How were the refs even that bad? None of the no try decisions were 100% wrong decisions. It's just that a few of them happening in a row looks like favoritism, when it was really just luck.
First no try to Kiwis... definitely looks like a harsh decision. But the onfield referee thought that the player knocked it on (before a replay I thought that is what happened too) and ruled that way before sending it to the video referee, and the video evidence didn't prove that he was wrong. Last year it would have been a BOTD try, but this year those decisions go down to whatever the onfield referee ruled when there's no evidence that proves he was wrong. Could have gone either way, but the video referee didn't have evidence to overrule the onfield referee.
Then the Whare try... that was most definitely an obstruction and there's no way that try should have been awarded. The ball should have gone back to the Kiwis for the Australia knock-on, but it wasn't a try.
The Prtichard try... he clearly knocked it on.
Greg Inglis try in the second half... first viewing I thought Slater knocked it on. But on replay it was clearly knocked back from Hoffman and Slater didn't play at it. As for the "obstruction" on Gallen/JWH, firstly that play had nothing to do with the try scored. And secondly JWH chose to make contact and throw his hands up to appeal for the penalty. But the try wasn't scored or created through anything that happened near him anyway. Start of the season that is no try, but the rules were changed and it clearly had no effect on the try itself.
Now two of those decisions could have gone the other way and it wouldn't have bothered me. But not one of them is a blatantly wrong decision. It's funny that if one 50/50 call goes against the team, that apparently every decision after that is wrong because of it. Nevermind the fact that the decision was correct according tot he rules.
