Precisely - and THAT is what can so easily be avoided.

I have no problem losing fairly to a better side, and I can even accept a vital refereeing error if there's absolutely NO whiff of conscious or subconscious bias.

'Suttongate' just stinks and it's no surprise the Ockers are battening down the hatches with 'selected' images and venemous denial. And stoney silence from the authorities, again.

It's not as though it's just us 'Poms' who feel this way - I browsed an Aussie forum last night and the majority of posters (the reasonable ones), agreed neutral officials was an absolute must in order to avoid any doubt. Many even agreed Hall's grounding should have been given.

This is how I foresaw it the other day. The only neutral oppointment is Ian Smith VR for the Aussie game.

Basically, Bentham will give the 50/50 decisions to England. They will meet their "win by 10 point" target. Australia know they can smash Samoa, and with an Aussie ref it will make things all the more smoother.

England will reach the final, Australia will reach the final and both Sutton turds will be referee and VR for the match again.

Disappointed with both team & ref selections. Seems certain players will play regardless. There are better options for the 17 in most peoples opinion, I certainly would have liked to see Hardaker & Ratchford given a run, simply to make our attack a bit more potent. If Clark can do 80 then why isn't he? I'm sure the NRL will improve Hodgson in the future but he was poor against Oz. I'm happy to eat humble pie over Farrell but only McNamara knows how J Tomkins is still there. Winning this one by 10 looks a tall order to me.

As for the ref appointments.......

The sensible thing to do would be for everyone to get together and say "yeah, we messed up. We made a simple botched decision look like something far worse, lets put a neutral ref in place for the remaining games and sort something permanent after the comp'. Only RL would double down on such a clusterfuk, the parochialism and self - interest even here at the very pinnacle of the game is just draining.

The team for last week was announced as the same team as the week before but it didn't line up as that against Australia - who is to say the same wont happen this week?

Is this not just a provisional team like last week?

If not I have to agree with everyone on Joel Tomkins still getting in over Whitehead.

Also if that is the final team, NZ 23 - 12 England. I'm hoping i'm wrong and we can reach the final

I can almost taste the faux outrage over this latest non-neutral refereeing appointment

Well I have to agree with every person on hear what a farce, but I forgot I do not agree with William eve

Ours is bad enough but the Aussies getting their own way again just beggars belief TBH. I wasn't going to bother watching on Sunday but if England win then Sunday will be must watch, car crash RL at it's most corrupt.

Can't wait.

think this is actually a blow to englands chances! the video ref will be getting lots of use as bentham can rarely make a decision on his own

Yes, id disregard the link at the top of this thread as the official England RL 18th Man news shows the team same as named last week for Aus game minus O'Loughlin and Sarginson rlhttps://theta.ecommzone.com/lz/RFL/00APT2/06cb61dc9a1309ad0ee70ae321e63a778b/story1.htmrl

I would expect there to be changes. Hopefully Hardaker and Whitehead get a shot!

It's not all about Aussies, JT being Joel Tomkins not Jonathon Thurston!

If we're in trouble at half-time, hopefully Bentham decides to penalise NZ for everything he sees second half and ignores everything England do.

If Bentham performs like Sutton did last weekend, I doubt it would be brushed under the carpet.

I thought Hodgson played well, what was wrong was not getting Clark on in the first half as the Aussies tired. Hodgson was targeted & was caught out after being winded in a tackle. Clark is a strike weapon & is devastating against big forwards when he comes on as a pair of fresh legs. I do agree Joel Tomkins should be no where near this team & would hope hardaker gets a run out.

Johnathan Thurston is universally known among players, coaches and media pundits as "JT." I don' t know if the Queen slander has patented the name, but he should have. Because of his stature as the greatest player in the game today, his moniker needs to have its exclusivity respected. The use of it to refer to such a limited talent as Tomkins the Elder is reckless, tasteless and utterly disrespectful.

Tomkins the Elder should be referred to as JoTo, in the manner of Jennifer Lopez, rather than sowing confusion and shameful insolence in the debating halls of TGG.