kiwilad says...

As a rugby fan from NZ I am embarrased that GH has decided to dive into this.

Abs lost the game because they had no plan B, and did not have the nous to attemp a drop goal.

The rest is a referees interpretation, and often wrong.

Sometimes its in your favour, other times its not.

Posted 00:28 30th July 2012

schalkthehulk says...

Oh and noone suspected match fixing in the world cup just gone??!?!?! Bryce Lawrence, anyone? Craig Joubert in the final?!?!?

Posted 00:21 30th July 2012

2EyedKiwi says...

Please note, Graham Henry speaks for Graham Henry, not all NZ.

Posted 23:37 29th July 2012

jamesliveinhope says...

This is absolutely disgraceful, has the man never watched a rugby match - 40 penalty infringements??????? of course there are its a complex sport, the referee is trained not only to judge whether an infringement has occurred but also to judge whether it has a material impact on the play otherwise the match would never get going. Also, having considered the fact that New Zealanders pride themselves in a captain who seems able to get away with murder on the pitch, is it not unreasonable to imagine that having the benefit of hi-motion action replays and a team of video analysts (lets not forget that he was trying to save his job at the time) you might spot more than the ref.

I think that this outburst of sour grapes does Henry no credit at all and, if I was going to defame a referee, I would probably not pick on a qualified barrister.

Posted 22:52 29th July 2012

StunTheMullet says...

Well do you have to wonder how one team who is on defence for most of a match doesn't concede a penalty for 50 mintes.

Plus throw in a dodgy sin bin and forward pass that the entire stadium saw.

Then there is the question why a novice out of his depth referee was awarded his first big match in a RWC QF between France and the ABs.

Posted 21:54 29th July 2012

ruckingkiwi says...

I haven't heard one person in NZ agree with what GH has done but that is his call and he will have to live with it, but the process he went through to come to this conclusion probably justified him keeping his job. I guess now he is being honest and clearing his chest, credit to him for that. I'm sure many coaches, players and officials have suspected the same behind closed doors, he has had the balls to say something. As for poor losers jibes, GH actually won the world's top fair play award, the Pierre de Coubertin trophy, following his actions to the French team immediately after that match.. he may not be everyones favourite but I prefer his dry honesty to the drivvel served up by the South Africans, players, fans, officials, ex-refs and everyone after they were knocked out last year.

Posted 21:31 29th July 2012

bk47 says...

Wow so many people getting their panties in a twist! Shock horror this comes out a week before his book, great way to get more $$$.

On the issue however I dont blame Henry for saying this. He got absolutly destroyed by NZ when he got back in 07 after RWC and has done well to hold it in for this long.

Match fixing is a massive call though Sir Henry. I put it down to a rookie Ref handed a big match way too early, the french fronting up and selections. Mils at 13 was a mistake and its being a long time so dont know if I am correct but Evans wasn't on the bench for this game was he? When the direction of the team went on Mcallisters shoulders thats when it fell apart.

Posted 21:01 29th July 2012

2EyedKiwi says...

Whether he's right or wrong, why say this now after 5 years?

Got a book to sell Graham??

Posted 20:41 29th July 2012

Conradmurray says...

Interesting this article is subtly different to another I read:

"...New Zealand did not receive a single penalty in the last 50 minutes of the match. Henry says his final analysis suggested Barnes missed 40 penalty infringements by France.."

The other article points out that in fact France were only penalised twice in the whole match.

Please people. Stats are stats. Have you EVER watched your OWN team play and only concede two penalties in a whole match? Let alone against a ten the is wholly dominating you by 166 rucks to 42. Seriously? Defend 166 rucks and convede only two penalties.

Don't you think he might actually have a point?

Take off your easy pot shots at Kiwi's and GH and have a food think about what has been written.

And, is it so inconvievable that the match was fixed? Who were overwhelming favourites in that match. Who stood to gain most from France winning. We know about corruption in Cricket, Football, Snooker now.

Posted 19:52 29th July 2012

KiwiJoe says...

The biggest factor in 2007 v. France was poor team selection and notable players not fronting up when the going got tough, as they knew it would

against the French.

Not going for drop goals when in a perfect position simply put them out of their misery, and it,s probably no coincidence you now see All Black sides taking this option, and why not, it can be a winner.

At least they learned from it and went on to become double World Champions, however it could all be a ploy to wind up Stephen Jones and other rabid AB haters even more..... if so, good move GH.

Posted 19:39 29th July 2012