100% a try.

A zoomed out version showing Inglis not near it. Good to see Channel 9 news made no mention of the controversy or robbing us.

Tbh the two penalties on half way on 4th tackles for laying on were the game changers. Australia fluffed it first time but got given another go where they scored and the momentum was all their way. Considering the flops and wrestling by the Australians it was farcical to penalise england only and this killed us.

Whichever england officials agreed to australian ref and VR wants castrating (that's if theyve got any balls!)

How can you tell Inglis is not touching that ball? Show me the gap.

They really are like the Americans aren't they?.... they will deny that incident even happened!

Inglis' third finger is on the ball. It's in plain sight.

Might be no more than a touch. But I've seen them given.

All talk of being robbed does us no favours. We were outplayed for 34 minutes in the second half.

Boo.

Cheats.

Aussies.

BOOOOOOOO.

England were great.

England were robbed.

By jingo.

Life is so unfair.

Obviously I am looking at it from the point of view of a disappointed England fan but that incident for me highlights that we need to have a strict policy of neutral officials only. It's not as if we couldn't have done so either. We have all seen the replays of it and the ball was clearly flat on the ground with Hall's finger on it, it should have been a try. We can never know for sure whether a neutral official would have awarded a try or whether had it been Australia rather than England looking to tie the match that the try would have been given. However that the decision that would likely have put Australia out of the tournament or kept them in it was in the hands of an Australian is ridiculous. With a non-neutral official making such an important decision in the favour of his own nation it is always going to smell fishy. Had a Frenchman made that call we would still be disappointed of course but there wouldn't be the same opportunity for (or feeling of) suspicion of home bias.

Publicly bemoaning the decision would do us no favours and credit to the players and coach for not doing so but hopefully there will be some done in private so that we can get a rule change to require use of neutral officials from now on.

The shot before the close up, this would suggest the ball is moving downward when he puts his ginger on it.

Go fvck yourself William.

Talking of grounding. Jennings was very lucky his wasn't chalked off!

I reckon that photographer has the evidence!

Stop feeding the troll FFS.Those of us with brains who have him and the others on ignore don't want to have to wade through you quoting him all over the place.

Inglis might be touching the ball but his hand clearly is at the side of the ball and not going downwards on it like Hall's, therefore Inglis surely can't be described as applying downward pressure in that shot.