Rugby: Two classy players who march to different beat

Dan Carter. Photo / Getty Images

Billed as the master versus the apprentice, the clash between Daniel Carter and Stephen Brett was anything but.

If Brett truly was a Carter in the making, Canterbury would never have let him go. That's the thing - Brett's not cast in Carter's mould.

Carter was endless poise last night. That cultured left boot banged the ball to all the right places. He played with his head up - seemingly having more time than any other player on the field.

Carter just didn't make mistakes, not ones that really mattered anyway and his break to create George Whitelock's try on 20 minutes was the defining act of the first half.

It's a sign of Carter's class that despite being named man of the match, he still isn't content with his form. "I feel good," he said. "I'm slowly progressing but I'm not yet near my top form."

Brett is not the same type of player. He was made in Canterbury and they tried to brand him with their stamp. But it never quite took hold.

Brett was born down there, grew up and cut his rugby teeth down there - but he looks a hell of a lot like an Aucklander when he plays football.

That's not to damn him as inferior to Carter. He's just different and will inevitably come off second best if comparisons are made on the basis of Brett emulating Carter. They don't play the same way.

If Brett is to be judged fairly, it has to be understood that he never has been, nor will be, a Carter clone. He wasn't brought to Auckland to be Carter. He's here to be himself and develop himself as well as a side in desperate need of something more compelling at first five.

He gave them largely what they needed last night.

"I thought he had a strong game," said Carter of Brett. "He had his kicking boots on and it's always fun playing against good mates which he is."

Carter's assessment was echoed by Blues coach Pat Lam who was aware of the emotional drain Brett would have felt.

"I thought he played really well,"said Lam. "He needed to run the show for us and he did."

As Blues fans have been aware, Brett makes mistakes. They can be costly, yet to his credit he doesn't hang his head when it all goes wrong.

There is a bit of mental fortitude to Brett, it's almost as if he is accepts better than anyone that his package has flaws.

It's tempting to call him maverick, even mercurial, but neither term hangs quite right on him. He's adventurous and he's confident. He's bold and positive. His flaw is more uncontained exuberance rather than out-and-out risk taking.

There has also been an element of inexperience shining through. The intercept pass he threw against the Hurricanes was the result of him not having the speed of thought to pull out of the intended play.

After more time, Brett's intuition should improve; he should be better able to envisage things before they happen and sense what's on and what's not.

His game management should tighten; tactical authority increase and while he'll still take risks, they should be more calculated with a greater awareness of how to abort or adapt.

For a region that yearns for the arrival of the new Carlos Spencer, it's not easy to accept that right now Brett is as much a work in progress as he is.

But for all the ground he has to make up, Brett is still the best first five the Blues have had since Spencer. He has already made them a better team; less inclined to disappear into a flurry of speculative passing and aimless running.

Even under Nick Evans, the Blues had a take it or leave it approach. These days they play to a plan which in itself is a giant step forward.

The sight of Brett dropping a goal after five minutes said it all. The Blues under Brett are not wedded to finding open spaces and scoring tries.