Henry hears no evil, sees no evil, speaks no evil

There's no way of sugar-coating Stephen Donald's performance last week. The All Blacks first five-eighths was flat as a pancake in Hong Kong.

His kicking was poor. His decision-making was off and his confidence ebbed as the game progressed.

I know it, you know it, he knows, and fortunately Graham Henry, who replaced him with Dan Carter before it was too late, knew it.

Just don't expect Henry to admit it.

So loath are the All Black coaches to publicly criticise players, even when it's obvious they've had a shocker, it's become a subject of mirth in the media.

But it's really no laughing matter.

It concerns me that this refusal to speak ill of any individual wearing black is breeding a generation of mentally fragile All Blacks.

Donald and others who have had an off night at the office should be strong enough to hear the All Blacks' coaches confirm as much to the fans, via the media.

As long as the criticism is constructive, balanced and fair, it should not have any detrimental impact nor probably come as any great surprise.

But the All Blacks' coaching staff would beg to differ.

They steadfastly refuse to offer anything remotely resembling criticism when asked to assess various players' performance, even when it makes them look daft.

Their stubbornness is born out of blind loyalty and a belief public criticism will destroy their man's confidence. But that's absolute rot and, quite frankly, fans deserve better.

The majority of us can more of less tell when a player has played poorly. Some of us are even realistic enough to know the unfortunate player hasn't turned into a bad apple over night. That next week they'll probably be back on song.

But Henry and his mates obviously don't share this view.

They seem to think the All Blacks' egos are so brittle that they can't stand a bit of criticism in the press.

Brittle players are mentally weak, and we all know what mental weakness in the high pressure world of sport leads to: events such as we saw in Cardiff at last year's World Cup.

So I'd argue Henry should be using the opportunity to offer a balanced and considered critique when asked to and leave it at that.

Coaching critiques are common in Australia where players are liberally doused in invective from the boss in what are known as "verbal sprays".

Wests Tigers coach Tim Sheens famously tore into his team this year slamming one of his stars, Benji Marshall. The Kiwis hero had just played in a winning team which made the attack all the more extraordinary.

A couple of Sheens' players were man enough to put up their hands, notably not Marshall, and admit they were not performing.

No great harm was done. So why can't it happen here?

Donald lives a fair chunk of his life in the public spotlight anyway so is already adept at reading and listening to people make assessments on his performance.

Much of it is ill-informed. So why not have it come from the experts?

The All Blacks are often guilty of taking themselves way too seriously, and there's not a great deal of trust with the media.

No doubt there would be some screaming headlines the first time such critiques were offered but the novelty would soon wear off and would soon become nothing out of the norm.

- © Fairfax NZ News