Graham Henry has finally put into words what we all suspected. He has had enough of being a full-time coach and wants out.
This is a fair enough request, considering he and his team won the Rugby World Cup in similar fashion to Dunaden at the Melbourne Cup - by a whisker.
Whiskers or one point, however, is all it takes to separate victors from villains and Henry has experienced both labels during his time as All Black head coach.
It could have gone either way on October 23. Spare a thought for the French coach, Marc Lievremont, who since returning without the Webb Ellis Trophy has been highly criticised by his players, claiming they gave him the "cold shoulder" after his public outbursts against them.
It must be a tough job to coach a bunch of grown men with a range of temperaments and personalities that make them appear childish at times. What was Lievremont to do leading up to a final with players who didn't seem to want to be there?
Is it the job of a coach to please the players or to bring out the best in them by whatever means possible?
Lievremont's public outbursts may not have won him friends in the French squad but it almost worked in terms of getting what had been a mediocre team throughout the tournament to fire on the night of the final.
Unfortunately, Lady Luck was not on the side of the French and so he went home vanquished and Henry was the hero. As a result, Lievremont has been duly dumped while Henry has basked in the glory.
So where will Graham Henry, the Great Redeemer, cash in on his impressive coaching career and people-management skills? He suggested a desire to run his own business, and to mentor other coaches in New Zealand and possibly overseas.
The NZRU seems highly sensitive about losing intellectual property and wants to keep Henry under their control. Does it have the right to do this? And is there anything in coaching that is sacrosanct these days? New Zealand has always been at the cutting edge of coach innovation and creative play.
Why should that stop now just because Henry is no longer at the helm?
I don't think Henry should feel obliged to stay in New Zealand at all. He has done his duty and has experienced the extreme highs and lows of coaching. He has practised what he preached in terms of coming back from a failure wiser and mentally tougher.
It would be great for New Zealand coaches if he decided to mentor at Super rugby level but would this be fulfilling enough for him? Will he get the same satisfaction mentoring coaches as he does players?
Henry, as a principal and head coach, has been mentoring those around him for some time, but he has also been in the power seat, where the buck stops.
As a mentor to other coaches he could enjoy developing others and talking rugby without the stress and responsibility.
At this stage in his life the gruff, dry-witted man with a wink and wily eyebrows should have the right to decide his own destiny - not because of his age (his mother is 95 years old, and longevity is genetic!) but because his achievements and resilience afford him that luxury.
Take your time, Ted.
