Will someone please sack Graham Henry!

Exactly. A few poor games is not necessarily a trend towards disaster. If NZ get flogged in the TriNations and the EOYT then there would be enough data to draw a negative conclusion.

Mitchell was 23-4-1. His All Blacks lost to the Wallabies twice and England twice, which I guess makes it pretty fitting that we came third in the 2003 World Cup.

OJ - you seem to have all the stats - how many games did Mitchell lose ? I thought he had a pretty fair record as All Black coach except when his ego finally got the better of him at the World Cup and anybody who knows him would know that Deans would have been a very lonely assistant coach - it's Mitch's way or the highway. At least until the players finally revolt as was threatening at the Force Given that the All Blacks have better players than the Boks - does this mean PDV is a better coach than Henry & Co ? The pretty unfair handicap Deans has (and knows it) is that he has got 2nd rate players who are so up their own ability it's hard for him to get them to do the basics 1st. When he took over, the Wallabies were a disgrace at the skill level, and they are still regressing thinking that it's all pretty easy if everything goes right. And it would be for them if it did - but it doesnt always and you have to do some hard graft 1st most times. Still, he took on the challenge so he has to deliver.

wallabies win a couple of rwc and finals in 2003 after beating deans back selection and JON makes him the wallaby coach. if you think deans was hard done by in nz,there are some aussie coaches who feel slighted too

It depends. Henry went to Wales when he couldn't get a look in at the All Black job in 1998. Gatland, who is somehow now considered a great coach, and Deans may return to NZ rugby in the future or perhaps Hansen will get the position which he seemingly convets. If we win the World Cup (big if), I assume Hansen will take over. Maybe on a two year contract. If we lose, they'll probably clear out the lot of them. Eight years is a long time to coach an international rugby side and Henry and Co. may be running out of ideas, but only the next year or so will tell us for sure.

I thought Rattue expressed his opinion well, but I cannot believe that he said Mitchell did a fine job with the All Blacks. Can you imagine Rattue taking Mitchell to task for the journey? Wait, Robbie Deans was involved in that, so it's all revisionist history now.

Of course it would get worse for a perdiod. The question is would it get better before the RWC11. Probably not. While Henry/Hansen/Smith seem to be heading in the wrong directions, it is too early to say whether it is a complete failure of their coaching or a short term aberration. The unusually flat performance by reliable players last week suggests that there are factors other than coaching at play. On the other hand, it might be the beginning of a protracted slump. If I knew for certain I would be camping out at the TAB with my life savings. The other problem is the replacement. With Gatland and Deans leaving, there are no coaches with solid international experience or extensive provincial experience left in NZ. That was probably the biggest flaw with reappointing Henry & co, he has been phenomenonally successful (aside from the RWC07 which he did say was his main goal) but leaving his team in for such a long stint has stifled upward progression in the NZ coaching ranks. This could be a long term problem for NZ once Henry & co move on.

SAM, players who try to think playing whats in front of them invariably falter if rookies or slow mentally.; behaviorists suggest rote for these players(.carlos spencer springs to mind in the 2003 rwc.)simulated practice. thats why canes used to win by 50 one week lose by 10 the next;playing by the seat of your pants with no foundation. autocratic coaches are needed for rookies ;pacific island players are right brain players who play instinctively and find difficulty thinking on the hoof ;they dont perform well under pressure of good defence.;mistakes thru poor judgement. now these guys can be tailored/mentored but not without rote of the basics (KISS)as foundation for their dynanism;esp in test arena with low confidence and diffidence WHAT CONCERNS ME IS WHAT YOU CLEVERLY REMINDED ME OF wayne smith lost confidence and spat the dummy, now hes back again with no more testosterone and bereft of ideas or confidence.weed the garden ,give henry a chance

This SA side is very good side and has the potential and certainly the talent to develop into a special side. I don't see it as a disgrace or catastrophe to be beaten by a very good side on their home grounds. There are individual aspects of the All Blacks game that needs dramatic improvement as well as a rebuilding of players confidence. That is the responsiblity of the coach and that's what I expect Henry to work on during the layoff until Sydney. Execution of skills under pressure is the responsibility of the individual player to practice in their own time as well as when the team comes together in the buildup. Once the players take the field, it's up to them to put into practice what they've covered in training and use their intelligence and experience to read the play and adjust their decisions accordingly. When you lose your composure, then your decision making is the first thing to go and that was noticeable in a scratchy first half. Rocokoko hasn't been coached to run the ball from behind his own goalline, but he has been coached to look up and see if it's on and then to go for it. But it wasn't on and he still decided to do it. His decision, his responsibility. Same as the call to throw the ball long to a defensive lineout when Ross was in the sinbin. Players decision, players responsibility. What players decide during a game is beyond the control of the coaches, although I'm sure they all wish it wasn't. They can discuss and devise tactics before the game and at halftime, but they can't play the game. I think in all this furore, there is a big loss of perspective and Henry is a very visible and easy target. I'm not exempting him from any criticism, but much of it is over the top and unbalanced.

OJ, SORRY YES THE ABS ARE A SPORTS TEAM NOT A COMPANY YOURE RIGHT OF COURSE my analogy was poor

sam;you make some valid points about deans and i can comprehend the logic of keeping henry ;but wayne smith has neither the balls or brains to advise the abs ;hansen not a competitive edge either

Here, here Sam ... and of course such a great rugby brain as Rattue has come up with a replacement trio of Foster, Gatland and Mitchell - FFS ... what a combo ... ignoring the fact that 2 of them are externally employed already ... Foster's a nice bloke - but he's taken 5 years or so to get the chiefs to a semi spot ... Mitchell has probably found his level at the Force ... and Gatland wasn't deemed by the NZRFU up to taking over the chiefs when Foster was struggling and he then took a pretty reasonable Waikato outfit to nowhere in the NPC - yeah he had a good 1st year with Wales - but in reality he didn't have much to beat in that 6N .... for me the next good coaching products in NZ look like the Highlanders pair - but they're still some way off ... Henry is the right bloke to be in charge ...

In addition to OJ's comment about Deans, the legend about his coaching career at the Crusaders was only possible after the NZRU granted him a dispensation to continue coaching the Crusaders and still be the All Blacks assistant coach. For some reason known only to them, they denied the same privilege to Highlanders coach Tony Gilbert when he joined John Hart's team and to Steve Hansen who wanted to apply for the Crusaders position last year. Deans was also allowed to complete his tenure with the Crusaders in 2008 when the NZRU would have been well within their rights to send him packing after he accepted the Wallaby position. Compare that to when Henry signed with Wales. People who criticise the NZRU over their treatment of Deans in not giving him the All Blacks job forget how much leniency he's been granted in the past compared to any other coach. Without that dispensation, Deans coaching career at the Crusaders would have ended in 2001 which is when they finished in tenth position.

Nobody else OJ other than a few of us and going by Chris Rattue's vitriolic column in today's NZ Herald, NZ talkback and blogs like this one will be whipped into a frenzy. Following Henry's reappointment I stated then and still believe today that it was done for one reason only and that is to deliver the world cup in 2011. This year's Tri Nations results will be irrelevant if he delivers on that promise. This may be sacrilegious to many All Black supporters who want them to win everything every year but until we can get that 100 tonne monkey off our back then the NZ public and the world rugby public will never be satisfied, and as you say only until the next test. There are so many critics and fair weather supporters wanting to see Henry fail that I really want to see him succeed and shove a hot iron poker up all their arseholes. I'd rather see Wayne Smith go first as our attack has really spluttered but our defence has been solid.

Another thing about the clamouring for Deans. He wanted Pat Lam as an assistant coach. The same Pat Lam who's honeymoon period is over with Auckland. People always forget Henry's pedigree. He won the NPC four years in a row. He won back-to-back Super 12 titles. There is no other coach in NZ bar Deans who has his credentials. Auckland rugby has never been the same since he left in 1998 and the only time they've won the Super rugby competition since then is when he came back to NZ in 2003 and was their defensive coach. Has anyone considered the fact that the All Blacks could get WORSE if Henry was sacked?

CK - the irony of that call is that is what Henry's rotation policy did ... and he got pillared for it … rotation built depth … we need to get back to that and ignore the cries of cheapening the jersey

It's not a company. It's a sports team. The NZRU take care of the business side of things, and well, I warned people what would happen if we played 15 Tests a year. Look, did the Lakers fire Phil Jackson when they couldn't win a championship between 2003 and 2008? Did the Patriots fire Bill Belichick when the Patriots lost the Superbowl in 2008? Man United didn't fire Alex Ferguson between 2004 and 2006. What if the All Blacks had axed Lochore in '86, the Wallabies Dwyer in '89, the English Woodward in '99 or the Boks White in 2006? McCaw had a strong game. Go look at the match statistics. Watch who set up the only try and a number of other breaks. McCaw made turnovers in that game. He was penalised twice and Brussow had a turnover where he stood in the tackle and it looked all flash, but where was Brussow in the loose or anywhere other than the tackles or rucks? Great young fetcher, probably the future of openside play, but he's McCaw circa 2002. IWhether the Wallabies win or lose, Deans will still be the man. Deans could lose the remaining three Tests against the All Blacks and still be the man. The Wallabies could fail to win a GS and he'll still be the man. Until he's All Blacks coach and then slowly, little by little, it'll be fire Deans! He was never any good as Wallabies coach! What were the NZRU thinking? Yes, the coaches failed. Yes, the All Blacks are playing badly. Yes, something needs to be done. But if there's a turnaround, no one will be content. The NZ rugby public will never change their tune until we win the RWC and only until the next All Blacks loss. I'll never understand why a country that has grown up with All Black victories and losses always think that the latest rut is the worse period in All Black history. A lot of people just aren't familiar with All Black history. Imagine if they had the media coverage we have today in 1949.

Yeah I hope so. I would sooner develop a few youngsters and drop a few tests on the EOYT. we need to get our depth back to where it was and the only way to do this is to utilise these tours in this way.

Henry will have to lose at home to both South Africa and Australia before the NZRU will seriously look at axing him. Even then I would have thought it more likely one of his assistants takes the fall as a sacrifical lamd (probably Smith as Hansen seems more ambitious and political). It would take a lot to actually oust all three of them, like the home losses and getting slaughtered in the EOYT. Besides, as many have pointed out, who would the NZRU appoint in place of the cartel?

Sam you're right - sacking mid cycle is not an option - Henry's there come hell or high water - despite the normal suspect of the NZ media crowing yet again .... this tri-nations still has a fair bit to play out ... I'm not impressed with Deans' aussies and really haven't seen anything that makes me think they won't a distance 3rd this year ... I'm sure there will be more of a development look to the NZ end of the year tour ... after Saturday I think Donald may not make that tour and wouldn't be surprised to see Carter sitting at home as well .... Cruden, Brett and McAllister might fill the 1st 5 options and we may see Dagg, Ranger, Crotty, Bateman also along for the ride .... in the forwards it should be Evans, Whitlock, Lowe .. along with Thomson and an opportunity to really see if Read is up to being the new #8 - the talent is there ...