New Zealand All Black coach Graham Henry, center, flanked by Byron Kelliher, left and Richie McCaw. AP Photo/NZPA, Ross Setford
Those infamous words may always come back to haunt Graham Henry. Throughout the duration of his first tenure in charge of the All Blacks – from 2004 until 2007 – Henry’s mantra was “judge me on the World Cup.”
Had he not uttered those words, we would surely have to rate Henry as one of the most, if not the most, successful All Blacks coaches of all time.
His record is simply phenomenal: 68 wins from 80 test matches gives the sterly Aucklander a winning percentage of 85 percent, behind only Alex Wyllie (86 percent) and Fred Allen (100 percent), who coached the national side just 29 times and 14 times respectively.
However, using Henry’s own criteria, we could not possibly put him in the top echelon.
Assuming success at the 2007 World Cup to Henry meant lifting the cup, Henry fell well short of this mark. Shorter, in fact, than any of his predecessors.
So, here we are. An All Blacks coach with four Tri-Nations titles in six years, a six-year hold on the Bledisloe Cup, two grand slams from two attempts, and not a single loss in the northern hemisphere, who is, by his own admission, a failure.
So let’s think rationally for a moment. What has Graham Henry done for New Zealand rugby?
First and foremost, he has repaired a damaged relationship between the All Blacks and the New Zealand rugby public. Following the John Mitchell era, which left many fans disillusioned and feeling alienated from their national rugby side, Henry began a conscious, albeit transparent, campaign to restore the All Blacks’ image in the public eye.
He made himself open to media, answered questions bluntly, carried himself well, and involved the players with the public – small measures, but significant in the circumstances.
The Probables v Possibles trial was re-introduced. It was a meaningless game, with no players from Super 14 finalists the Hurricanes and Crusaders taking part. But it is a tradition entrenched in the national game, and its one-off return was another sensible and well-received move from Henry.
His opening two test matches against England did nothing to harm his or the team’s image: the attractive brand of rugby played in two heavy defeats of England on home soil gaining most attention.
But it is worth remembering the attacking team Henry was in charge of upon his appointment was a team largely blooded by Mitchell.
Mils Muliaina, Joe Rokocoko, Ma’a Nonu, Daniel Carter, Rodney So’oialo, Ali Williams, Keven Mealamu, Andrew Hore and Tony Woodcock all made their debuts in 2002 or 2003.
Nevertheless, Henry introduced a number of players of his own and took the All Blacks to the 2005, 2006 and 2007 Tri-Nations, a 3-0 whitewash of the British and Irish Lions in 2005 and a Grand Slam in the same year.
And then came the World Cup.
After piling up massive scores against Italy, Portugal, Scotland and Romania, the All Blacks froze against their bogey team, France, a team they had decimated twice earlier in the year at home.
With a quarter-final exit, most accepted Henry would quietly resign from the top job, take it on the chin, realise he had not succeeded in his quest, and make way for his successor.
But Henry had unfinished business.
Not only did he re-apply for the job, the NZRU seemingly took pity on him and renewed his contract for another four years, his total of eight years in charge comfortably the longest of any All Black coach – despite being the least successful one.
People deserve second chances. But Henry had four years to take his side to World Cup success, Mitchell had two. Mitchell was sacked, Henry was given another four.
A coach should not be judged on one game. But clearly, Mitchell was.
Furthermore, although Mitchell frequently stated he was on a journey towards the World Cup, he never stated it was the be-all and end-all, unlike Henry who explicitly stated the holy grail was all that mattered.
That is water under the bridge now, though, and Henry has made a good fist of his second term as head coach, the rise of South Africa the only real threat to his side in the past two years.
Once again, the All Blacks will go in as favourites for the World Cup next year, only slightly ahead of the Springboks this time, though, due to home advantage.
If the All Blacks once again fail to lift the game’s greatest prize, Henry will not only be remembered as the coach who lead the All Blacks to their worst ever world cup result, but also as the only coach to be in charge of two unsuccessful world cup campaigns.
Like it or not, nothing in between will matter. There has been very little mention of next year’s tournament from ‘Ted’ in the last couple of years. Maybe he has learned his lesson.
Ai Rui Sheng
Guest
In my opinion, the 2005 All Blacks were the greatest football team, of any code ever. Last night we saw a glimmer of what happened two years before a RWC. This team is going to give it a shake, which I could not have said two weeks ago. There is only a year to the next RWC, and if they play as well as 2006, love will fill the air in the Shakey Isles.
Damian George
Roar Rookie
no point, just felt like writing something.
Damian
Guest
cheers sam, are you referring to the loss to munster? i should have said not one "international" loss
Damian
Guest
fully agree. deans has got very little to work with. never write off an aussie team though. it would not surprise me one iota if the aussies get it together in time for next year.
Damian
Guest
All fair comments, appreciate the discussion. Henry's 05 team more dominant than Hart's 96-97 team? Massive call, but each to their own. Anyway, let's not get offside so early on in my Roar venture cause there will be many more stories from me on here! Cheers
Sylvester
Guest
Agree with you OJ. If the good cattle Henry has with the ABs used to discredit his record, could it be that Ruddock's record with Wales is better than Henry's for the same reason. As OJ also said, Henry has won at all levels of NZ rugby. Mitchell's record with the ABs is great, you won't get an argument from me about that. He probably was a victim of the usual post-cup blood-letting, whereas the NZRFU wised to that being a flawed tactic by the time Henry's head was on the block. Also, popularity with the public is part of the job. That's where Mitchell failed badly.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Why do I think Henry is a better coach than Mitchell? Maybe because I watched every single game coached by them. Mitchell was fired as he did nothing to discourage a binge drinking culture and got offside with the world's media at the 2003 World Cup. 61% is not such a bad result as the coach of Wales. Robbie Deans would kill to have a 61% winning record with the Wallabies. If people think Henry is an average coach I could care less. His results at every level of NZ rugby don't bear that out but how about explaning what makes him average.
Spencer
Guest
John Mitchell had an 82% winning record and lost a RWC semi-final. Graham Henry has an 84% winning ratio and lost a RWC quarter-final. Why do people under-rate Mr Mitchell? Mr Jacket - I am waiting for your reasoning, as you seem to be the great Henry spruiker. Why did Henry survive the RWC disaster, and yet Mitchell was castigated and chased out of NZ? Could it be because Referee Barnes provided a convenient foil for Mr Henry, and absorbed much of the frustration and vitriol that the NZ public poured forth? I submit that Mr Henry is an average coach doing a good job with better than average cattle. A useful comparison would be Mr Henrys results with Wales (61% win ratio) compared to Mr Henry with NZ (84%). Mr Ruddock had a better win ratio with Wales than Mr Henry achieved.
Nathan
Roar Pro
Nice pad but somewhere else to live is not what I would consider an outside interest. Take Richie MCaw for example. He seems to have that balance. He wants to win and talks about it openly. Nothing to hide with him ie what you see is what you get. His actions match his words. Why be coy about it and pretend that you don't? This balanced approach comes from having other interests in your life. He is a pilot and in the off season spends time flying. Not suggesting Mr Henry takes up flying but perhaps the odd surf or listening to Bob Marley occasionally might help. The photo above sums it up.
Jason
Guest
Is there a point to this asinine article? Graham Henry is clearly a brilliant coach. Anyone who honestly thinks otherwise needs to book themselves into a mental health facility.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Dude, seriously, I'm sure Henry has some kind of hobby or outside interest. Perhaps he can talk about his new bach the next time the All Blacks lose -- http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10618206
ohtani's jacket
Guest
I think your memory's faulty if you think Henry mentioned “judge me on the World Cup” more than once. Henry really didn't have to defend himself a lot prior to 2007. As for Mains, he presided over the most frustrating and unsuccessful era of All Black rugby I've ever witnessed. I'll give him credit for the WC team he put together after such a disastrous '94 season but the fact is that he was only there because Colin Meads and his cronies didn't want Hart in the job. Nowdays, rugby isn't controlled by the provinces as much. Therefore, Henry can't get kicked out by the Andy Hadens of NZ rugby. Instead, they just go whinging to the media. But yeah, Mains was at the last chance saloon in '95 (having fought off Hart once.) He failed just as badly as the rest of them. Besides, Henry turned the All Blacks into a more dominant force than the John Hart All Blacks of '96 and '97. You're giving Mitchell way too much credit for his imprint on that team. Henry's 2005 All Blacks side was nothing like a John Mitchell All Black side. Mitchell may have blooded a few guys but Mains didn't exactly blood the All Black pack now did he?
Nathan
Roar Pro
Damian, I get what you are alluding to in this article and see the point you are making. Perhaps he has been his own worst enemy (see below).
Nathan
Roar Pro
With respect, just referring to this era. Don't get me wrong I am a big fan of Graham Henrys and well aware of his credentials but on the few occasions Richie McCaw wasn't playing for the AB's, coincidentally, they have lost. Debatable then, which person would be the biggest loss. I get your point however, and perhaps the likes of Wayne Shelford, Sean Fitzpatrick etc would have a similiar effect.
Nathan
Roar Pro
The thing that bothers me about Graham Henry is that he has tended to play down or make light of winning the World Cup in the past. However, you get the feeling that if it came down to losing a body part in order to win it he would seriously consider it. Although I appreciate there is an enormous amount of pressure to win, this kind of obession is perhaps an unhealthy one. Prior to the 2007 World Cup he came across like it was no big deal but his actions indicated otherwise. The rest and rotation policy, the controversial re-conditioning programme etc were signs that he was deadly serious and was going to do whatever it took. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but perhaps he just didn't get the balance quite right. I'm not sure if he has any hobbies or other interests but all work and no play makes for a dull day. Just get the feeling he could do with some outside interests to help bring some balance and perspective back into his life. If he has a weakness it's his ability to 'overthink' things and I think some R&R would help considerably.
Sylvester
Guest
Two points Nathan. 1. How many All Blacks coaches have been without at least one match-winning player? 2. Henry had to cut his teeth through the coaching grades to get noticed because he lacked the "ex-AB" tag of his predecessors. He won multiple titles at secondary schools. NPC and S12 level.
Sylvester
Guest
The "lose the world cup - new coach" policy hasn't worked in the past, so I thought it was a smart decision to reappoint Henry. At least he'll have the opportunity to not repeat the same mistakes. A new coach would have his own ideas and was likely to come up with a scheme even more hair-brained than resting players from the S14.
Damian
Guest
I think you're all missing the point. Clearly, he is not the least successful coach of the All Blacks - on the contrary. The irony is that, by Henry's own admission, he is. That is the danger when you put all your eggs in one basket, as he did. Does one game make him a bad coach? Rhetorical question. A monkey could answer that. I am not suggesting either that he isn't the best man for the job. I think we all expected him to stand down after the World Cup because that is what he said he would do. I am not judging Henry, or anyone else. I am not even having a go at Henry, I simply think it is quite funny that he wanted to be judged on the world cup. If that is the case, then he is a failure - which he is not.
Damian
Guest
Mr Jacket My point is he is clearly not the least successful All Blacks coach. The irony is, that by his own admission, he failed miserably in his first tenure. Yes, he was referring, in part, to taking players out of the Super 14 - with the justification it would lead to world cup success. You are kidding yourself if you think he didn't say this all the time. He is not a worse coach than Mitchell, by any stretch. But that is the danger when you put all your eggs in one basket, as Henry did. It was a silly move. He wanted people to only judge him on the world cup, everything was geared towards that, everyone had to make way for his wishes and sacrifice for the good of his four year plan. I simply think it is funny. And, yes, clearly Laurie Mains was a better coach than Graham Henry. He created a team from scratch and turned it into the best team in the world, as he did with Otago, who were in the second division when he took over. Anyway, good to see it's sparking debate - that is the point of this website after all.
sixo_clock
Roar Guru
IMO blaming the coach is a triple fault. Firstly and obviously the coach and managerial team do not commit one error on the paddock. Their job is the preparation of the squad - trite but true. Second is that by deflecting the focus onto non-participants we provide players with an escape route. Rugby is a man's game and every player has to ensure their preparation and mind are on the ball. But, you say, they are young men and need some protection - true, but only off-field and not to the point that it may be used to excuse themselves. Thirdly and more insidiously my main point is that we do not need to reinforce the concept that the coach effects play on the field because that gives rise to the clipboard and flowchart mechanistas who fail to understand that leadership on the field is THE MOST important element of Rugby and must be developed. Having an independent leadership team in the thick of things goes to the very essence of our game. Off-field management may work in League, Soccer and other sports but not Union. Long term lovers of Rugby will be able to identify teams that had such a group of leaders and those squads played well above their weight. Australia has two Webb Ellis trophies to prove that. Graham Henry is a gem and would be welcome into any squad in the world.