Now youre talking Graham Henry...

First topic message reminder :

Recent posting has Henry looking back instead of forwards for this years World cup.

http://www.allblacks.com/news/16468/All-Blacks-to-focus-on-history-and-rivals

The lessons to be learned are all there.

Hopefully he'll find the need to match the passion and exuberance of the French when the chips are down

Hopefully he'll find the need to adapt when the decisions arent going his way can be covered with back up plans and personnel.

Hopefully he'll find that the inactivity on attack and inadequacies on defence from 30-60 minutes by the AB's is whats caused most of the pain.

Hopefully he'll find the need to set a high standard of intensity, pace and skill to match what has won the only event for the team so far.

But mostly hopefully he'll find a way of getting the team through to the end, with his usual stubborn determination and humility intact, doing it the AB way.

Here's.......hoping...

That was a classic riposte was it ? I thought it was more his attempt at "humour" which again failed as no one responded. But in reponse, not one Argentinian played for England after Argentina reached third place in the IRB rankings in October 2007.

What started as the thoughts of Graham Henry has deterioated AGAIN into lets slag the All Blacks RWC record,1987 not counting etc.Think on this but for NZ and Aus interest there may well not have been a RWC.After All SH sides have`nt exactly struggled much over the years beating NH sides when they met.Lions aside for example NH sides have beaten NZ precisely 21 times since 1905.
Back to the point ,I find graham Henry`s comments about identify ing back ups at 7 and 10 for RWC.Indications they will get game time in 3Ns implies a new starter or cap.Berquist and Todd?anything s got to be better than Donald Duck.Full Back if Toeva or Dagg don`t make it Marshall or Ben Smith?S15 is a level down from tests But?

Yes I knew it would Alan but thought some might find it interesting. For me the issue isnt so much about the ability of the SH to beat the NH- we do it year in year out without a lot of learning being done by one half in between.

I mean look at the U20's... "this year I reckon we have the goods then....bang... "... normal transmission resumes. The gulf is clear and instead of really getting down here to see why it exists we go through this silliness every year.

The issue is the challenge to the AB's to overcome why, with their substantial domination in most areas, they cannot get over the line in the games showpiece. Whether we like it or not the WC is the yardstick and NZers pride themselves in being able to lead the game in all departments- 7's, u20, womens, superxv etc as well as the Bledisloe, 3N, AI's and Lions tours. Generally, we lead them all, by a distance.

So I would love to be a fly o the wall at the analysis and inner thinkings of this process because this is the one thing that really does have a influence on this years tournament. If we manage to go through and win it, the discussions, theories and learnings that go on over the next few weeks will have become invaluable. And even if we dont win, we must benefit from it in the long run. as ever, we are always relearning the game.

Well said Taylorman. I do want the cup to be a success, and everyone that attends or visits NZ to be blown away by the country, hospitality and rugby. I'm a bit nervous about it as like all other Kiwis on here I'd like NZ to raise its profile as a great country and destination however unlike the Americas Cup and Lord of the Rings this is the one thing that makes us testy. Though thankfully not like those Canadian ice hockey fans! Man they went mental in Vancouver.

Heart wants the ABs to sweep all before them, but if the good of the game and the good of the country requires we lose, what the hey. I'm still filthy about 07 but I'm still here and still an ABs fan so there can't have been too much damage.

Really want Todd at 7 in that case with Thomson on the bench. For 10 who knows. Could be Cruden the way his kicking's improved. Either way Slade for me if he gets right.

Thoughts of Graham Henry.RWC squad 16/14 forwards backs mix 3 hookers,3 SH`s.specialist 7.Replacement 10 may have some All Black experience,will reward NZ loyalty.Implies McAlister,Brett,Berquist,Delaney,Donald non-starters.down to Crudon,Slade or Tony Brown,unless weepu plays at FH.Consistency in tackle ball area by ALL officials NH and SH no variations of opinion.Indications may be more kicking.

Geez I hadnt actually read all that stuff before Alans post. Could have taken one of many excerpts from the old 606 and pasted it there.

Yeah I want the cup to go well also, thats the primary aim for the country as a whole. It may be our last here given 'money' will dictate future hosted events.

Winning it is the icing and not winning it here opens a new low chapter for NZ rugby as we've never lost a cup at home.

Provided we make the semi's the last 2 matches is at Eden park and given we have lost one on 35 tests since the last WC win on the ground against all those attending this event, the choking tag will be well and truly confirmed.

Its as simple as that. It would prove once and for all that others lift higher than us at the key stages. I'd be happy to concede the point and that clarified we can all move on in agreement that the problem is as real as I've been saying and fix it.

I think even if we win it people will still go on about choking. "can only win it at home etc"
In fact people will still go on about it even if we win every second one as long as they think we are the best overall, because its one of the few things they can have a go at us about.

S15 rugby, a game where referees have scant regard for rules over making the game more exciting for TV and spectator. No wonder kiwis moan when games are reffed properly.

To embarras our Club sides with having to play Franchise teams from NZ is silly. Most club sides take the AB's to the wire and some actually beat them. I find no reason why British clubs should have to face 2nd best.

Welsh John would you like to quantify that.the last club side to beat an All Blacks one was Munster,or one of the English divisional groups.I don`t think any has since at least 2000.If you you are referring to Munster 2008,that was a All Blacks side,NOT the All Blacks side.A game to give the rest of the non test squad game time,with a few starters on the bench if things go wrong.Now if you were talking about the Boks 2009 you have a point.I would be surprised if many CLUB sides[not Franchises like Leinster/Munster]would trouble ALL the Currie Cup or ITM sides when they were at full strength.

Coming back to the actual topic of conversation.

One thing I am certain of is that Graham Henry is a very proud man, perhaps pride was his downfall in the past.

SA and England in particular do not play with the flair of the Australians or All Blacks, but yet have been succesful at RWC.

Of the 6 RWC tournaments thus far, 3 has been won by teams playing conservative rugby and 3 has been won by teams playing running rugby.

The question is, which gameplan is the better one to play in knockout matches.

Well I don't think this is that simple. NZ in particular have proven for example in the Junior world cup that running rugby can win you three straight tournaments. But then NZ has been so superior in the Junior World Cup that they were never really under pressure and had to assess the risk factor associated with running rugby when matches are close affairs.

So in my opinion, perhaps the answer lies in firstly the strenghts of each team, focusing on the execution of what they do well. Making no mistakes in that execution.

But, what is also very important is that a team must be able to adjust their play when the pressure is on. Even though in 2007 the All Blacks did try to keep the ball close when they were inder pressure, their execution failed them as this was not their primary way of playing the game. Add to that the culmination of decisions by the referee and inexperience of Richie McCaw as captain, and you have a recipe for disaster which the All Blacks could not overcome.

So in summary, both gameplans work, as long as they are executed to perfection, decisions need to go your way, and you must have the ability to adjust AND EXECUTE a different gameplan when the pressure is on.

If Graham Henry can get the All Blacks to do that, they will without a doubt lift the trophy.

As long as he plays 'The' All Blacks and not 'A' All Black team you'll be ok.

hahahahahaha

If it says New Zealand as the side, then it is the New Zealand rugby team.

To all those putting down All Blacks since 1987 ,games played 231,games lost 42,a win percentage of 81,72%.The 1987 side record 1987-91 including RWC loss 36 wins 3 losses 1.draw.Most of the put downs are not from Sa or Aus supporters.But from NH supporters whose record versus the ABs in RWCs is ZERO,France alone defeating,and having been defeated by the All Blacks in turn twice.From those figures it is clear that the AB over all dominance goe s back to at least 1987.If you want to bring up the Boks not being there in 1987 ,neither were they in 1991 but no one knocks Australia for that or says it does`nt count.The Boks went from 1992 to 1998 with a record of 12 played 2 won,one drawn 6 of those defeats were at home.You just don`t get it do you the knockers.EVERY test match matters,not just in a RWC,you should go out to play your best everytime.Yes you`ll win or lose matches,yes they`ll be matches you think you lost because of decisions given against you.BUT you have the satisfaction of having given it your best shot.EVERY side in the world goes through slumps.The All Blacks did in the 1970`s, 1998,first part 2009.Will they win in 2011 ? I neither know nor care as long as they continue to play to win EVERY game then that will do me.

Yeah in all fairness Alan the Munster B team was playing then. Probably the most committed performance I've ever seen. Out on their feet after 50 and still took till the 78th minute to crack.

I agree with you Biltong in that teams should play what is natural to them. In some ways Henry is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't with regard to playing expansively. If we play wide and lose then the knives will be out for not playing conservatively, and if we keep it tight and lose then we'll get bagged for forcing players to play what is not natural to them.

Personally I hope for the former and I hope it is successful. Have a crack and play to your strengths. NZ and Aussie's strengths are wide so why not. In terms of Australia, well people say that going wide early etc is risky, but if their tight five is getting a pasting then why not spin it and get the pill to their strength? Keeping it tight in that regard would be high risk to me.

Welshjohn that's pretty rich implying that the Super Rugby teams don't deserve to play the NH clubs. I've got no idea what you're smoking on that front actually. Sure teams would peak facing NZ, but in reality it's David and Goliath and I agree with Alan in that most of the time NH sides would come off second best. You got a chip on your shoulder from the Under 20s or something? Because if you're implying that the 07 QF was reffed properly then get out of the rugby boards. Sure NZ stuffed up big time and French defence was amazing, but you must be Stephen Jones if you want to praise that performance.

As stated if the AB's were that great in 2007 they had 80 minutes to destroy everything in their path. They were stopped by France, whether it was a pretty match to watch blah blah blah is immaterial, they still bloody lost pal.

I don't smoke nor do I have a horse in my back garden

I said they stuffed up didn't I? I asked you whether or not you really thought Barnes refereed that game properly as you stated in your previous post.

disneychilly wrote:I said they stuffed up didn't I? I asked you whether or not you really thought Barnes refereed that game properly as you stated in your previous post.

Like many games over many years the ref does not get it right every time, most certainly Barnes could have reffed better but it was the same for NZ as it was for France. I NZ were the better team then over 80 minutes (for the 1000th time) NZ should have beaten them if they were the better team.

As per thread .... it also amazes me how NZ have gone from hating Henry in 2007 to him being the best thing since sliced bread. After their defeat in 2007 as you can imagine it was National headlines in NZ and the majority of people wanted Henry gone......and I mean GONE.....Dean's was waiting in the wings. There was debate after debate on TV and many a hated letter in the few Daily Newspapers here written about Henry still in charge of the AB's after the humiliating early plane home from the 2007 WC. Also the ex- All Blacks and other sporting experts wating Henry gone at this time. Funny old country.

I thought Barnes did a marvellous job. But had an "independant" review of the game, paid for by the NZRU said he had made lots of mistake. I wonder if France had paid for the "independant" review the result would have been the same ? We still have some NZ fans bleating a forward pass from 4 years ago. I presume no NZ try ever came from a forward pass ?

Fact is England fans loved it because it was the only time they'll see an Englishman knock NZ out of a rugby tournament.

You can't defend his pathetic performance on the basis by finding other examples of refereeing incompetence or we end up in a very much downward spiral.

His performance was a disgrace to the tournament. Any real fan of the game will agree.

nottins wrote:I thought Barnes did a marvellous job. But had an "independant" review of the game, paid for by the NZRU said he had made lots of mistake. I wonder if France had paid for the "independant" review the result would have been the same ? We still have some NZ fans bleating a forward pass from 4 years ago. I presume no NZ try ever came from a forward pass ?

I think only GG moans about the forward pass. The penalty count in the second half was criminal, but had Carter or Evans been on the field, or had somone had the sense to "point out" the count to WB, or had Mauger been on the bench instead of McAllister we should have walked the game.

TheGreyGhost wrote:Fact is England fans loved it because it was the only time they'll see an Englishman knock NZ out of a rugby tournament.

You can't defend his pathetic performance on the basis by finding other examples of refereeing incompetence or we end up in a very much downward spiral.

His performance was a disgrace to the tournament. Any real fan of the game will agree.

Get over it. Change the record. They lost. How long are you going to keep going on about it ? Another 4 years ? 10 ? 40 ?

As a real fan of the game, i thought he did OK. A real fan of the game would realise that sometimes referees make mistakes, just like players do. Saying he was a disgrace does not make you a real fan of the game.

GG just isn't man enough to give respect to a team that win's. His rants on 606 go all the way to prove that. I think his head is

I'm dirty about that game and will always be. Not just because of Barnes though, am dirty we weren't good enough on the day to take Barnes out of the game. Meaning he was a variable and you should try and eliminate as many variables outside your control as possible.

Kiwireddevil I'd also like to add continuing the tradition of playing someone out of position at 13.

Ironically Nottins Henry is going to start going on about it-amongst other things. That's actually what we're praising as he didn't do it last time.

Perhaps NZ should have learnt from England in 2003. England were being wrongly penalised countless times at the scrum. So SCW sends on Jason Leonard who asks the referee what the problem is at the scrum. JL didn't push at any scrums and no penalties were awarded against England at a scrum. it's called TCUP (thinking clearly under pressure) As I've said previously, why didn't GH read Winning! by SCW to see if there's anything he could learn from a RWC winning coach ?

I would like to know what messages Henry sent out about France not getting penalised. Though Carter and Evans were injured and they were the two best dropkick options.

I'm sure Henry has read a lot on the subject but not necessarily that book. Could be that he didn't as Woodward never bettered him in a NZ game or that he just doesn't like him and would rather go elsewhere for ideas on how to win a World Cup.

I'm guessing you've forgotten the game that England won, even when they were down to 13 men for part of that game ? You would have thought he might have thought that SCW might just have something if his 6 man scrum could hold out against a full NZ scrum and then go down the other end and go score 3 points ? Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean you can't learn from them

by disneychilly Today at 9:58 am

"I agree with you Biltong in that teams should play what is natural to them. In some ways Henry is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't with regard to playing expansively. If we play wide and lose then the knives will be out for not playing conservatively, and if we keep it tight and lose then we'll get bagged for forcing players to play what is not natural to them."

Lots of silly things have been said in this discussion which i've chosen to ignore. Getting back to some interesting rugby talk the above quote interested me. For me NZ at their best are neither wide and lose nor conservative, from what i've seen they are adept at playing elements of both be it from game to game or even within the same match. Carter kicks a lot of ball away particularly when they are in their own half or off static ball, a sensible conservative strategy. Equal they can be devistating off turnover ball and clinical in their finishing. They are the best because of their ability to play this all court game and over match any opposition in any conditions. However it does rely on making the correct decision between being lose or conservative in any given situation which requires clear thought process under pressure. Henry, McCaw and Carter should really be experienced enough to do this now and if they can then they'll be just fine.

Forgotten? I was at that game. Caleb Ralph's air kick was an absolute highlight. No wonder the Reds want him...

Henry did get Mike Cron in which was a masterstroke. But the scrums weren't the area in which NZ struggled. Neither was defence. That 10 minute period was a phenomenal effort though. NZ didn't need to learn how to defend, rather to put points on a defensive system that was making a phenomenal effort.

Bad choices that game too. Nonu's debut I think and outside Umaga in the wet. Wilko gave Spencer a kicking lesson and guided one over that changed direction twice. Carlos the clown missed four kicks at goal, one of which would've given NZ the win, so you can't say they didn't give themselves the opportunity to reap the rewards. And STILL Mitchell didn't pick Mehrtens in the 03 squad.

You could say people in NZ hated Graham Henry it`s a knee jerk reaction.Lose RWC sack coaches,did`nt work for SCW after 1999 RWC.Henry reapplied most obvious alternative Robbie Deans was tainted because of 2003.Since Henry has something like a 85% win rate,he must have something whats the alternative?

I don't think it a matter of an alternative, it was mass hysteria in NZ and certaily not a knee jerk reaction. The reactions towards Henry went on too long for it to be a knee jerk reaction.

Personally I have always thought Henry improved and learned from his experience with Wales especially how to respect players after his folly with the Lions and his quotes about Welsh players(which were then not included in his Lions squad).

Anyway win or defeat at WC sees Graham leave.


Mister Todd Blackadder for the position??

Jamie Joseph could get a look in also. Though Henry might not necessarily leave-he intimated that in TV interviews. Be interesting if he stayed after a NZ win as that's the only thing missing from his CV.

Certainly won't be Mark Hammett!

He will not be able to stay if NZ don't win, I think that is 100% certain.

Steve Hansen may make a claim (God forbid!).

Mind you if Wales fail to get into the Q/F's Warran will be available

Every losing coach in Nz was sacked after losing a RWC,had the English players supported Henry onthe Australian Lions tour they may well have won.The coaches of the Welsh 2005 Grand Slam side praised Henry and Co for laying down the base for that grandslam.Sir clive said judge me on the World Cup pre 1999 fortunately for England and him they did`nt and he was vindicated in 2003.

nottins wrote:

TheGreyGhost wrote:Fact is England fans loved it because it was the only time they'll see an Englishman knock NZ out of a rugby tournament.

You can't defend his pathetic performance on the basis by finding other examples of refereeing incompetence or we end up in a very much downward spiral.

His performance was a disgrace to the tournament. Any real fan of the game will agree.

Get over it. Change the record. They lost. How long are you going to keep going on about it ? Another 4 years ? 10 ? 40 ?

As a real fan of the game, i thought he did OK. A real fan of the game would realise that sometimes referees make mistakes, just like players do. Saying he was a disgrace does not make you a real fan of the game.

That makes no sense. He didn't do OK, he did make mistakes. 18 of them. In 40 minutes. One or two mistakes can be tolerated. But 18 in the space of 40 minutes, all in favour of one team is pushing credibility. It was a disgrace and utter failure of management to have such a junior referee appointed to such an important game, and a further failure of management to not acknowledge the mistake and do something about it. The fact he has been appointed again beggars belief. I think what you mean by "I thought he did OK" is "I enjoyed the ABs being knocked out, opening the door for England".

Another thing - SCW is a manager, not a coach. Henry bested him many times, including later in 2003 with two absolute thumpings of England who were widely tipped to "complete the job" with a series win in NZ. Henry revealed the myth in SCWs over blown hysterical philosophies in 2005 when SCW arrived with two plane loads of coaches and managers, PR experts and players and was given a lesson in winning rugby by a small team of players and staff who actually understand and love the game. Henry has nothing to learn from SCW or his ridiculous and laughable book.

I think the criticism of SCW is unfair. He basically invented the blue print for modern coaching, he was the first guy to bring in a defence coach, a kicking coach, a forwards and backs coach, and as a result England stole a march.
However everyone simply copied his blue print and caught him up.
SCW was a visionary coach but he was also a 1 trick pony who made his contribution to the game. I dont think him joining the RFU will make England invincible, though he does seem to have the ability to organise things well.

SCW thinks too much of himself. He's one of those guys that takes all the credit when his team is winning, and blames everyone else when they've lost.

Nothing was better than watching him tortured slowly over four tests in NZ with the "greatest, and best prepared Lions squad of all times" at his disposal.

If I needed someone to organise a filing system or alphabetise some CDs though, he'd be my man,

"If I needed someone to organise a filing system or alphabetise some CDs though, he'd be my man,."

Pure quality JB and if you wanted the CD arrangement polished he could throw in Alistair Campbell as well

Ye Olde SixOhSix is alive and well on this thread

TheGreyGhost wrote:SCW thinks too much of himself. He's one of those guys that takes all the credit when his team is winning, and blames everyone else when they've lost.

Nothing was better than watching him tortured slowly over four tests in NZ with the "greatest, and best prepared Lions squad of all times" at his disposal.

If I needed someone to organise a filing system or alphabetise some CDs though, he'd be my man,

Wrong.

Only 3 tests were in NZ.

I presume it's because you don't have the ability to do it yourself.

Still, I think Clive will be happy that he "managed" England to a RWC win. Well done for turning this thread into ANOTHER attack on Wayne Barnes, SCW and England.

Actually it turned into ANOTHER choking jibe at NZ too, so well done in that regard as well then.

Woodward stuffed up in 05 big time. His career is littered with them. 76-0 anyone? But the RFU kept him and he learned from his mistakes to make a bloody good rugby team and got them to the top of the tree just in time for the World Cup.

Henry has an impeccable record but for one game. He's maintained that record since 07 and I'm glad he's still in because he'll learn from it as will the rest of the guys that were there.

Campbell was an utter joke also.

4 tests. The Maori was the "fourth test" as spoken by scw himself...remember? Allowing the midweek team to declare themselves "unbeaten"

Yep, three losses against the ABs and one loss against the Maori to go with the draw against Argentina. In fact scw didn't win anything...guess we'll be skipping that book of his afterall

TheGreyGhost.

You can slag SirClive WoodWard off all you want.

The one thing that Sir Clve WoodWard is that Graham Henry is not, IS SIR CLIVE WOODWARD IS A RUGBY WORLD CUP WINNING COACH.

The one thing Graham Henry keeps missing out on.

He's only had one crack at it Madge!

(I know about Wales)

disneychilly wrote:

Henry has an impeccable record but for one game.

I'm guessing you're forgetting his record for Wales ?

Ohhhhhhh my sides are aching, TGG is back to his usual self. Come on Admin can't you see the guy will ruin this site.

Nottins what was so poor about his record for Wales?

From what i can see a 61% win rate over 36 tests is I thought something Wales dont achieve too often. This includes a 10 test winning streak against all comers. has either happened previously or since for Wales, or was it just because more was expected of him. Robin Deans has a far worse record for Oz and they love him so perhaps the expectation of Henry to do better was a little too high?

And remember, he can only work with what hes got.

There was nothing wrong with GH at Wales, in fact he was the man that dragged us back into the rugby world. What sent GH packing was the selection of the Lions to Aussie and after talking his Welsh team up failing to select them. I suspect most will know the rest.

welshjohn369 wrote:Ohhhhhhh my sides are aching, TGG is back to his usual self. Come on Admin can't you see the guy will ruin this site.

This site will only be ruined if posters allow it to be, that goes by what they post themselves and how they react to others. If you have any problems with a post please use the report button where the admin/mod team will look at them to see if they are breaking the site rules at all. Thank you.

Endless slagging of The ABs for the past record maybe great fun but is now getting very boring.Henry says he has pencilled in his squad,I would have thought it more or less picked it self if there are no injuries.Wood chicken,Mealamu,Owen Franks,Brad Thorn,Sam Whitelock,Kaino,Read,McCaw.Cowan,Carter,Cory Jane,Conrad Smith,Nonu,Sivivatu,Muliana,.reserves Ben Franks,Crockett,Hore,Flynn,Ali Williams,Boric,Adam Thomson,Matt Todd,Ellis,Weepu,Slade,Sonny Boy Williams,Richard Kahui,Hosea gear,Isreal Dagg.If some don`t get to the starting gate.Toeva,Ben Smith,rene Ranger,Donnelly,Hoeta.Messam,Tom Marshall,Aron Crudon,Matt Berquist,Macintoah or Afoa in with a shout.
IF they pick many outside that group I shall be very surprised

Endless slagging of any nation becomes very boring whether it is by sheer arrogance or retort.

You mention Cory Jane in what appears to be your 1st 15! Really, what has he done this season so far. I have no idea who Sonny Boy Williams is but I am sure he may make a good league player !!

I may be thick but Wood Chicken? Is this a nickname that I have missed?

I bet you missed a certain Crusader winger there too!