Earlier you had said that England/GB have won nothing for 40 years because the refs are against you, to saying in this thread that you think England probably would've lost yesterday anyway. I took that as a sign of calming down a bit.




Now do one for England.

Wheres Baz and his Aussie defense???? hmmm...guessing he can't really - even Baz would have trouble justifying that referee performance...can see why they've brought 2 refs in the NRL...bring them up to the right standard!

Aussie here present and accounted for, and was thoroughly disgusted in Archer's performance.

Perhaps you didn't. I could've sworn it was in the first post of one of the threads you made during or just after the game. I thought you were using your emotion to have a bit of a troll, but I can't find it so I guess I was wrong. Bit weird that the poster "kobashi" seems to reference you saying it as well though. I can accept I was wrong, but both of us thinking we saw it is a little odd.

i thought the refereeing was atrocious and was quite embarrassed to be honest. i dont buy into the whole australian referee's being biased and continually giving australia the 50 50 calls instead of england, but gee its hard to argue against it. i think australia would still have won, but the contest was taken out of it way too early. it was a great opening to the game, i think england were up for it but their outside backs are very ordinary and i dont think they are aggressive enough, they really should have stuck it to the aussies more. also, graham and crabtree should have nailed smith, he tapped the ball, end of story. you guys have a lot of work to do and the injuries havnt helped, but i can understand the frustration at us.

My point has been we didn't get a fair crack at the game. I don't sulk when we get murdered by Australia, the 25 minutes that you tore us to shreds at Elland Road is possibly the best Rugby League i've ever seen in my life live.

It's good to see some Aussies who are honest and humble enough to admit the ref was awful. I think the two things everyone can agree on is that the game would have been much better without the ropey ref, and the roof at Eden Park doesn't work.

i watched on the internet, so the coverage wasnt so good , but that ingoal decision by clarke was a shocker , i could see the ball change to a a downward direction after the fingers touched it , how in hell didn,t he

that last pass try by the aussies , archer was in direct line with it and so was the touch judge , mile forward

the try by you guys when it was a short and called play the ball by archer. Where his elbow was, the ball must have touched the line at least !. why wasnt that benefit of the doubt to the attaking team .


i have seen Archer ref loads of times in the NRL and he has never made so many errors like that

shame for the game


Cheers
Dave

England weren't good enough to win the match, however I don't agree with the any ref reffing a game in which his home team is playing in, whether it's an Aussie or English ref reffing Aus Vs Eng, or a bloke from Bradford or Leeds reffing Leeds Vs Brad. (I don't actually know if there are any refs from leeds or bradford , it's just an example).

It's a conflict of interest, and shouldn't be allowed to happen at a professional level. It just raises questions of bias.


Edit: Also, according to this week's DD, the handing the decision back to the match ref by the video ref isn't a part of the international rules. What do people think about that?

I heard someone say that before. It's yet another error by Archer, but one that will be put down to habit I imagine.

They should introduce 2 refs for these games as well like the NRL,one pom one oz ref would've made the difference.

I hope the pom refs are looking at this and saying let them come to England next year and will give them the same medicine and see how they feel lol.

I think every single Rugby League game should be played with the same rules, same officials, same everything. I hope no English refs are thinking like this as it would be a sham, the international game is struggling when it really shouldn't be. I'd rather be reading about how amazing the Aussies were than how garbage the ref was and how many Tongans and Fijians were in the Australia team.

How can a VT ref award a try 'benefit of doubt' for the aussies then when there is genuine doubt about the Lunt try (so much doubt that he couldn't decide himself), that he decides to change the rules halfway through the game and award 'ref's call'???

Pathetic decision to have the game reffed by aussies, inept refereeing start to finish.

Even the refs seem to buy into the fact that the aussies are the better team before the game has started, so rather then both teams being treated equally, they tret the aussie differently 50/50 calls are awared to the aussies 'because they are better so surely they are in the right';

Another prime example - Cam Smith taps the ball, putting the ball in play, changes his mind, the ref decides to lecture the england captain! Imaginge the other way round, Tomkins taps teh ball, changes his mind, gets smashed by the aussies, - everyone would be saying 'typical indecisive, clueless england' .

What could have been a close game against a poor aussie team was never given a chance by absolute inept refereeing - starting with a ball steal on goulding which should have been pen to england, but ended in the aussies scoring of gifted field position in our 20m.

When our officials stop rolling over, admitting we are beat before our players even get on the field we may start to compete.

I guarantee that the kiwis will not accept Archer and Clark in the final.

Bazza admitted on a previous thread that he thought the kiwis are favourites so doubt he will comment on it.

The aussies will try every trick in the book to get the referee ( and video ref)they want for the final.

For the good of international rugby league i have my fingers crossed for a New Zealand win in the final

Yep...come on Kiwis.