KEY POINTS:
I await with interest this review by the New Zealand Rugby Union. I am not sure how much they will make public but there's not much point in having it unless they get it all out there.
They've told us the coach will be appointed by Christmas. I do not believe that person can be Graham Henry and Steve Hansen and Wayne Smith are goneburgers as well.
If Henry is re-appointed, I'd call for NZRU CEO Steve Tew's resignation. Tew can be bumptious and abrasive. With Tew, it's his way or no way.
It's all very well for departing CEO Chris Moller to talk about collective responsibility but Tew is the only person whose job was gift-wrapped and presented to him before the World Cup and yet he's been most involved with paving the way for Henry's theories.
Many people will see Tew as the kind of person to push rugby forward but, really, the NZRU is quite strong enough these days without having an aggressive, bolshy CEO.
I think Robbie Deans is the man for the coaching job. There's no doubting the credentials he has earned with the Crusaders and that other countries are lining up to employ him.
There is no doubt, too, that Tew and Deans have a history - going back to the days when Tew was CEO of the Crusaders and Robbie was manager and then a successful coach.
Will we get Tew's appointment as coach or will we get the guy we should obviously have if Henry is not going to get the job? A lot of people are surprised Henry hasn't resigned but he may just be hanging onto things while the NZRU get their ducks in a row.
If Robbie gets the job, his coaching partners could be quite interesting.
I wouldn't mind betting he'll go for someone he's worked with before and that could just be Vern Cotter - the former Bay of Plenty coach, who worked at the Crusaders with Robbie and did very well and who took Clermont-Ferrand to the final of French club rugby this year.
The other one could be Warren Gatland although he might not be comfortable being an assistant when he has had high-level head coaching positions, although I think his contribution would be great.
In the meantime, that review should provide answers for these questions:
Why didn't the All Blacks all come back together? Who was left in charge? Why didn't they make sure the players behaved?Were the All Blacks match-hardened and mentally fit? If not, why not? Why did we have so many calf injuries including, it now seems, Richie McCaw playing in the quarter-final with one? Should Conrad Smith have been taken when he was plainly not right? Should Dan Carter have played in the quarter-final? Should Keith Robinson have been there? What happened with our mental hardness? Was the mental skills coach to blame? Did the 27 officials and support team do the business or were they detrimental, as with the 2005 Lions and their bloated management team?
These and more are big questions New Zealand rugby needs to answer publicly and carefully so we can move on.
We shouldn't have something which doesn't clear everything up before we move into a new era.
