Acid on NZRU as Henry battles back

KENT BLECHYNDEN/Dominion Post

COMING INTO FOCUS: Word in rugby circles is that Graham Henry believes he has enough support from the NZRU board to win back his All Blacks coaching job when D-day rolls around.

Relevant offers

News

Rogue Sevens tackler drank 24 beers Alcohol crackdown planned for Sevens G-strings on the outer at the Sevens Record crowd as Saracens end Harlequins run Eddie Jones set to replace Kirwan as Japan coach ABs book seized in Spain over drug reference Charged Ex-All Black was celebrating Cup win School rugby breakaway comp 'abhorrent' Famous All Blacks bus up for auction Steve Hansen 'wants a crack" at top ABs job

Word in rugby circles is that Graham Henry believes he has the backing of the NZRU board to retain his job as All Blacks coach.
Advantage Henry as shortlist confirmed?

It's based on the fairly sound logic that he wouldn't have gone through the application process unless he was fairly certain he had a better than even chance of success. Given he has some fairly staunch allies in high places at HQ, it's also not unreasonable to suggest he would have been able to ascertain that information with not much more than a phone call.

Whereas some read the initial NZRU decision not to reappoint Henry as a mortal blow to his chances of retaining the job, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the whole application process may be nothing more than an NZRU ruse so they are perceived to be doing the right thing by Robbie Deans.

If so, if this process by which Deans and the other contenders have put their reputations on the line is nothing more than a PR-charade then, frankly, it is a disgrace.

But reverberations are that Henry now has the backing of the NZRU board, which will make the final decision. Remember this is the same board that approved his dual policies of rotation and reconditioning that were blatant failures in 2007 and contributed heavily to the All Blacks' worst ever World Cup performance.

Many are asking – and rightly so – how can they, having signed off on Henry's key strategic philosophies, then turn round and sack the coach. Isn't there almost a conflicted interest at play here, the same people are wondering?

Then there's the whole makeup of the board that will make the call on the next All Blacks coach. The four contenders will be interviewed next Thursday in Wellington and then the board will meet the following day, at which time they could make their decision.

But who makes up the board? Only one of their number has any top-level coaching experience, Graham Mourie having been the man in charge at Wellington (1998-99) and then the Hurricanes (2000-02). The rest are capable administrators, granted, but are sorely lacking qualifications to make a call such as this.

Given that chairman Jock Hobbs disqualifies himself from voting on this matter (he is Deans' brother-in-law), Mourie is also the only board member who played the game at the highest level, though Paul Quinn did make it as far as the New Zealand Maori.

Questions are starting to be asked whether this board, for all its business acumen, has the rugby knowledge to make a call such as this one.

Certainly the next 10 days or so shape as interesting ones as the process plays out ahead of Thursday's interviews.

Both of the chief contenders have their supporters in the media, with one national television organisation last night presenting as an indication of the public support for Henry a poll they had conducted of 100 Aucklanders. Sound scientific to you?

A more accurate, thorough and more geographically representative poll on RugbyHeaven, which by the middle of Wednesday had drawn nearly 1000 respondents, showed, in fact, that Deans had 68% of the support, compared with Henry's 27%.

It's also worth pondering whether the board are examining the detail of Henry's year with the All Blacks in 2007. His side was so badly underdone and short of either hard match play or a plan to execute in the end-game scenario when they came up against a very average French side in the Cardiff quarter-final that they meekly surrendered one of their worst defeats in the modern era.

A couple of comparisons are also worth making. Henry chopped and changed his All Blacks from week to week, test to test, throughout his time in charge. He said it was building depth. We constantly wondered about the other side of the coin. Even at the World Cup he never turned out the same side from one (mis)match to the next.

Yet Jake White pretty much sent his top South African side out throughout the World Cup, the great majority of his top lineup starting seven of the eight tests heading into the final.

The statistics that emerged on players' game-time in 2007 are even more alarming. Thanks to Henry's reconditioning programme – which he told us would work, and would pay dividends at the World Cup – the All Blacks were handed workloads in 2007 that must have been among the lightest in history.

Skipper Richie McCaw was the hardest worked of the All Blacks' frontline, but he played the equivalent of just 16 80-minute matches throughout the year. Dan Carter had less than 14 matches, Jerry Collins – a noted workaholic – played less than 13 while Byron Kelleher had 8.5 and Ali Williams just 7.3.

Again compare this to South Africa, deserved World Cup champions under White. Outside of props Os du Randt and CJ van der Linde, the remaining members of the starting XV from the final averaged 23 Super 14 and test matches in 2007. Which side got it right when it counted?

That's not to say Henry did not do some fine things with the All Blacks, and his record of 2005 and 2006, when his side was dominant against all-comers, will be strongly emphasised.

But as Henry told us over and over it was all about the World Cup in 2007 and no matter what way the figures are juggled, no matter how much blame is apportioned to an out-of-his-depth referee, the All Blacks got it badly wrong at the sharp end of the equation.

It only remains to be seen whether the board, with their collective absence of coaching nous, will be staunch enough to stand up and admit that they, like Henry, got it wrong and that it's time for a change at the top.

It's also being speculated that Henry is seeking reappointment on the basis that he will step aside after two years and allow Steve Hansen to take the side through to the World Cup on home soil. So that raises the question: is Hansen preferred ahead of Deans as the man to guide the national team in 2011?

One further point in this whole process as it plays out. RugbyHeaven understands there are some fairly strong rumblings from the provinces that it is time for a change of All Blacks coach.

The regions have been sacrificial lambs under Henry as he's wrapped his All Blacks in cotton wool, ruined the Super 14 and sent out so many sub-par national lineups. There are some fairly clear messages from strong rugby areas that this has not been good enough and that it is time to take a new approach.

If their calls are ignored by a board that is elected to represent them, there may yet be more heard on this matter.

But right now, it's no stretch to say that Deans is not the runaway favourite many have perceived him to be. And that Henry remains very much in this game.

The decision-makers:

The NZRU board comprises: Jock Hobbs (chairman)*, Ken Douglas (independent), Mike Eagle (southern), Ivan Haines (northern), Graham Mourie (central), Mark Peters (southern), Paul Quinn (Maori), Warwick Syers (northern), Bill Thurston (independent).

* Hobbs will not vote on the All Black coaching position because of a conflict of interest (he is Robbie Deans' brother-in-law).

- © Fairfax NZ News