Discussion in 'Rugby Discussion' started by Schadenfreude, Jul 29, 2012.
I am pretty sure he signed a code of conduct saying he wouldnt.
He had a fleeting thought that it may have been, then dismissed it.
That is not his feelings on the matter.
The game has given him a fucking good living for many years, he was bestowed a knighthood from his association with the game.
Then he shits on the game to earn a couple of extra bucks..
BTW I don''t rate him in any event, he has a 50% winning % in RWC and turned up to both events with the best team each time.
I also saw him in a doco on the Lions tour, he was the cause of their defeats, they would have been better off with no head coach than with him on that tour.
He learnt and improved his man-management skills from that tour.
In terms of coaching the All Blacks, he is one of the most successful AB coaches of all time.
5 Tri-Nations, 1 World Cup, 3 Grand Slams, 5 times IRB coach of the year, 7 straight Bledisloes - you are hard to please.
How many AB coaches are not greatly successful?
John Mitchell also had an outstanding record coaching the AB's. When he was sacked from the AB job they had every trophy except Bill.
How has he gone since then?
Henry had a good record with the Blues, but didn't he have some all time greats in that side.
Internationally he had a great start with the Welsh, but it turned to shit.The Lions he was hapless/hopeless.
I hope you enjoy his book, but he is a JAFA to me.
I don't see it that way, I saw it as him mentioning what was on his mind. I don't know what the fuss is about. And, what if he was correct?
A match fixing conspiracy, or a baseless headline to make a few bucks?
Why have there not been a plethora of instances since, that smell of match fixing?If it worked then it would be repeated regularly.
I think Henry trying to earn a few sheckels is the much more likely option.
Totally agree: if Deans had just included a DVD of that documentary in his application for the job he would have got it..and we might have won in 2011!
The old 'when the team wins it's beacuse of the players and when they lose it's because of the coach' huh? I suppose there were no great players in the 1998 All Black team that lost 5 straight Tri-Nations and Bledisloe games? Or the 5 years between 1998 - 2002 when we couldn't win the Bledisloe? I suppose Phil Jackson isn't that great of a coach either - he's had Jordan, Pippen, Kukoc, Rodman, Grant, Bryant, Shaq etc all play for him over the years. Wayne Bennett is lucky he had guys like Alfie, Lockyer, Petro, Tallis, Sailor, Tuquiri etc in his teams. What about Sir Alex Fergusson? It must be so easy for all of these coaches huh? Bullocks - you can't take the guys record and imply he had little to do with it. When it come to winning results, Sir Henry ticks all the boxes. If you think it's easy, ask any Kiwi's if John Hart and Wyane Smith are remembered as greatly successful AB head coaches?
But he also has the respect of his players and his management team. Something Mitchell/Deans didn't have. When Henry re-applied for the job, players like Dan Carter and Ritchie McCaw backed him over Deans. Big tick given all the success those two enjoyed with Deans in Canterbury. Yes, the RWC result in 2003 was the nail in the coffing for Mitchell but there was a rising feeling of dislike for him and his style in the media, the public and amongst some of the players well before that tournament. And unlike Henry, Mitchell doesn't seem to have learnt from those mistakes.
Henry also worked hard to install a great culture within the ABs. Early on in his tenure he talked about his belief that better people make better players. He was quick to stamp out off-field controversies and made some tough decisions eg. Piri Weepu, Ma'a Nonu and Troy Flavell dropped from the 2007 RWC squad. When was the last time you saw a scandal that involved any AB players? Corey Jane and Israel Dagg out having a few drinks and a smoke a few night before a RWC game. No urinating in public, no stolen laptops, no getting into fights, no making out with some local girls. Pretty tame. And who came down to the pub and pulled them back into line..the same guy who had been dropped 4 years earlier for 'attitude' issues - Weepu.
The 2007 semi-final hurt the ABs and the AB fans hard because unlike 1999 and 2003 where the best team on the day won, the French got the huge 'rub of the green' that day, to put it mildly. For the French to not concede 1 penalty for 50-60mins is simply ridiculous. I'll admit that match-fixing crossed my mind that day - I'm not surprised it did Henry's as well. His job and his reputation were on the line. But he came back, learnt from his mistakes (again) and won the RWC.
You mite not like Graham Henry but you can't take away from the fact that he is a great coach.
I won't deny for one minute that Graham Henry was a great coach with a great record (Lions apart) to back it up. I have to say though that he's increasingly come across as a sour and bitter old man since his retirement. Why on earth would a bloke who's achieved as much as he has have such a chip on his shoulder?
Why does saying what you actually thought and felt 4 years ago make you sour and bitter? The guy wrote a book about his experiences - was he supposed to lie about it?
It's not the book. I've not read it and thus can't comment on it. It's some of the other remarks I've seen attributed to him since he bowed out.
Fair enough. Not restrained by being the All Black coach anymore has allowed him to speak his mind a bit more I think. To me, it hasn't come across bitter or sour but more like an un-emotional 'that's just how I see it' kind of remarks.' But I fully admit to being biased so I understand not everyone will think that.
There is a limit to 'telling it how you see it'.
I don't blame Henry for thinking the 2007 QF was fixed. In the emotion of the end result these thoughts sometimes do occur.
I don't think he should have put it in his book though. It gives credence to an idea that is frankly absurd, and gives justification to other crackpots out there to think the same when their team loses a tight game.
Especially when they didn't pursue the complaint in 2007. Now it just looks like sour grapes, and it's made worse by the fact that the referee in question is still refereeing, and many of the players and officials are still active as well.
Where was Susie the Waitress in 2007? Shagging Wayne Barnes?
What was John the Bookie doing and where was Warnie's Mum?
Why were the Sheep on the grassy knolls around Cardiff smiling?
What chapter in the book cover these issues?
I suspect this is an book publishers beatup to drum up sales and more like the equivalent of a troll post.
Apparently he did want to pursue in 2007 but the NZRFU basically shut him down - which he says was the right thing to do. He would never had got a second crack at the ABs if he had pushed this back then.
Now, I'm not saying that I think there is match-fixing going on in rugby but why is an absurd notion? People probably thoght the same thing about cricket for a long-time. Or drug use in sports. I don't know why we think that rugby is completely immune.
Finally, why is putting the truth in an autobiography sour grapes?? Is that the whole point of them? The 2007 RWC is a fairly significant part of Grahm Henry's story - should he have lied about it or just skipped it all together? The man has told the truth about his own experience, the stats for that game are pretty incredible - where's the sour grapes??
And journalists/editors drumming up newspaper sales..
It's not absurd to suggest there is match-fixing in rugby. Where you get into trouble is saying "I think there is match-fixing, and I think it happened in game X". Now unless you have some evidence about game X to back it up that goes beyond simple game stats then I think you should keep those comments to yourself.
I think he should have glossed over a few aspects. Say he considered that the game was fixed, but the NZRU set him straight. Say in hindsight he probably went a bit far, even though the refereeing was fucking appalling.
And yes that may be twisting the truth, but I think someone of his stature in the game should have known better. I don't think it sends the right message to coaches or supporters. It paints him to be still bitter five years on after the event- he knew this would create a stir, and you wonder why he needed to pick this particular battle after the 2011 win.
That's a good point, obviously that Richie & Carter are a little more qualified to pass judgement on Henry than I am.
The way he was portrayed when coaching the Lions has left an indelible impression on me, so i just can't get over his performance there.
In terms of match fixing IMO, you either never ever mention it, or you believe it and never ever let it go until it has been addressed.
You don't make the allegation and then qualify the statement to sell a couple of books.That is just a grubby act from someone who has been well served by the game.
That is pretty much exactly what he has said in his book. He thought that one of the possibilities for the poor refereeing was match-fixing, but that nothing else came out of it, and he was a little surprised there was no investigative body within the IRB to look at corrupt practices ala the ICC.
Not much to see here.
Always good to have someone who has actually read "the book" that everyone is all commenting on join in on the discussion.
How often do the tut-tutters just either parrot what has been selectively reported in the mass media (internet included) or from some publicist, or worse simply add extra value to the noise of the parrots, without actually viewing the actual source material to form their own opinion?
Separate names with a comma.