The officiating in the australia vs England match.

[VonVolks]

debating the actual decisions isnt the point.
Its the fact that an English ball was 'forward' (when it was flat?) but the massively forward aussie pass was 'try'
Aussie Try = "BOTD", England Try = "No Try"
Aussie Knock on ="Play on" - England stripped ="Knock on"

thats the problem...... not the actual decisions but the total one way freight train of game ruining cr@p that was dumped on England.

They did their best to help the Aussies by dropping the ball a lot, they didnt need Archer kicking them when they were down....

 

[TrevorAllan]

Big Pete and co....

A blind man could see Cronk knocked on - what were you watching?

At great expense I flew from Asia to Melbourne for the 2008 WC game and England got whacked but I did not give up on the international game. I enjoyed watching Locky, Slater and Inglis play rugby league as much as anyone.

This time was different. Archer was bias against England against the kiwis and then he followed it up with that shocker on Sunday. Sorry but I'm never going to ever waste my money on international rugby league until there are neutral refs.

 

[mrpwnd]

Archer should have his intestines ripped out and paraded throughour England for that travesty that was called refereeing.

 

[adamkungl]

Archer is the International Referee of the Year...

:lol:

 

[VonVolks]

Archer is the International Referee of the Year...

:lol:

yeah...an award presented by the RLIF and ARL

 

[roughyedspud]

jointly awarded to archer and 'englands' richard silverwood......

and while tony archer's name would have been printed in shiny,golden italics, on the piece of paper...i'll put $100 on it that 'englands' richard silverwoods name was hastily written on in biro late on sunday night

 

[Big Pete]

A blind man could see Cronk knocked on - what were you watching?

The game?

Unless there's 100% proof to suggest he knocked on, it's a try botd.

S**t rules but that's the way the game is these days.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

Archer is the International Referee of the Year...

:lol:

Unbelieveable. International rugby league has just sunk to a new low.](*,)

 

[Geordie]

The game?

Unless there's 100% proof to suggest he knocked on, it's a try botd.

S**t rules but that's the way the game is these days.

So by that same argument, Lunt's try that was disallowed by the on field ref who didn't know whether the ball had touched the line or not and passed it up to the video ref, who after several viewings couldn't categorically say that it didn't touch the line, passed it back to the onfield ref who didn't have a clear view of the incident because of goal post padding and Slaters body gives no try tackle two.

Should that not have been benefit of doubt to the attacker.

 

[Big Pete]

So by that same argument, Lunt's try that was disallowed by the on field ref who didn't know whether the ball had touched the line or not and passed it up to the video ref, who after several viewings couldn't categorically say that it didn't touch the line, passed it back to the onfield ref who didn't have a clear view of the incident because of goal post padding and Slaters body gives no try tackle two.

Should that not have been benefit of doubt to the attacker.

Different scenario.

Archer had no idea what had transpired with the 2nd Lewis try. With the Lunt try he had an opinion but sent it upstairs for another angle. The other angle proved his point and as he had the best angle he was able to adjudicate.

 

[nadera78]

Different scenario.

Archer had no idea what had transpired with the 2nd Lewis try. With the Lunt try he had an opinion but sent it upstairs for another angle. The other angle proved his point and as he had the best angle he was able to adjudicate.

Ref's Call is a local issue. It only applies to the NRL and no other Rugby League competition in the world. It should not have been used, and the fact that it was demonstrates how little the ARL cares, or even knows, about the game of rugby league as a whole.

 

[deluded pom?]

Different scenario.

Archer had no idea what had transpired with the 2nd Lewis try. .

Maybe he could train his guide dog to bark when it sees a knock on.

 

[Geordie]

Different scenario.

Archer had no idea what had transpired with the 2nd Lewis try. With the Lunt try he had an opinion but sent it upstairs for another angle. The other angle proved his point and as he had the best angle he was able to adjudicate.

Archer hadn't a clue about the Lunt try. Have a look at it again and you will see that he has the padding of the goal post and Billy Slater's body between him and where Lunt put the ball down, so there was no way he could see it. If the video evidence had been conclusive then the video ref would have said "no try" but he didn't and wrongly passed it back to Archer, who proved just how biased he was by saying "no try". He must have had a doubt otherwise why pass it up to the video ref!!!!

You need to look at things through open eyes a bit more.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

Archer hadn't a clue about the Lunt try. Have a look at it again and you will see that he has the padding of the goal post and Billy Slater's body between him and where Lunt put the ball down, so there was no way he could see it. If the video evidence had been conclusive then the video ref would have said "no try" but he didn't and wrongly passed it back to Archer, who proved just how biased he was by saying "no try". He must have had a doubt otherwise why pass it up to the video ref!!!!

You need to look at things through open eyes a bit more.

BigPete is in a 2.13% minority.

 

[Big Pete]

Archer hadn't a clue about the Lunt try. Have a look at it again and you will see that he has the padding of the goal post and Billy Slater's body between him and where Lunt put the ball down, so there was no way he could see it. If the video evidence had been conclusive then the video ref would have said "no try" but he didn't and wrongly passed it back to Archer, who proved just how biased he was by saying "no try". He must have had a doubt otherwise why pass it up to the video ref!!!!

What are you talking about? He was right over the Lunt try when it happened.

Lunt did make contact with the goal posts but by the time he hit the turf, Archer was right there to adjudicate and with instances like that it's customary to go to a video ref.