Waratahs pinged off the park by referee Egon Seconds

In the first half the Tahs played more attacking rugby but in the second half they were defending and used various tactics to slow down the Lions ball. The were many potential penalties that could have been awarded for tacklers not rolling away, players not staying on their feet and the scrums were messy. The defending team were penalised more which I do not have a problem with as I think the referee should allow the game to flow and award teams that want to play. I have seen worse performances by referees than Seconds but didn’t think he was bias nor very bad.

I will watch the game tonight to see if there were calls that should have been made that were not. I have a bias as I prefer refs that let the game flow and reward sides that wants to play rugby and penalise sides that use negative tactics e.g. slowing the ball down or consistently go offside. I watch the game again.

"Ghost who Walks" you're 100% right. Guran, Diana and even Col. Travers of the Jungle Patrol would do a better job.

Terrible standard of reffing this year and this match was one of the worst.

Immediately before Phipps’s try he did what I thought was impossible; he ran with the ball from the ruck base. Admittedly it was only for three tentative steps, but it was better than the usual two steps backwards. He’s always been good at backing up a break, but seriously, he’d have to rank behind Genia, Powell, Gordon and McDermott at present, and a long way behind White when he returns from OS.

I agree most (all) of the penalties against the tahs were correct, there were only 11 of them which isn't that much. Same with the rebels except some were incorrect especially the scrums. The issue is with lack of consistency, the non calls against the lions. In both games Seconds reffed the lions did exactly the same things as the rebels / lions and were not penalised. In 2 games a total of 3 penalties against the lions when under any other ref they have penalised a normal amount of times. So you could say Seconds is not biased against the rebels / tahs but is biased favourably towards the lions. This is exacerbated by Peyper calling offside against the aussie teams but not once against the lions despite them being offside after break outs and getting involved in play.

What I noticed in the Rebels game was that there was no "wrong" calls either. It was all about the timing, interpretation and consistency. He played "French" for the Lions and "Southern" for the Rebs. By french, I mean loads of bodies off feet smothering the ruck, blowing over the top off feet reset scrums. By southern, he was calling for hands away the moment the opposition arrived at the breakdown, even if a Rebs player already had hands on the ball and the Lions player was hanging on for grim death. I prefer the hi-flow souther style but also appreciate the existence of the more forward eccentric interpretation, but you need to be consistent with the calls throughout the game. You can't have all the 50/50 calls going 1 way.

Yes, Ken, interesting, isn't it? I also saw a 'satirical' piece from the Betoota Advocate about how the likes of Izzy aren't allowed to disrupt the team culture in NZ - especially the AB's. They just don't allow one person to be bigger than the team. There is something very wrong with the set-up in Oz. I don't have the solution but I can see it's a problem.

After reading this article I watched the game yesterday night. Seconds is not a particularly good referee but he did not have a bad game not shown bias. I replayed each penalty and it was clear for what each penalty was awarded - a true transgression and the Tah's should therefore look at their discipline. Poor discipline has been a consistent problem for the Tahs. There are three cases that are controversial: - The collapse maul penalty I thought the Tahs was unlucky as Seconds judged that Marx broke away from the maul and was then tackled while the Tahs thought it was a maul and killed the ball. Seconds clearly called it a tackle and early but the Tah's failed to respond appropriately and therefore penalised. - On the forward pass that lead to Skosan's try: From the camera angle from behind, the pass between Lowies to Marx looked like it went forward. However Seconds was well positioned in-line with the pass and from that position he could see the players hands and make a judgement if the ball went forward from the hands or not. There is no evidence from our angle to tell us that this call is wrong as we cannot see the hands. - On touching the player. Referees as judged on their empathy with players and I expect that Seconds was aware of the penalty count and thought that Hooper for slowing the ball down and could not hear his call to leave it. To avoid another kickable penalty he stepped in and touched/pulled Hooper arm of the ball to allow play to flow on. This should have ended up to be a kickable penalty to the Lions. Although it does not often happens, it is not unusual to see referees touch a players that they think cannot hear their calls to allow to play to flow and avoid a penalty. Seconds took it to the next level and this mistake benefitted the Tahs not the Lions. Referees should not get physically involved in the game.

I'd like to see the stat for home teams v visitors everywhere as well.

Trouble, I think the reason is the standard of reffing. It is very poor at the moment. Their general play rulings aren’t too bad – except scrum time as you say. But when the pressure is on they take the easy option & shy away from the correct hard calls. Also, their game management is poor. Is it because they are relatively young & inexperienced at this level? Maybe not, for the more experienced refs like Gardner & Jackson are struggling as well.

I wouldn't say Seconds cheated per se, but he's just not up to the job. I suspect he's had plenty in his ear from SA, suggesting various things, and I reckon he's capitulated to that. But overall, the reffing standards are lower this year, especially in Oz - even allowing for a new guy like Murphy who is finding his feet. Gardner's been good, but 10% below last year, and Berry's been just ok without setting the world alight. I have heard that Gardner's and Berry's long time coaches have been shafted by RA, and there's some dissatisfaction within the ranks. Could be part of it if true.

Good post Dave. Not sure I'm on board with point 2, but I like the rest, especially point 4. I've long scratched my head as to why a team gets a PK for dominance, given as you say, often the inferior scrum disintegrates for safety. You don't see backlines awarded PKs for dominance.

Damn, as I wrote that message, I knew it was a mistake to quote the Lord on this site. I am sure Simmons will make it to 100 tests; he can play the role of a lock for for 80 minutes at test level.

He was pretty good there is his debut season. Got shifted by Ledesma using the argument he wasn’t big enough to succeed at tight at Test level. His best scrummaging performances remain on the TH side as although he’s improved I don’t think he’s nailed LH yet. I really like HJH. Think he has a tendency to get caught with his head down but he’s very young and he shows plenty of strength so am hopeful he can fix it.

true - at least Waratahs have a 10 :P

I agree Fionn. I doubt that referees deliberately cheat. I suspect that each rugby nation tends to interpret the laws in slightly different ways. Referees grow up in the same culture as the players. So it may be that the refs ‘naturally’ agree with decisions made by players from their own country and disagree with interpretations of foreign players. If that is right, it is more confirmation bias than partisanship. But either way, neutral refs can overcome the perception of bias or at least the apprehension of bias.

marx may have unbound at the maul with the ball hence it was a tackle and fine since no other lions were bound to marx.

So, when "Factory" seconds cost the Rebels the game, there was silence. But when it happens to the Tahs.... we get a headline.

Totally agree. I haven't watched it with an eye to deciding that issue, but having seen it a few times it never occurred to me that it might be forward. It didn't even look to go forward relative to the ground, if at all, let alone forward out of the hands. Looked flat, in the way many good try-assist passes are.