Henry suspected match-fixing after 07 loss

Henry suspected match-fixing after 07 loss

 

STEVE KILGALLON

        Last updated 12:56 29/07/2012     GRAHAM HENRY: After returning to New Zealand following the failed 2007 World Cup campaign, the All Blacks coach and wife Raewyn escaped to Hervey Bay in central Queensland.

All Blacks coach Graham Henry was so stunned by the lopsided penalty count in the 2007 Rugby World Cup quarter-final loss to France he urged the New Zealand Rugby Union to call for an investigation into referee Wayne Barnes' performance.

In his biography, 'Graham Henry Final Word', by veteran author Bob Howitt, Henry reveals he briefly contemplated match-fixing as the only logical explanation for the All Blacks' upset 20-18 loss.

He analysed the game on video for his report to the rugby union and found Barnes had awarded only two penalties to New Zealand during the game.

His gut feeling, according to his biography, was that the video "would confirm that referee Wayne Barnes and his touch judges, Jonathan Kaplan from South Africa and Tony Spreadbury from England, hadn't exactly covered themselves in glory at the Millennium Stadium, that they had missed an obvious forward pass when France scored its match-winning try - a pass so forward everyone in the stadium had witnessed it except the referee - and that Barnes had been pretty lenient on the French at the breakdowns, probably costing the All Blacks the game".

His analysis was that France deserved to be penalised up to 40 times.

The video had three different angles and featured statistical breakdowns of lineouts, scrums, penalties, tackle counts, territory and possession. On those statistics, the All Blacks dominated. They had an overwhelming 73 per cent territorial advantage, winning 166 rucks to France's 42 and making only 73 tackles compared with France's 331.

A mind-boggled Henry was so stunned by his findings he told the rugby union it should "pressure the International Rugby Board to institute an inquiry".

He also said it was 'incomprehensible' the IRB did not have strategies in place to investigate bizarre matches. 

Howitt writes: "He knew if a comparable situation had occurred in other sports, it would be investigated. But there existed a blissful purity about rugby, or at least that's how everyone wanted to perceive it. It wasn't politically correct to even suggest the match officials might have favoured one team." 

The rugby union chose not to push for an investigation.

Elsewhere in the book, it's revealed All Blacks captain Richie McCaw disobeyed instructions from the coaches' box during the last 30 minutes of the 8-7 Rugby World Cup triumph against France at Eden Park last year.

Henry demanded the All Blacks play for position and kick the ball deep into French territory late in the nail-biting final.

But McCaw, fearing a match-winning French counter-attack, chose to defend the game in the middle of the park, backing his players not to give away penalties.

BY THE BOOK

There's not much love in South Africa for former Springboks coach Peter de Villiers. His autobiography has irritated many. SA Rugby magazine was unimpressed. De Villiers claimed the 2012 World Cup quarter-final against Australia was 'fixed'. The magazine commented: 'True to P Divvy protocol, he then contradicts this statement and covers himself legally with the offering: 'I cannot say if there was match-fixing without facts to prove it'.' If you can't prove it, why make the allegation?
 

There are two issues here.  In the case of the 2007 game - there was no action taken against the referees invollved..   The pass preceeding France's try was forward - I saw it with my own eyes, so I do believe it was a blatant mistake by the referees - otherwise they would have been taken off the test panel.   However,  general transgression of the laws in respect of the game was not in evidence - even if Henry studied the game carefully - he would have found that the northern referees do not allow some transgressions of the laws allowed by some southern referees.

In the case of the 2011 WC the referee involved (Bryce Lawrence) went for Psychological treatment after the game and was removed from the international referee panel.   I do not believe Bryce Lawrene crooked the game - I think he was just grossly incompetent.   Smit said after retirement he was glad he was retiring - purely for the fact that it would be a privilege never to have Lawrence refereeing any game he plays in.   It was thus not only De Villiers who expressed an extremely negative view on the refereeing in the relevant game - it was also expressed by the SA Captain - who always was highly regarded by friend and foe alike.   However, what was a joke in bad taste - and gave reasons for a wide-spread believe in SA that Lawrence crooked the game - was the fact that despite his incompetence New Zealand made him the referee of the year for 2011.    Incompetence should not be awarded like that - it leaves a very bad taste and can lead to allegations of an unsavioury kind. 

Just one more thing - what did Todd Blackadder say recently about Lawrence after him refereeing a game involving the Crusaders?

@clevermike,

i agree with tha well thought a comment and o have voiced similar opinons, about bryce being more incomptenet then he was corrupt.

but back in march i think, there was a live online Q & Q with tony johonson and lawrence related questions were the most popular topic. one saffa blog asked why did NZ award lawrence the NZ ref of the year and jhonson revealed that not everyone agreed with him being awrded the honour, but when he asked those who were responsible for awarding bryce, they revealed while lawerence had a shocker during the quater final match, he had reffed all his other games to the highest of standards and was therefore worthy of the title.
johnson then said that he dosent agree with theirdecision, cos it sent a very poor statement out to world, mainly SA and he was dead right given all the hoo haa thats been spwed about it, but the guys who awrded lawernce with the actual NZ ref of the year, then replied, one bad game in a RWC final is not the entire context of what lawerence should be judged on and they refused to bow down to the pressures of what may be concieved as wrong, when they know it was the right call.

on this matter, i agree with tony johnson, he shouldnt have been awarded the ref of the year, but as i didnt watch every game he reffed, i cant really say how he preformed, but if he did ref well in all his other games and that quater final was the worst one, then i can understand their rationale, cos habana had a shocker against the sharks, but hes still the form winger of the world at the moment, considering how well hes been playing all year.