Paul Lewis: Give Slade and Siti a shot

Graham Henry. Photo / Getty Images

You'd have to say - quietly, mind you - that pretty much every step taken on the path to the Rugby World Cup this year by Graham Henry, Steve Hansen and Wayne Smith has been firm, correct and is setting up the All Blacks for their best shot at (hush, now ... whisper it) a World Cup title since 1987.

The All Black squad for the Tri Nations is due out today and it will contain few, if any, surprises.

Henry has reduced the "bolter" dimension to almost zero in past years - even before the advent of the recent training camps which pre-announced such things as the dropping of Stephen Donald and faith in Aaron Cruden.

The build-up this time has been in extreme contrast to those of 2007 and 2003; 2007 with its Looney Tunes rotation, rehabilitation and recreation in Corsica - and all that other psychobabble sports science gubbins which has thankfully been ditched.

In 2003, coach John Mitchell's perplexing circumlocutions and even more perplexing selections (no Tana Umaga; Leon MacDonald at centre) gave rise to the still-fresh horror of that Wallaby assault at the breakdowns on an unprepared All Black team.

Selection is the middle part of any coaching master plan. First, identify the style of game to play. Then select those best qualified to play it. Third: execute. Successive All Black regimes have done the first two elements well, or mostly so, since 1987 but the third has been as elusive as weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

A home Cup helps, of course, but it is Henry & co's preparations thus far which give the greatest confidence in the All Blacks' chances come September-October. It's all a far cry from the vengeful aftermath of 2007 in which this writer was one of the louder voices.

Back then, this column said: "The NZRU need to replace the coaching staff pronto and begin again the business of building anew. It can only do that by burying all connections with the last campaign and starting afresh - even if the next coach does use some or even all of the Henry concepts.

"It's not that Henry is a bad coach - he is clearly very good indeed. But when the thing you hitch your wagon to disappears down a crevasse, you either go with it or you do not attempt to negotiate another crevasse. It's a credibility thing.

Taking time to consider a disaster does not change it from being a disaster."

Henry was very, very lucky to hang on to his job after New Zealand's worst World Cup result; gained after he and his fellow coaches got their way on every last element of the All Black build-up. But credit where it is due.

The All Blacks, with some hiccups, have looked strong, focused, determined and efficient. Redemption may be just around the corner now; we have the people and the tools to do it.

So we come to selection today. That there are only a few quibbles is a sign of the good management and unity that the All Black coaching panel and the team have produced in recent times. There is a sense of togetherness in the great, occasionally confused wilderness of New Zealand rugby fans and their strong knowledge of, and opinions on, the game.

I can remember walking away from that semifinal disaster of 2003 and my brother-in-law, a Kiwi who lives in Sydney, saying: "You know, the Australians are way, way better than us at getting behind their team." When I asked him what he meant, he said that Australia seemed to manage to align team, fans and media in a way that rarely happened in New Zealand.

It's true. Part of the reason for that is that rugby is still not a major sport in Australia and thus gets a fair amount of underdog treatment and alignment. It may also be true that the Australian sense of nationalism is a little more developed (one-eyed?) than ours.

In New Zealand, we are far more critically aware and inclined re our rugby - just as the Australians are about league. This time, Henry & co have aligned the planets rather well. Few are arguing with the approach being taken nor the execution and style - in great contrast to 2007.

However, in today's selection, there are two names to mention - Colin Slade and Sitiveni Sivivatu. Henry's one, big, possibly unpardonable mistake was not to take Slade on that All Black tour in 2010. Donald's demise only confirmed what most of us already knew and the chance to give Slade a decent outing vanished.

There are now whispers that the selection panel feel Slade hasn't had enough rugby and that he might not be chosen; or only later in the Tri Nations. If Henry had chosen Slade last year, 'not enough rugby' this year would not matter so much. Slade has the tools required - a good kicking game, goalkicking, aerial skills, good defence and passable skills at running to the line and steering his team-mates.

Cruden has undoubted qualities - his running at the line is excellent and fits the All Black pattern. But I cannot banish from my mind the little chap being rag-dolled by Crusaders fullback Tom Marshall as a try loomed in the clash with the Hurricanes. Marshall, a rookie, slammed the All Black first five back; a try was lost. Donald would have scored that try.

So would Dan Carter; and Slade. Cruden's size is an issue - and you still fret about his ability to handle the World Cup heat. Slade has more sang froid. It will matter greatly if Carter is injured.

The gossip is that Sivivatu will be the big casualty today. The word is that the selectors have been disappointed with his response to their directions; and that he turned up this season overweight and under-done.

But Sivivatu remains one of the few backs in New Zealand capable of the unexpected; able to rip large, jagged holes in today's disciplined defences. If he is absent, it increases the pressure on the only other backs capable of doing it - Carter, Sonny Bill Williams, Hosea Gear and Ma'a Nonu, and three of those four have done so only fitfully recently.

Surely Sivivatu is a coaching job. Get the kilos off him and play him constantly to get his confidence and his game-breaking facilities honed.

Some, including the selectors, will say it's less about individual flair and more about possession and the way it is used; support play and being accurate - and fair enough. Maybe he too will be selected later in the piece after getting the rocket of omission.

But why not include a proven point of difference if all you have to do is coach him and coax him back to his best? This is about the World Cup; not who follows orders best.