from that deludedpom you are inferring that a ref from a participating country is biased in some way - it's never been a great problem in cricket (except for a certain Pakistani umpire & Mike Gatting) so why should it be any different in RL ?
Phil Bentham had three good games in the recent Alitalia Cup series in france but i'm sure Thierry Alibert would have done just as good a job.
As I keep saying,wait till after the game and judge the refs performance accordingly.
regarding the Aus v Eng game on sunday the english players will have to be aware of the aussie refereeing styles which shouldn't be a problem for professional international sportsmen.Just don't use it as an excuse if/when they get stuffed.

dear sanjunien.

You are missing a fairly important point or two in the the aussies will only accept their own match officials as being good enough which is utter crap.
The real reason is because they nor I have never seen an aussie ref giving his own team a "hard time".
Remeber when they changed the IRLB rules for australia to allow their own VR "observer"? WTF was thart about.

Things to look for are: 50/50 decisions where you can't argue individual decisions being unfair or biased - you have to look at the weight or quantity of these. Also penalty count is no guide; look for penalties given in useless positions and times e.g. when in possession early in the tackle count near a teams own line.
If you want to be gullable then fine.

I see your reasoning 'saints at wire' and can understand your reluctance for an aussie ref tho' I think it's more a case of the english players adapting to the aussie refs attitude and approach to the game etc

I have to agree with you about the 50/50 decisions tho' and of course the penalty count means very little as any ref can and does try to even things up on paper especially in the last quarter - the most blatant incident I have ever seen was this season at the Limoux v Leigh cup game where the ref ((from Leigh incidentally !) actually 'gave' Limoux about ten penalties in the last five minutes to make the penalty count look even.The ref was seemingly so biased towards his home town team it was embarassing !

I feel the most important thing for the english is to stay disciplined (especially James G & Joel T) and not invite the aussie ref to take action.

And is this with both coaches together, or private meetings with each coach. I know for a fact that Sheens has asked for a meeting with Archer to "clarify" a few things (you can have a guess what they will be), but I don't recall McNamara wanting any such meeting.

Anyway, Archer is a homer so I'm expecting nothing less than a biased performance. His attitude is a disgrace. The way he was speaking to the England players last week was shocking. Thing I'm concerned about is the video ref. When England played New Zealand, there were two video referees; one from Australia and one from England's opponents, New Zealand.

Tomorrow, there is only one video ref, and yep you've guessed it, they are Australian, the nationality of England's opponents. Why has an English official not been asked to do VR duties? THe whole thing is a shambles.

It should be neutral referee's, but Australia haven't got the to go with it because they feel it will "harm" them.

dont know why we let these filthy aussies call the shots. if we pulled out the comp would be worthless like their nrl where players get paid a pittance thats why they come over here for some decent money. we wont get a fair crack of the whip from a bitter jealous aussie ref why bother ?

You're missing the point completely san. Cricket now has neutral umpires. In no way have I questioned Archer's impartiality. If I have copy and paste it for me. My point is the credibility of the international game is not good at the best of times and having a ref from one of the competing nations reduces it even more. It's about the perception of the game to outsiders. We are seen as a parochial little game that's played in northern England and eastern Ausralia and the fact that the ref is from Australia just confirms this to some people. There are plenty of Aussie supporters who don't rate Archer full stop so the argument about quality over neutrality doesn't hold water with me.

just get the game played and whinge,complain,criticise even give praise post-match instead of pre judging !

great to see young Sam in his rightful place - this bunch of green 'n golds may just be there for the taking, even with aussie officials ?

Once again san misses the point of my post whilst trying to tell me what I mean.

I personally would have a NH neutral ref when the 4N in in the SH and vice versa.

it's impossible to have a 'neutral' ref by definition if the NH & SH criteria are different - that's my whole point - that is to say,there is no such thing as a neutral ref when a NH team meets a SH team ! IT's a contradiction in terms.

What a disgraceful display of officiating. Our own errors probably nailed us in the end but the decisions from ref/video ref certainly didn't help matters whatsoever.

Absolute daylight robbery !! Disgraceful and brings the game to the level of a joke.
No we probably wouldn't have won but jeez, a one eyed man with glasses could have seen that knock on....these decisions change the game and the momentum.
Am left with the feeling that had we actually started to get close then the backup 14th and 15th man for Aus would have been there to see we didn't.
Brings the whole International scene into disrepute, absolutely shocking to be allowed to get away with this sort of cheating....thats what it was end of.

OK then as neutral as we can possibly get at least from a nationality point of view. Archer may well have called things as he saw them but the fact remains that we had a game involving Australia played in Australia reffed by an Australian and had an Australian as the VR. A game where plenty of 50/50 calls went the way of Australia. Some weren't even 50/50. Calls that had nothing to do with which comp the man refs in. Calls that were just plain wrong and there were too many of them. It was either incompetence on the part of Archer and Clark or it was bias. You decide which it was.

We plainly need to go back to the neutral refs policy of the 1980s/early 1990s.

Simple as that.

I can cop poor decisions but not this joke of a policy.