They might be the fiercest of rugby rivals, but New Zealand coach Graham Henry jumped to the defence of his Australian counterpart Robbie Deans after he was criticised in the wake of the Wallabies’ stunning loss to Samoa.
The Pacific Island nation claimed the biggest scalp in their Test history by beating the world’s No.2 ranked side 32-23 in Sydney on Sunday and the media have been quick to put the boot into New Zealand-born Deans after the shock loss.
He has been accused of arrogance after fielding an under-strength side against Samoa, choosing to rest players from the Queensland Reds, who won the Super Rugby title.
Henry said the criticism is ill-founded.
Perhaps that’s because the All Blacks are following a similar method in their Test against Fiji on Friday, with only four of the starting team from their last Test against Wales in November – fullback Mils Muiliaina, centre Conrad Smith, halfback Jimmy Cowan and captain Richie McCaw – named in the run-on side.
All Blacks’ selectors were keen to rest key players after an arduous Super Rugby campaign for the Crusaders and Blues, and the Fiji game will allow them to do that ahead of the Tri Nations.
Henry said win or lose, resting players at this point is the right move for Australia and New Zealand.
“Robbie’s got a bit of stick from the media which I think is questionable,” he said.
“How does he play those Reds players? Throw them out there again – kill ’em? Or be pragmatic?
“He was hoping that he’d do the business without the Reds players, but it didn’t happen that way, so he gets a lot of stick for making the right decision.
“I’ve got some sympathy for him.”
Henry kept the top coaching job in New Zealand rugby after the All Blacks crashed out in the quarter-finals of the 2007 World Cup to France, forcing Deans to move offshore to realise his international coaching ambitions.
The loss means Deans’ three-year tenure has yielded 24 wins from 44 Tests but Henry said not enough credit had been given to Samoa for their performance.
The result had served as a lesson for the All Blacks ahead of Friday’s Test against a side who concede on average 76 points a game against New Zealand.
“It just shows you that any side in the world in the top 10 or so can do the job. You’ve just got to prepare correctly,” he said.
Despite the negativity in the Australian media after the result, Henry believes the upset will not be detrimental for the Wallabies.
“In the long term, it won’t do the Australians any harm. It’ll give them an extra edge, an extra determination. They’ve had a wake-up call.”
Lock Jarrad Hoeata was named to make his Test debut and partner the returning Ali Williams for New Zealand’s one-off Test against Fiji in Dunedin.
Included in the All Blacks’ Tri-Nations squad after impressing for the Highlanders, Hoeata will partner 61-Test veteran Williams in the second row for the first time.
A series of injuries has prevented Williams playing at Test level since late 2008.
Others returning to the team for the first time since 2009 are Crusaders’ prop Wyatt Crockett and Highlanders’ winger Ben Smith.
The team will be captained by flanker Richie McCaw while his Crusaders’ team-mate Dan Carter has been named on the reserves bench, with Colin Slade starting the match at five-eighth and Conrad Smith and Ma’a Nonu in the centres.
All Blacks team: Mils Muliaina, Zac Guildford, Conrad Smith, Ma’a Nonu, Sitiveni Sivivatu, Colin Slade, Jimmy Cowan, Liam Messam, Richie McCaw (capt), Adam Thomson, Ali Williams, Jarrad Hoeata, Ben Franks, Andrew Hore, Wyatt Crockett. Res: Corey Flynn, John Afoa, Sam Whitelock, Jerome Kaino, Piri Weepu, Dan Carter, Ben Smith.
Aware
Guest
I couldn't find the stat either. I watched the youtube replay again and it seemed that England had a greater territorial advantage. However, the match was so negative that it is fair to say both sides "strangled" one another. Every move was countered or negated for 90% of the game. It is wrong to say England dominated the forward exchanges. The video doesn't bear that out. They couldn't get their rolling maul working more than one or two metres over the advantage line and the set pieces were even and messy. When England tried to run the ball they were tackled down every time. Australia had a huge weight advantage in the pack but England were able to nulify it most of the time. England were unlucky that Campese wasn't penalised for an obvious second half infringement that could have turned the course of the game. Had England played a purely 10 man game they could have theoretically won the game 3 nil, but would have had to overcome their weight disadvantage in doing so- very much a hypothetical prospect. In 2003, they did play a10 man game and only won in extra time and that with a heavier pack.
Ben S
Roar Guru
Wouldn't know where to begin looking for that stat.
Aware
Guest
What was the break up of possession?
ABshades
Guest
Very cynical of you cookie Henry is not known for ever throwing barbs so whether he is being shrewd or supportive is irrelevant. He is being true to form. Putting your suspicions to the side, it demonstrates class. The inevitable loss you make mention has no base in present only the past. Hold on to that last crumb of hope cookie if it helps you to believe your team will triumph instead. If your belief in inevitable chokes hold true, I would be equally concerned that the Wallabies will choke having a kiwi head coach and a kiwi first five. It is a brave person that underestimates an All Black team in threat and strength. Even the worst All Black teams have not lost to Samoa, Ireland or Scotland before.
Red Rooster
Guest
If I substituted the name Robbie Deans for Eddie Jones in your comments then its a pretty similar story is it not and he has more players to choose from
Capital
Roar Guru
And Kevin Sheedy was available until GWS snapped him up.
Ben S
Roar Guru
They were strangled, and that's why England had so much ball during the match, no? Hence the 'why did England persist in playing through their backs?' debate.
Shahsan
Guest
Aware, you got it in one. The 1991 pack was better -- relatively, absolutely and man for man.
Aware
Guest
In 1991 Daly, Kearns and McKenzie in the front row were rarely "strangled". In fact, they scored a rolling maul try from a lineout against England in the final at Twickenham, from memory. In this youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uXgxWPH0V8&feature=related
P. Isstaker
Guest
If only Australian RU had a decent coach of the likes of Wayne Bennett or Craig Bellamy. Then we'd show those Samoans who's boss !
Ben S
Roar Guru
Gregan, Larkham, Roff, Tune, Horan, Little and Herbert no more than a very good backline? Really? England were still fielding De Glanville at that point and John Hart was pratting about with Cullen at 13. The pack was adequate, but it had a superb lineout marshalled by Eales, one of the best carriers in the world, Kefu, a very good 7, Wilson, and a solid front row. Richard Harry was no dominator, but that pack was technically sound and competitive. In 1991 the England pack strangled the Wallaby pack. That didn't happen in 1999.
Capital
Guest
(Robinson) Thats not a coaching issue though. The signs have been encouraging for the past 18 months. And yes the unexpected losses are painful - Scotland, England, Samoa - all coming off very good matches I am certain. But even with losses, the team and squad have built momentum. I think I will judge the season by the RWC, Bledisloe and 3N in that order. Though a clean sweep would be pretty special.
Aware
Guest
No. But the signs aren't great, especially with Robinson out.
JohnB
Guest
Can you actually judge whether things have turned around until the World Cup takes place?
Ben S
Roar Guru
There's been lots of comments about a golden generation on the Roar over the past two seasons, the usual hyperbole - Genia, Cooper, Mitchell, Davies, Turner, Beale, O'Connor etc.
Aware
Guest
Eddie Jones got his job on the strength of his coaching the Brumbies to success. He started well as a national coach, but couldn't sustain the effort. You would think the curve should have gone the other way. He's a pleasant enough person, but that's not the issue. Of course, the players have to be blamed too, but in the end, the coach has to take the hit and would know that.
Red Rooster
Guest
So you have talked about Bob and Rod - what about the current situation? Bob had two bites at it and Rod did it in two years - my point is that 4 years is more than enough to turn things around - so why do keep making excuses rather than demanding results
JohnB
Guest
Bob Dwyer, not Alan Jones. Jones had his great moments, but before that. Don't forget it's still only 3 provinces producing the players to select from. Losing to Samoa (and losing games in the past) isn't what you'd want to do, but doesn't mean the Wallabies can't win the World Cup this year.
Aware
Guest
Correction. Bob Dwyer, not Alan Jones. Jones coached the grand slam winners in 84 or 85. Rod McQueen did not have much world class talent really. He got the best from a very good backline and an adequate pack. Bob Dwyer had a better pack and a very good backline.
JohnB
Guest
Maybe that reflects that the Samoa game actually was viewed as pretty unimportant in the overall scheme of things, and the training time was used for other purposes (and possibly also that training continued without any let up going into the game itself)? Of course you want to win every game, but sometimes you miscalculate what you need to do to win some of them (particularly the low priority ones - and no disrespect to Samoa but that surely is what this game was). Not exactly the same, but remember the Reds had a stumble against the Hurricanes after a number of unforced changes were made to the team, so even the best coaches can get these things wrong.