First topic message reminder :

Headline reads "Jonny was better than King Carter"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2507452/SIR-CLIVE-WOODWARD-Jonny-Wilkinson-better-Dan-Carter.html

Woodward does make that claim, but doesn't really explain why. The Daily Mail copywriter hasn't really done him any favours by singling that sentence out. Woodward's piece is more of a lengthy tribute to Carter. While he does mention Wilkinson's defence, most people would probably say that.

When he was at his peak, Wilkinson was probably the best 10 in the world but I'd have Carter in my team. You think Woodward might make that choice too if he was going with his head rather than his heart.

GeordieFalcon wrote:JW had a very good running game...he had pace, a good step and an eye for the gap. His handling maybe wasnt exceptional but was still very good.

But people forget this and think he was just "a kicker".

He was just a kicker. Not even a particularly good tactical kicker. He also lacked range.

At the time he was a useful asset since the game was dominated by ruck penalties, favoured negative dour game slowing tactics and he could kick a penalty goal. As the laws adjusted to the removal of rucking his lack of vision and slow decision making found him out.

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm sure JW's lethal try scoring and attacking abilities were held back by not having some of Dylan Hartley's ability at applying just the right not quite enough obstruction to create the gaps for him to run through.  

If thats the case you could argue Carters success in the 05 lions series can be partly attributed to him having 2 henchmen follow their orders to a tee within minutes of starting the first test.

fa0019 wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm sure JW's lethal try scoring and attacking abilities were held back by not having some of Dylan Hartley's ability at applying just the right not quite enough obstruction to create the gaps for him to run through.  

If thats the case you could argue Carters success in the 05 lions series can be partly attributed to him having 2 henchmen follow their orders to a tee within minutes of starting the first test.

Yes because BoD has shown, on each of his numerous chances, his innate ability to neutralise New Zealand's play makers.

Seriously   have I woken up on fantasy island? Or is it twilight zone delusional hour?

GloriousEmpire wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:JW had a very good running game...he had pace, a good step and an eye for the gap. His handling maybe wasnt exceptional but was still very good.

But people forget this and think he was just "a kicker".

He was just a kicker. Not even a particularly good tactical kicker. He also lacked range.

At the time he was a useful asset since the game was dominated by ruck penalties, favoured negative dour game slowing tactics and he could kick a penalty goal. As the laws adjusted to the removal of rucking his lack of vision and slow decision making found him out.

Later in his career he was seen more as a kicker but pre 2003, JW was a sublime attacking 10. I am sure there will be some old videos on youtube to be seen.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm sure JW's lethal try scoring and attacking abilities were held back by not having some of Dylan Hartley's ability at applying just the right not quite enough obstruction to create the gaps for him to run through.  

If thats the case you could argue Carters success in the 05 lions series can be partly attributed to him having 2 henchmen follow their orders to a tee within minutes of starting the first test.

Yes because BoD has shown, on each of his numerous chances, his innate ability to neutralise New Zealand's play makers.

Seriously :Picard: have I woken up on fantasy island? Or is it twilight zone delusional hour?

GE when you are around... its always the twilight zone delusional hour.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:JW had a very good running game...he had pace, a good step and an eye for the gap. His handling maybe wasnt exceptional but was still very good.

But people forget this and think he was just "a kicker".

He was just a kicker. Not even a particularly good tactical kicker. He also lacked range.

At the time he was a useful asset since the game was dominated by ruck penalties, favoured negative dour game slowing tactics and he could kick a penalty goal. As the laws adjusted to the removal of rucking his lack of vision and slow decision making found him out.

Just for you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_mLbOP2oTA

GloriousEmpire wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:JW had a very good running game...he had pace, a good step and an eye for the gap. His handling maybe wasnt exceptional but was still very good.

But people forget this and think he was just "a kicker".

He was just a kicker. Not even a particularly good tactical kicker. He also lacked range.

At the time he was a useful asset since the game was dominated by ruck penalties, favoured negative dour game slowing tactics and he could kick a penalty goal. As the laws adjusted to the removal of rucking his lack of vision and slow decision making found him out.

Why come on a rugby forum when you obviously have never watched much rugby...

Woodward talking about Wilkinson in The Daily Mail.

I bet there's some serious spittle on GE's monitor/phone screen.

GloriousEmpire wrote:
He was just a kicker. Not even a particularly good tactical kicker. He also lacked range.

Think you're a bit harsh there GE. He was for a time a very good steady kicker. You just know concede a penalty anything up to 40 metres from your line and it'll be 3 points against you. We've been on the receiving end often enough playing England when I had thought we were the better side on the pitch, running in tries all round the park (yes we did have an attacking side in those days!!) and still come off losing from those kicks of his, drat as I would've say at the time!!!

Hmm, good point GE, I'm fairly sure New Zealand have never utilised significant degrees of obstruction through dummy runners and lazy runners or "holding the line". They certainly did not master it and therefore Carter has never gained from it

 

If Johnny was just a kicker, Will Greenwood must have been even better than I thought he was. Seriously, as England's backs scored plenty of tries and he managed that backline with such a limited 10, he's almost certainly the greatest rugby player of all time, with daylight second

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha9RqQmtXUU

One of my all time favourites

I am not sure but I think it was Ntamack's last international

The title bears no relation to the article apparently. It's a bit like the other day Quade Cooper better than McCaw on defence. You don't need to read an article nowadays to know the title is attention grabbing sensationalism as people comment on the title rather thanthe article. It's like Louis CK saying a video posted on Facebook that has a thumbnail of your child but the video itself is 5 minutes of your bum and scrotum will elicit comments such as OMG that's so cute and + 1 so adorable. Who can be arsed watching such trivial nonsense?

At least though the article has sparked debate and like fools we keep getting sucked into their game. But what they hey, it beats working. Happy Friday everyone. Or as Jesus said, do not just have any Friday. Have a Good Friday and rise from the dead on Sunday. Don't mind the alcohol fumes. That's why you're wearing a toga.

It IS true that Carter has, and has had, a smörgåsbord of talent to work with, which always makes a difference.  Is Carter making the smörgåsbord look tastier than it really is or does the smörgåsbord varnish his work?  That's an eternal question that might have a lot of stats behind it but will never really have a definitive answer.

But the same could be true for Wilkinson.  He wasn't a one man team.  Indeed, he became the icon that he is because of his kicking talent.  No kicker kicks unless he has a team giving him endless opportunities to do so.  So he was part of a potent team - certainly in the forwards, who forced penalty after penalty. That they liked that menu and kept to it is in part down to his predictability at the kicking but still, no team effort, no kicks.

Wilkinson had his time - and for England it was a glorious time.  But look at the IRB ranking graph since records began and it's frightening how dominant the All Blacks have been.  Carter is only one player yes - but he's been a central figure in their continuing potency.

SecretFly wrote:It IS true that Carter has, and has had, a smörgåsbord of talent to work with, which always makes a difference.  Is Carter making the smörgåsbord look tastier than it really is or does the smörgåsbord varnish his work?  That's an eternal question that might have a lot of stats behind it but will never really have a definitive answer.

But the same could be true for Wilkinson.  He wasn't a one man team.  Indeed, he became the icon that he is because of his kicking talent.  No kicker kicks unless he has a team giving him endless opportunities to do so.  So he was part of a potent team - certainly in the forwards, who forced penalty after penalty.  That they liked that menu and kept to it is in part down to his predictability at the kicking but still, no team effort, no kicks.

Wilkinson had his time - and for England it was a glorious time.  But look at the IRB ranking graph since records began and it's frightening how dominant the All Blacks have been.  Carter is only one player yes - but he's been a central figure in their continuing potency.

I agree fly

take Hugo Porta for instance. Had a decent pack but in the 80s he was a man apart. He took his side to SA and drew a series 1-1. Not bad considering the boks had smashed the '80 lions, were within touching distance of beating NZ in an away series in '81 and dismantled the kiwis in 86 at home.
He didn't have the tools and he still achieved remarkable things.

I'll wager that never, in the history of 606 v2, has the word smörgåsbord been used 3 times in one post. THRICE!! Impressive stuff fly!

Well as smörgåsbord's go this thread didnt look that tempting but barring a couple of dishes which are best left well alone overall its been pretty damn good

tatterd wrote:I'll wager that never, in the history of 606 v2, has the word smörgåsbord been used 3 times in one post. THRICE!! Impressive stuff fly!

I knew connoisseurs of flowery lingo would appreciate that, tatterd - thus I used it three times for effect

Nachos Jones wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:JW had a very good running game...he had pace, a good step and an eye for the gap. His handling maybe wasnt exceptional but was still very good.

But people forget this and think he was just "a kicker".

He was just a kicker. Not even a particularly good tactical kicker. He also lacked range.

At the time he was a useful asset since the game was dominated by ruck penalties, favoured negative dour game slowing tactics and he could kick a penalty goal. As the laws adjusted to the removal of rucking his lack of vision and slow decision making found him out.

Later in his career he was seen more as a kicker but pre 2003, JW was a sublime attacking 10. I am sure there will be some old videos on youtube to be seen.

Let's not go overboard here. He was certainly more than just a kicking outside half, but to say he was a 'sublime attacking 10' is to lie.

OzT wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:
He was just a kicker. Not even a particularly good tactical kicker. He also lacked range.

Think you're a bit harsh there GE. He was for a time a very good steady kicker. You just know concede a penalty anything up to 40 metres from  your line and it'll be 3 points against you. We've been on the receiving end often enough playing England when I had thought we were the better side on the pitch, running in tries all round the park (yes we did have an attacking side in those days!!) and still come off losing from those kicks of his, drat as I would've say at the time!!!  

Oh yeah, as I said. In terms of reliability within 40 meters he was top drawer. Very few before or since could match his accuracy from the tee.

But his tactical kicking from hand has always been average, and he was no Steyn with his range. He also appeared at a time when place kicking was globally weak. So he appeared to give more of an ad range than he might have.

1/2p is a far better all round player to me. With an equally good place kick.

Probably a number of better outside halfs who played in the same era as Wilkinson, but didn't play behind the English pack!

Carter plays in the best side in the World but has rightly been no1 in his position. Getting to the end of his career now and I am not sure he still deserves the no1 accolade, who will take his crown?

Carter at the moment isn't even the second best 10 at the crusaders.

Seagultaf wrote:Probably a number of better outside halfs who played in the same era as Wilkinson, but didn't play behind the English pack!

Carter plays in the best side in the World but has rightly been no1 in his position. Getting to the end of his career now and I am not sure he still deserves the no1 accolade, who will take his crown?

Owen Farrell.

Seagultaf wrote: who will take his crown?

Nobody. The IRB will retire his number as a mark of respect. That'll make rugby a damn sight more interesting to watch! Phillips will get to be 9 and 10, something he's always wanted.

Seagultaf wrote:Probably a number of better outside halfs who played in the same era as Wilkinson, but didn't play behind the English pack!

Carter plays in the best side in the World but has rightly been no1 in his position. Getting to the end of his career now and I am not sure he still deserves the no1 accolade, who will take his crown?

Who?

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Seagultaf wrote:Probably a number of better outside halfs who played in the same era as Wilkinson, but didn't play behind the English pack!

Carter plays in the best side in the World but has rightly been no1 in his position. Getting to the end of his career now and I am not sure he still deserves the no1 accolade, who will take his crown?

Who?

Em.....well there's................................................ I mean, there was that.........................................

I mean, ....well it's hard to name them off the top of my head coz they didn't get much opportunity to do much kicking................ as England was there at the time doing theirs.

I love the old chestnuts and this is one of the best,

Look...even die hard English fans know in their hearts that Carter is probably the best 10 of all time. Wilkinson was good though and would certainly make it into the top ten.  

I did point out, when I started this thread, that the Daily Mail headline hardly gave a fair impression of Woodward's piece, which was actually a lengthy tribute to Dan Carter.

Wilko and carter comparison is truly unfair

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever !

Totally different league

If wilko had been a kiwi he wouldn't have been capped .

No disrespect to 'Jonny' - a magnificent goal kicker and consummate pro, even if, perhaps, he does sometimes take himself a tad too seriously? Trying to bite your hand off underwater while screaming??? It's only rugby mate, get a grip - no not with your teeth on your thumb...

...BUT, if Ceri Sweeney had played behind that pack then we'd now be talking about the Glyncoch Commando as an all-time great.

Armchair ride.

I like the way Wilkinson gets his performances downplayed, yet Carter who has sat untouched for club and country, always stepping forward as his superstar pack and strike runners get the momentum never gets the same sort of downplaying.

For me it's simple, they were both superstars of the game, both won the world cup they deserved, had near perfect careers and are possibly 2 of the best role models for the sport you could imagine.

Who was better? Noone will ever know, Carters running game was miles better than Jonny, was his cultured boot as good? Carter was nowhere near as solid defencively, infact I'd go as far to say that Jonny was the best defeding 10, nae back of all time!

One played flat and got others in around him, and loved to break the line, the other was all about putting his pack in the perfect places and stepping up when it counted.

Nothing much between 2 superb players, except that Jonny had to go through 3 times more national coaches, a drop off the cliff of quality players around him.

alive555 wrote:Wilko and carter comparison is truly unfair

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever !

Totally different league

If wilko had been a kiwi he wouldn't have been capped .

Of course he wouldn't have been capped.  Too small a recognition for a bloke of his skill and stature.

He would have been crowned.  King Jonny the First, of NZ.  Kiwis would be singing God Save The King...............

Imagine if NZ had managed to get Jonno AND Jonny!

I think an away World Cup win wouldn't have been out of the question.

It's always hard comparing players from different countries/eras. They are both very good players. I think most kiwi fans would vote for Carter as the best NZ first five and most English fans Wilkenson as the best English. None of us can remember or judge players prior to WWII and few can remember players from the 50's and 60's (Alan excluded of course). I'm guessing Welsh, Irish, Australian and Bok supporter have their own favorites.

So it's all down to bias. I remember the 80's with great 10's such as Botha, Porta, Ella, Lynagh, Fox and Davies. So this would be my example. While Fox got a lot of press in NZ for his kicking, passing and game management. I always preferred others. Lynagh was a solid fly half. Davies was a brilliant attacking flyhalf, playing for a poor team. Ella showed how the game could be played and retired in the blink of eye. Porta was a huge talent, who we rarely got to see and who, like Davies played for a poor team. Botha was probably the most talented, but we saw so little of him due to SA's exclusion. The views on these players will no doubt be based on where you're from.

In terms of Wilkinson and Carter. I think the standard is constantly rising. My personal opinion is that Carter is the most complete flyhalf we've seen yet. At his peak he had no weakness. We was a great runner, passer, kicker of the ball. A greater reader of the game. A destructive tackler and an additional loose forward. His peak was long.

Wilkinson: 1246.

Carter: 1435.

I fail to see what relevance the times of their birth has Laurie...

Butterfingers Wilko had a superstar pack as well...

disneychilly wrote:Butterfingers Wilko had a superstar pack as well...

Once again, England - and Jonny - had larger testicles.
Ends the discussion right there.

Sorry, but I can't share where I obtained that FACT.............