• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Donald's Premiership switch falls through

I hope the New Zealand public don't hate Donald. He has always done his best for the jersey and it is not his fault that he is not good enough for international football. Anyone would love to achieve what he has in rugby.

That's exactly my point you say he's not good enough for international football when he's had 22 test caps and only been below par in what 4-5 of those at most? Most of his test caps he did his job or did very well And people just ignore the fact that he has also played a critical role in winning a number of key test matches for the All Blacks. More important games than the first test vs. France in 2008 or Hong Kong 2010 which meant very little or almost nothing in comparison. Heck there was a time his form off the bench for the AB's was so good he was started at 12 while Nonu warmed the wood.

Heck not even Dan Carter is good in every test. He's been pretty bad in some and he's been bloody lucky not to have cost the AB's in other games. Like last year that test in SA he missed a regulation conversion which would have won the match then made a silly knock on late in the game to give SA a chance to win. AB's were lucky to get one last chance and Ma'a Nonu Broke through John Smitt to put Dagg over the line to win the game and Save carter from the headlines. Everyone knows carter is good, maybe the best ever. But people tend to ignore his mistakes.

If Donald had no capacity for test rugby then he wouldn't have got all of 22 test caps or be selected for the AB's three years in a row that's for sure.

One thing is for sure, being Dan Carters backup is the worst job in rugby. Nick Evans was the smart one, he left for the big $$$ when he had the chance. It's the poisoned chalice of NZ rugby.

Hope slade can handle it better than Evans, Donald or Cruden have.
 
The thing about Carter though is he has been so very good in many more other tests. Also he has never (to my memory) had a complete shocker. His ratio of good tests to bad ones I'd argue is so far superior to Donald's. Donald was adequate in a lot of his test matches, good (not outstanding) in one or two and absolutely dire in a few more.
 
That's exactly my point you say he's not good enough for international football when he's had 22 test caps and only been below par in what 4-5 of those at most? Most of his test caps he did his job or did very well And people just ignore the fact that he has also played a critical role in winning a number of key test matches for the All Blacks. More important games than the first test vs. France in 2008 or Hong Kong 2010 which meant very little or almost nothing in comparison. Heck there was a time his form off the bench for the AB's was so good he was started at 12 while Nonu warmed the wood.

Heck not even Dan Carter is good in every test. He's been pretty bad in some and he's been bloody lucky not to have cost the AB's in other games. Like last year that test in SA he missed a regulation conversion which would have won the match then made a silly knock on late in the game to give SA a chance to win. AB's were lucky to get one last chance and Ma'a Nonu Broke through John Smitt to put Dagg over the line to win the game and Save carter from the headlines. Everyone knows carter is good, maybe the best ever. But people tend to ignore his mistakes.

There is a a world of difference between making an error in execution, like missing a conversion, and taking a completely wrong option under pressure, like when your team is leading by less than a converted try in the last seconds on the game, and instead of taking the high percentage play and kicking the ball OUT, you do something completely stupid and kick it straight down the throats of one of the most dangerous counter-attacking backlines in world rugby.

And Hong Kong 2010 WAS important. Losing it has given the Wallabies some heart and confidence. Had we won that game, it would have been a demoralizing 11 wins against Australia in a row, and even more demoralizing, two 4-zip whitewashes back-to-back, and to cap it off, the AB's would now be sitting on a world record 20 consecutive test wins!!

In any case, I don't buy into this "friendly" bullshit as regards test matches, they way we see it in Soccer.

ALL Rugby Union test matches are important. Its the pinnacle of the game, and I refuse to regard June tests and Autumn Internationals as "friendlies". There is no such word in my rugby vocabulary.
 
Last edited:
The Cruden signing was released earlier than the news flash that Donald didn't had a work perlit for the UK.


Nonetheless, Donald's intention to leave New Zealand rugby for Europe was signaled well before Cruden was signed by the Chiefs, so Willliam's statement is still valid.
 
I love people who defend Donald's ability at international level. Name any other player in New Zealand rugby who has lost 28% of their games as an All Black? Is it everyone elses fault? Everyone who played certainly had a part in it, but there is no doubt Donald's playmaking obviously is not up to scratch.
 
Victor Vito

Damn it, I was meaning in terms of having played 20 or more tests. Otherwise there are players like Ben Smith, Victor Vito who have only had a couple of tests for a team in which Stephen Donald was fly half for.
 
I love people who defend Donald's ability at international level. Name any other player in New Zealand rugby who has lost 28% of their games as an All Black? Is it everyone elses fault? Everyone who played certainly had a part in it, but there is no doubt Donald's playmaking obviously is not up to scratch.

Fair enough. See Issac Ross smart arse.

Only a 50% success rate as an All Black During the same time as Donald and should sholder a lot more of the blame for many of the losses during that same period as the All Black lineout was totally out classed and at times utterly useless.

Though it should also be noted that it was a coaching error to put him in such an important position as main lineout taker and caller with no test experience at the time.
 
Fair enough. See Issac Ross smart arse.

Only a 50% success rate as an All Black During the same time as Donald and should sholder a lot more of the blame for many of the losses during that same period as the All Black lineout was totally out classed and at times utterly useless.

Though it should also be noted that it was a coaching error to put him in such an important position as main lineout taker and caller with no test experience at the time.

Fine, I'll concede the fact that Stephen Donald is as good a Isaac Ross.

?????????????? Vito has won every game he has played for the AB's......

Good point.
 
Apparently Bath are appealing the decision, or supposedly are.
 
I love people who defend Donald's ability at international level. Name any other player in New Zealand rugby who has lost 28% of their games as an All Black? Is it everyone elses fault? Everyone who played certainly had a part in it, but there is no doubt Donald's playmaking obviously is not up to scratch.

Donald has lost 5 of 22 All Blacks tests - that is just 23%. The All Blacks historically lose 21% of the time. His statistics aren't that bad in that regard.
 
I think Premier Rugby has put a time limit on Bath to get the Work permit
 
I'll personally pay for the useless ***** one way ticket to England if it keeps him away from the Blues.
 
Top