Ronan O'Gara signs for Munster & Ireland until the end of 2012/2013.

thomond2006

http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2010/1118/ogarar.html

Ronan O'Gara has committed to a new international contract that will see him playing in Ireland for a further two seasons up to 2013.

Following the recent announcement of Donncha O'Callaghan signing a new contract, O'Gara has now signed up as he competes with Jonathan Sexton for a place in Declan Kidney's side.

ROG will have turned 36 just before he retires (born March 1977).

Great servant for Ireland and Munster.

cson

Who's gonna replace him when he does retire? :eek:

phog

cson wrote: »

Who's gonna replace him when he does retire? :eek:

Declan Cusack

Seriously, I'm delighted for ROG and in another sense for Munster and Ireland, he is without doubt one of the best rugby players ever produced by this country. He still has a lot to offer both province and country.

tolosenc

Has he made any commitment to learning how to tackle?

Judgement Day

cson wrote: »

Who's gonna replace him when he does retire? :eek:

Probably Jonny Wilkinson as he is going to play until he's 50.

outwest

why, why why, we should retire him and focus on sexton and try and bring thru keatley or steenson. and please dont say that there not good enugh. we need to try players out

some_dose

outwest wrote: »

why, why why, we should retire him and focus on sexton and try and bring thru keatley or steenson. and please dont say that there not good enugh. we need to try players out

Eh ok but what about him playing for Munster?

outwest

no problem with that but he play for ireland because of the contract. irfu will want player under contract in match day squads

little173

outwest wrote: »

why, why why, we should retire him and focus on sexton and try and bring thru keatley or steenson. and please dont say that there not good enugh. we need to try players out

Are you seriously suggesting that Munster should retire Ronan O Gara now in favour of Steenson? That is one of the more bizarre things I have heard in a long time, why not go the whole hog and say to BOD he needs to hang up his boots and give Downey a go. Paulie, dont bother coming back from injury, we have got Ryan.

ROG is still an International class player, regardless of the Sexton debate, look at any HC games this year. If he is good enough, he plays.

CatFromHue

long live the rog v sexton debate so

it makes sense, its good for munster and ireland to have him still around.

while keatley may become an international he isnt there yet and it would be counter productive putting him a green shirt juet yet. he still isnt consistent enough.

jacothelad

I'm delighted for ROG but it's ridiculous from the Ireland point of view. We are lumbered with a 'long past his sell by date' player in John Hayes because he is either Deccies mate or because he has an IRFU contract. Exactly the same case may apply and we will also be trapped into using ROG when there should / may - hopefully - be a better young player / players not being given games because ROG is on the payroll.

ROG had a bad patch in 2008 /9 and many thought he was finished. He wasn't but next time he may not come back to his best game. His strength of character is remarkable and he might become a top level coach when he finishes. But giving him a contract for almost the next 3 years is wrong. It is worse than giving EOS that contract before the last RWC. I just can't understand it. Why not wait until after the RWC ? What next? A new IRFU contract for David Wallace.

outwest

little173 wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that Munster should retire Ronan O Gara now in favour of Steenson? That is one of the more bizarre things I have heard in a long time, why not go the whole hog and say to BOD he needs to hang up his boots and give Downey a go. Paulie, dont bother coming back from injury, we have got Ryan.

ROG is still an International class player, regardless of the Sexton debate, look at any HC games this year. If he is good enough, he plays.

not for their provences. just ireland, after the next wc we need to start to build for the next one,

bod currnet international form is poor, after the next wc i doubt we will see him in the green again, he need to greatly imporve his performances to still be with ireland

CatFromHue

outwest wrote: »

bod currnet international form is poor, after the next wc i doubt we will see him in the green again, he need to greatly imporve his performances to still be with ireland

if i didnt know better id ssay there is something wrong with brian o driscoll. he had that vertigo when in new zealand which made no sense and was then pretty much anonimous for the rest of the summer tour.

he has started this season slowly and that hamstring injury he got against racing metro at stage in the game when it happened didnt make any sense.

phog

ROG got his contract on merit, enough said really. It's up to other players to prove themselves capable of overtaking him, why should the IRFU take a punt on them and then discover that they aren't up to it.

outwest

he gets a 3 year contract, on merit ok he been a great sevent fori irish rugby but he wont be at the 2015 wc, but he will be in every match day squad because of this contract, so in 2013 we will have a back up outhalf with a few caps instead of giving an other out half 4 years in the irish set up

jacothelad

phog wrote: »

ROG got his contract on merit, enough said really. It's up to other players to prove themselves capable of overtaking him, why should the IRFU take a punt on them and then discover that they aren't up to it.

Correct mostly BUT: To paraphrase you......Why should the IRFU take a punt on a 34 to 36 year old guy who is already at the last knockings of his career and in the process deny opportunities to up and coming players? It's not as if he'd turn down a game for Ireland if he was selected outside of an IRFU contract. Giving him a two year extension isn't good business. If he is up to it after the RWC then a year is the right way to go. What will they do if his form collapses? Just as they select the now awful Hayes they'll select an awful ROG because he's got a contract.

sock puppet

phog wrote: »

ROG got his contract on merit, enough said really. It's up to other players to prove themselves capable of overtaking him, why should the IRFU take a punt on them and then discover that they aren't up to it.

Just like O'Sullivan got his contract on merit. Not saying he shouldn't be offered a contract after his current one is finished but just because he's good enough for a contract now doesn't mean he will be in two years time.

cson

sock puppet wrote: »

Just like O'Sullivan got his contract on merit. Not saying he shouldn't be offered a contract after his current one is finished but just because he's good enough for a contract now doesn't mean he will be in two years time.

You could say that about any player. A lot can happen in 2 years. Things like form and injuries for example. And believe it or not, they ain't the exclusive preserve of ROG either.

profitius

jacothelad wrote: »

Correct mostly BUT: To paraphrase you......Why should the IRFU take a punt on a 34 to 36 year old guy who is already at the last knockings of his career and in the process deny opportunities to up and coming players? It's not as if he'd turn down a game for Ireland if he was selected outside of an IRFU contract. Giving him a two year extension isn't good business. If he is up to it after the RWC then a year is the right way to go. What will they do if his form collapses? Just as they select the now awful Hayes they'll select an awful ROG because he's got a contract.

Theres only 2 international class Irish qualified 10's. The IRFU would be stupid not to give him a contract. In 3 years time I hope there'll be no need for Ireland to rely on ROG and I reckon one or two young 10's could be good enough for international rugby but IF nobody does come through by then at least ROG will be there as backup.

And playing 10 isn't a physical position. Not in ROG's case anyway!

Corsendonk

sock puppet wrote: »

Just like O'Sullivan got his contract on merit. Not saying he shouldn't be offered a contract after his current one is finished but just because he's good enough for a contract now doesn't mean he will be in two years time.

I don't know, goal kicking fly halves seem to have long playing careers if you look around.

sock puppet

cson wrote: »

You could say that about any player. A lot can happen in 2 years. Things like form and injuries for example. And believe it or not, they ain't the exclusive preserve of ROG either.

Except he's 33 years old and coming to the end of his career. A deal to keep him here another 3 years seems a little much.

Cpt_Blackbeard

As long as the contract doesn't mean that Kidney can force Munster to start him for the next three years. Ireland will hopefully stop looking to him after the world cup, because we badly need to develop a new squad. Hopefully his experience will do wonders to help Munster's young outhalves mature.

I'm surprised that he isn't off to France for a big payday before he retires like what was being rumoured in the last few months.

Teferi

Jaysus Thomond, you opened a can of worms here.

If I was him I would have signed a one year extension and tried to get a final year or so in France/anywhere that pays him loads. Good luck to him anyway

SomeFool

outwest wrote: »

why, why why, we should retire him and focus on sexton and try and bring thru keatley or steenson. and please dont say that there not good enugh. we need to try players out

Honestly, I think that Keatley, Steenson and Humphries are all decent players but, I can't see the same international quality in any of them. I'd guess he's been signed as a steady, reliable, goal kicking back-up to Sexton for the near future until further players come through.

phog

outwest wrote: »

he gets a 3 year contract, on merit ok he been a great sevent fori irish rugby but he wont be at the 2015 wc, but he will be in every match day squad because of this contract, so in 2013 we will have a back up outhalf with a few caps instead of giving an other out half 4 years in the irish set up

AFAIK, Stringer hasn't an Irish contract and yet he has made the squad so to say non contracted players dont make the team is rubbish. Then you can include Murphy and Bowe who obvioulsy dont have Irish contracts in this as well.

jacothelad wrote: »

Correct mostly BUT: To paraphrase you......Why should the IRFU take a punt on a 34 to 36 year old guy who is already at the last knockings of his career and in the process deny opportunities to up and coming players? It's not as if he'd turn down a game for Ireland if he was selected outside of an IRFU contract. Giving him a two year extension isn't good business. If he is up to it after the RWC then a year is the right way to go. What will they do if his form collapses? Just as they select the now awful Hayes they'll select an awful ROG because he's got a contract.

Nonsense, we have two international outhalfs at the moment and you want one of them be told to get lost in the hope that one might appear from nowhere and will be good enough to play for us.

sock puppet wrote: »

Just like O'Sullivan got his contract on merit. Not saying he shouldn't be offered a contract after his current one is finished but just because he's good enough for a contract now doesn't mean he will be in two years time.

So whe the IRFU should get a crystal ball and see where players will be in a few years. Nearly everyone was critical of the IRFU forcing Connacht to offer one year contracts now you're advocating it for National Contracts :eek:

buck65

Great to see O Gara around for another 2 years. Only have to look at the way he almost turned the SA game around when he came on. His vision, experience and kicking makes him one of the most valuable flyhalves in the world. Relentlessly targetted in the loose, it is a testimony to his courage that he keeps getting back for more every time he's floored and is very rarely injured.
One of Munster's favourite sons, here's hoping hew climbs up the all time goalkickers list another few places.

JustinDee

phog wrote: »

Nearly everyone was critical of the IRFU forcing Connacht to offer one year contracts now you're advocating it for National Contracts :eek:

Sorry for the sidetrack, but this appears to require explaining still . . .

As explained before, the situation with the contracts in Connacht goes as follows:-

- The IRFU is requested by its Connacht branch to undertake a viability and feasibility review.
- Review procedure commences.
- Reviewers recommend that while completion is pending, contracts be limited to one year.
This is to avoid contracts bypassing the review's recommendations thus preventing a recommended as lengthier contract from becoming too short and a contract recommended as shorter term from being oversigned.

ROG sticking around for another two will be vital to his province at the very least and I hope he continues on into the coaching side of things as he would have a lot to offer.

toomevara

JustinDee wrote: »

I hope he continues on into the coaching side of things as he would have a lot to offer.

Absolutely imperative. O'Gara still has a lot to offer both on the field and off it at both national and provincial/club level.

thomond2006

Teferi wrote: »

Jaysus Thomond, you opened a can of worms here.

If I was him I would have signed a one year extension and tried to get a final year or so in France/anywhere that pays him loads. Good luck to him anyway

Moving the O'Gara family (I think he has 2 young children) to France for a year mightn't suit.

I'm surprised they gave him a 2 year deal considering his age tbh. Having said that, the man has been an absolute legend for Munster and will never let us down.

I always thought they'd give ROG another year and then bring Keatley down from Connacht to replace him.

myflipflops

I don't get this, people have an issue with giving a contract to one of our few decent performers from this Autumn?? A player who also happens to have 101 caps, 2000+ points and 3 Lions tours?? And all this experience playing in a postion where we have very little strength in depth?

Seriously??

I'm a Leinster fan to the extent that I won't buy a Toyota car but this decision is a complete no brainer for IRISH rugby, not provincial rugby. The world cup is less than a year away. O'Gara will have a big influence for Ireland in it whether starting or off the bench.

desertcircus

The IRFU need to decide what the big target is for the Irish rugby team. Is it the Six Nations or the World Cup? If it's the Six Nations, then fine - sign O'Gara up for another contract. But if we're serious about making a big impact at World Cups, then players who won't be at the next World Cup shouldn't be getting Irish contracts much past the current one.

Juninho Pernambucano retired from the Brazilian football team aged 31, while still perfectly capable of playing at the highest level for another few years (he only left Lyon in 2009). Why? Because as far as he was concerned, every game he played after 2006 was a game's worth of experience not being gained by someone who'd be playing in 2010. O'Gara won't be playing at the World Cup in 2015 (at least, I bloody hope not), and his getting a contract and playing the games means that whoever comes on to replace Sexton in that World Cup won't have had as much big-game experience as they could have.

I'm deadly serious about this - if you're serious about competing at the World Cup, then players who you know won't be going should be used as emergency cover only. Our replacement outhalf at the 2015 Cup is going to have a bad day at the office at some stage; keeping O'Gara on means it's more likely to be at the World Cup. I'd rather lose a Grand Slam to England in 2013 than get knocked out by them in 2015.

smurphy29

I fail to see how this can be bad news for anyone. Saying 'we should be investing in Sexton full time' is a daft argument - when did it become a bad idea to have more than one decent fly half?

Rog may well be 36 when he retires, and while he probably won't be starting too many games for Ireland between the end of the world cup and his retirement, he will still surely have a value to the national squad, be it off the bench or around the training paddock. And I'm sure he'll continue to be a key player for Munster.

He's also the type of player that age won't make a huge difference to - this is not the same as John Hayes. He's never been able to tackle or take the ball into contact, he has a skill set that should still hold up as he enters his mid 30s. If he's around to steer us to a couple of big wins off the bench in 2012 and 2013 I won't be complaining. David Humphries was 36 or 37 when he retired, and he was still able to produce a few classy cameos for Ulster in his last season.

phog

JustinDee wrote: »

Sorry for the sidetrack, but this appears to require explaining still . . .

As explained before, the situation with the contracts in Connacht goes as follows:-

- The IRFU is requested by its Connacht branch to undertake a viability and feasibility review.
- Review procedure commences.
- Reviewers recommend that while completion is pending, contracts be limited to one year.
This is to avoid contracts bypassing the review's recommendations thus preventing a recommended as lengthier contract from becoming too short and a contract recommended as shorter term from being oversigned.

Regardless of the reasons it still attracted a lot of criticism and the point of my reply stands if they felt one year contracts were wrong for Connacht then surely it's wrong to offer a one year contract to one of our best players.

jacothelad

Originally Posted by jacothelad
Correct mostly BUT: To paraphrase you......Why should the IRFU take a punt on a 34 to 36 year old guy who is already at the last knockings of his career and in the process deny opportunities to up and coming players? It's not as if he'd turn down a game for Ireland if he was selected outside of an IRFU contract. Giving him a two year extension isn't good business. If he is up to it after the RWC then a year is the right way to go. What will they do if his form collapses? Just as they select the now awful Hayes they'll select an awful ROG because he's got a contract."

phog wrote: »

Nonsense, we have two international outhalfs at the moment and you want one of them be told to get lost in the hope that one might appear from nowhere and will be good enough to play for us.
:eek:

Did you actually read what I posted? Where did I say he should 'get lost'. As you said Stringer doesn't have an IRFU contract. Why give one of only 22 to a guy who will not feature in 2015. Just to clarify what I said as it appears you can't understand my words.

I said "Giving him a two year extension isn't good business. If he is up to it after the RWC then a year is the right way to go. "

What that means is this. If he is still good enough he can play and if he has succumbed to the ravages of time as happens to all players eventually, then he should not be considered. How do you get from ' a year is the right way to go' to me saying he should 'get lost'? It just defies any kind of even basic understanding. If you are going to label stuff as 'nonsense' at least have the sense to read it first. if you need clarification of the difficult bits then you can p.m. me and I'll do my best to simplify it for you.

JustinDee

phog wrote: »

Regardless of the reasons it still attracted a lot of criticism

Misinformed criticism by many who refuse to look at the actual background of the review in the first place.

phog wrote: »

the point of my reply stands if they felt one year contracts were wrong for Connacht then surely it's wrong to offer a one year contract to one of our best players.

Entirely different situation. Each contract is individual and circumstances, signee, role are all different.

phog

jacothelad wrote: »

Originally Posted by jacothelad
Correct mostly BUT: To paraphrase you......Why should the IRFU take a punt on a 34 to 36 year old guy who is already at the last knockings of his career and in the process deny opportunities to up and coming players? It's not as if he'd turn down a game for Ireland if he was selected outside of an IRFU contract. Giving him a two year extension isn't good business. If he is up to it after the RWC then a year is the right way to go. What will they do if his form collapses? Just as they select the now awful Hayes they'll select an awful ROG because he's got a contract."



Did you actually read what I posted? Where did I say he should 'get lost'. As you said Stringer doesn't have an IRFU contract. Why give one of only 22 to a guy who will not feature in 2015. Just to clarify what I said as it appears you can't understand my words.

I said "Giving him a two year extension isn't good business. If he is up to it after the RWC then a year is the right way to go. "

What that means is this. If he is still good enough he can play and if he has succumbed to the ravages of time as happens to all players eventually, then he should not be considered. How do you get from ' a year is the right way to go' to me saying he should 'get lost'? It just defies any kind of even basic understanding. If you are going to label stuff as 'nonsense' at least have the sense to read it first. if you need clarification of the difficult bits then you can p.m. me and I'll do my best to simplify it for you.

I equate as I'm sure any quality player would when being offered a one contract as being told to get lost. Simple really.

durkadurka

toomevara wrote: »

Absolutely imperative. O'Gara still has a lot to offer both on the field and off it at both national and provincial/club level.

ROG showed in that 20 minutes against SA exactly why we need 2 top outhalves, who can offer different things and change the game tactically. I'm a leinsterman by the way who isn't his biggest fan. He's not exactly a physical specimen so I reckon he hasn't got the pace or physicality to lose with age, so he's good for 2 more years. He's been very injury free too. I don't remember him him ever missing many games.



Maybe after the world cup he'll be more of a last 20 minute man for Munster too, but he will still offer the ability to close out a game or change the approach.

little173

desertcircus wrote: »

The IRFU need to decide what the big target is for the Irish rugby team. Is it the Six Nations or the World Cup? If it's the Six Nations, then fine - sign O'Gara up for another contract. But if we're serious about making a big impact at World Cups, then players who won't be at the next World Cup shouldn't be getting Irish contracts much past the current one.

Juninho Pernambucano retired from the Brazilian football team aged 31, while still perfectly capable of playing at the highest level for another few years (he only left Lyon in 2009). Why? Because as far as he was concerned, every game he played after 2006 was a game's worth of experience not being gained by someone who'd be playing in 2010. O'Gara won't be playing at the World Cup in 2015 (at least, I bloody hope not), and his getting a contract and playing the games means that whoever comes on to replace Sexton in that World Cup won't have had as much big-game experience as they could have.

I'm deadly serious about this - if you're serious about competing at the World Cup, then players who you know won't be going should be used as emergency cover only. Our replacement outhalf at the 2015 Cup is going to have a bad day at the office at some stage; keeping O'Gara on means it's more likely to be at the World Cup. I'd rather lose a Grand Slam to England in 2013 than get knocked out by them in 2015.

This is where we differ, I am hugely sceptical about the while World Cup thing to be honest. Take England for the last world cup playing poorly leading up to it, went on a good run, NZ cant really perform at them, SA timed their run from only about a year out. We were pretty decent going in and flopped, I think you need to look fairly short term and manage our very small pool of players.

irishbucsfan

Poor decision from the IRFU.

O'Gara is a class player and has given so much to this country, but he was contracted through the World Cup already until after next season. At that point he will be 34 years old. Surely giving him a provincial contract then instead of an international one (in the same manner Peter Stringer has been managed) would be in the best interests of the IRFU?

The question is, has Stringer been excluded from the team this weekend because of his contract status? Has Hayes been included for the same reason?

That is an important question. Using John Hayes as an example, we have seen a man go from being an Irish legend pre-2010 to becoming an international laughing stock. Personally I don't think I respect anyone more on a personal level than John Hayes, especially after that game in Croke Park. But he is continually selected in Irish teams now, despite obviously being over the hill. Is that because the IRFU hastilly signed him to a central contract in 2009 out of fear that no one would step up to replace him? If it was that lack of bravery on the part of the union that has led to the likes of Ross/Hagan being snubbed for Irish squads this year, then will it be that same lack of bravery that could lead to players like Madigan/Cusack/Keatley being snubbed until 2013?

For the sake of Irish rugby I hope not.

phog

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Poor decision from the IRFU.

O'Gara is a class player and has given so much to this country, but he was contracted through the World Cup already until after next season. At that point he will be 34 years old. Surely giving him a provincial contract then instead of an international one (in the same manner Peter Stringer has been managed) would be in the best interests of the IRFU?

The question is, has Stringer been excluded from the team this weekend because of his contract status? Has Hayes been included for the same reason?

That is an important question. Using John Hayes as an example, we have seen a man go from being an Irish legend pre-2010 to becoming an international laughing stock. Personally I don't think I respect anyone more on a personal level than John Hayes, especially after that game in Croke Park. But he is continually selected in Irish teams now, despite obviously being over the hill. Is that because the IRFU hastilly signed him to a central contract in 2009 out of fear that no one would step up to replace him? If it was that lack of bravery on the part of the union that has led to the likes of Ross/Hagan being snubbed for Irish squads this year, then will it be that same lack of bravery that could lead to players like Madigan/Cusack/Keatley being snubbed until 2013?

For the sake of Irish rugby I hope not.

Hayes had a good game today, not finished yet.

stephen_n

Ii assume he was given the contract to keep him in Ireland rather than risking him going to France! If Sexton losses form or gets a serious injury ROG provides cover! If he went to top 14 he would be playing a lot more games and the IRFU could not manage this aspect as they would have no say! It comes down to money, the dual contract is more of an incentive to stay based here!

thomond2006

No other 10s are putting their hands up for Ireland anyway. Keatley started strong this season but seems to have faded.

irishbucsfan

thomond2006 wrote: »

No other 10s are putting their hands up for Ireland anyway.

That's a very short-sighted reason to give out a contract extension that doesn't even come in to effect until the end of next season.

If O'Gara is using a move abroad as leverage then I'd prefer that we let him go. It would force Munster/Ireland to use some younger options (maybe make Keatley -> Munster more likely) and would be better for us in the long term.

thomond2006

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's a very short-sighted reason to give out a contract extension that doesn't even come in to effect until the end of next season.

Oh I agree, it is short-sighted.

It seems to be Ireland's way though.

phog

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's a very short-sighted reason to give out a contract extension that doesn't even come in to effect until the end of next season.

If O'Gara is using a move abroad as leverage then I'd prefer that we let him go. It would force Munster/Ireland to use some younger options (maybe make Keatley -> Munster more likely) and would be better for us in the long term.

Are you in favour of this for all Irish players or just ROG?

stephen_n

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's a very short-sighted reason to give out a contract extension that doesn't even come in to effect until the end of next season.

If O'Gara is using a move abroad as leverage then I'd prefer that we let him go. It would force Munster/Ireland to use some younger options (maybe make Keatley -> Munster more likely) and would be better for us in the long term.

Nothing in Keatley's performances so far suggest he is a better option at 10 than ROG so should New Zealand drop Carter after the world cup to start planning for the next one? Sexton forced his way into the setup by his performances as did Cooper for Australia and where as keatley may become an international class 10 in the future it is not likely to happen while he is at Connacht! Having said that he and not ROG should have been on the bench against Samoa and possibly Argentina!

danthefan

stephen_n wrote: »

Nothing in Keatley's performances so far suggest he is a better option at 10 than ROG so should New Zealand drop Carter after the world cup to start planning for the next one? Sexton forced his way into the setup by his performances as did Cooper for Australia and where as keatley may become an international class 10 in the future it is not likely to happen while he is at Connacht! Having said that he and not ROG should have been on the bench against Samoa and possibly Argentina!

What mind-bogglingly rubbish logic.

stephen_n

danthefan wrote: »

What mind-bogglingly rubbish logic.

How so, it is the exact logical extension of his argument! That form should be disregarded by age and future possible potential! If you can explain to me a logical difference between the analogy's I'm all ears!

irishbucsfan

stephen_n wrote: »

How so, it is the exact logical extension of his argument! That form should be disregarded by age and future possible potential! If you can explain to me a logical difference between the analogy's I'm all ears!

Its completely different. O'Gara is nearly 6 years older than Dan Carter!

irishbucsfan

phog wrote: »

Are you in favour of this for all Irish players or just ROG?

Of course just ROG, because I hate him...

No, if any player at that age (34) is out of contract then we should seriously consider other options. If O'Driscoll starts waving foreign offers around after the world cup then I'd be completely in favour of moving him on and going with Earls/McFadden etc. as our options at 13.

stephen_n

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Its completely different. O'Gara is nearly 6 years older than Dan Carter!

But it's applying the same logic, Carter will be 33 by the next world cup after New Zealand. So by the OP's logic New Zealand should be looking to replace him and use those four years to build the new outhalf up.

My point is if Keatley was knocking on the door and demanding to be picked it might be a valid argument but it's not. O'Gara will give us the best option for cover for the next two years while Sexton cements his abilities rather than having two outhalves finding their way in international rugby. Keatley if he is good enough will hopefully be pushing his case for selection a lot harder by then and will still have 2 years to gain experience off the bench.