Good question indeed, would personally go on performance, just like picking any team you always go for the best individuals. That definitely would rule out NZ ref and Bentham has been his usual crap self, the French one not even on the 4 nations ref panel and he's worse than Bentham!!

I think some people need to take off their biased glasses. The RFL aren't going to appoint a referee just because Sheens has been moaning. And Cecchin won't be biased just because the country of his origin. I'm a referee myself and have refereed the team I have played for on a few occasions. I'm not biased towards them. My career means too much for me to ruin it by that. So does Matt's

oh well. it was nice having a bit of hope for a while.

There is absolutely no way that Cecchin will give any of the 50/50 decisions to England - as he wont want to jeopardise his NRL position next season.

Makes me sick that the RFL roll over every single year.

Matt's career in the Australian competition? The only way he is going to ruin his career is by sending off a couple of Aussies for foul play. The Aussies know this, and will push him to the limits knowing that they can pretty much do anything they want without getting punished.

The RFL aren't rolling over. It's up to them to pick whether they want a neutral ref or the best performer.



They won't drop him if he makes the right call.

And on performances in this tournament Mark Cecchin fulfills neither criteria!

I want a referee that is preferably neutral but more importantly is familiar with and has experience of refereeing to the International Rules.....again Mark Cecchin fulfills none of these criteria!

So just what justification other than pandering to the moans of the Aussies can be given for his appointment?

Im not sure those two things are mutually exclusive. If Cecchin is the ref I would be looking at swapping Bailey for Carvell because Cecchin picked up none of the messing about at the PTB, If Cecchin didnt have the balls to send either Smith or Luke off after their performance on Saturday, it would be like Christmas for Bailey.

Though considering what it took for Cecchin to ping the kiwis at the PTB last week Bailey could probably get away with full on stabbing someone "You've come in with the knife, stabbed him and intentionally killed him, no more! Its going on report"

I choked on me tea a little bit then - both at the bit in bold and at the idea that Bailey would be in any way effective against the Aussies.

Its between bentham and cecchin. It will be announced tomorrow morning at 10/11. Each country (aus, england and new zealand) gets one vote each. Assuming that we vote bentham and the aussies vote cecchin, it will be down to nz to decide.

heard that an Aussie Ref has got the final,,if thats so,then OMG,,What a joke,,,..Just can imagine the first iffy decision against England and i can just see these boards heat up....

It seemed to have been done on a rota all through the 4 nations..Now the posts have been moved....If they were worried about this scenario,then why didn*t they have Alibert as a back up?...We all now Penera(sp) had a couple of big blunders in the game at Wembley,but Bentham as we all know has his moments as well...But if Checcin does get the game then you can just imagine the 1st iffy call against England and these boards will be hot!!!!!!

The whole system stinks

The Ref should be neutral, it is wrong that the only pro ref that is not a national of any of the four participants is not part of the ref's squad

The NRL provided two refs and the ESL provided one, why is each hemisphere represented by two teams yet ours only provides one ref?

The southern hemisphere believe their own refs are unable to handle a top class game on their own so why are they reffing the biggest games at international level?

If it comes to a vote as suggested then why do three of the four competitors get a vote and not the WRL? Why is there not a neutral board in charge of appointments?

Perenera should be the only choice from the current squad, the English refs always bow to the Aussies and reffing an Australian defeat in a final will kill your career if you are an Aussie ref

It's a complete joke and it shows Australia are slightly concerned.

England should refuse to play, simple as that.

People say he won't be biased, based on the first game I'm not convinced. The NRL referees ALWAYS referee internationals over here with the attitude of 'I'll show you how it should be done, this is how WE do it'.

refs ought to be neutral regardless of their experience. To the Aussies its all about having the 'best' ref - which generally means reffing games as though it were the NRL. Part of international sport is having a ref who will sometimes call things differently.

Having said that, if not a neutral I'd prefer an Aussie to a British ref. In the past our refs have been desperate to show impartiality, sometimes to our detriment.

In any event, here's hoping nobody remembers the ref after the weekend. Unless a last minute call wins England the game....

Agreed. If Perenara is not deemed to be good enough, then he shouldn't have been part of the squad in the first place and we should have had a neutral ref who was up to the task. The fact that he has already refereed England v Australia means that there is no justification for not using him again.