Do you think it's time Aus stop controlling International games?

I don't consider there was any bias by the ref in the game. There were some poor decisions to both sides but this is something we have seen all season from the whilstleblowers. There isn't any way around it. It is either English or Australian refs. The French play in the ESL with English referees and the Warriors play in the NRL with Australian refs. French, PNG, NZ refs do their district club sides only. There are only the two groups to choose from. It's not like rugby where there are at least three or four refs in each of the top ten rugby countries who can officiate so there is always a neutral ref.

As it stands, the international game is a joke with many players having Islander or Maori antecedents opting to play for Australia so they can play SOO. This is the joke that international rugby league has become where players put SOO attainment in front of their country.

Australia doesn't get to decide any of that, the Rugby league international Federation decide where the games are played, what rules the games are played by and so forth. The top members that make a vast majority of the decisions are from Australia, New Zealand and Great Britain, thus making it an even board free of bias. Just because Australia has been a dominant rugby League force ever since they had an international side doesn't mean they're cheating, it just means that their development of Rugby League players is far better than any other country, and the fact that NZ pretty much has the same access to develop their players as Aus does means that they are just not up to par for some reason.

I would have liked to see Shane Rehm, the Kiwi ref who controlled the Aus-PNG game last week and did a relatively good job by the standards we have seen in 2010, have control of last night's match too. But I don't think Archer was particularly biased. Sure he didn't have a great game but he made errors both ways.

As for games they play at home, let's have a look at some stats and figures. Last year they really only had one test at home. So did NZ, the Tonga test.

This year, if you count the NZ-Samoa match, and assuming both teams make the Quadnations final, both transtasman nations will have played 4 home tests this year.

2008, well that's different. World Cup.

2007, there was one transtasman test in each country.

So in recent times, the Kangaroos have not played significantly more games at home than the Kiwis.

i agree with most the people here even if it had been a kiwi ref england still with have lost but it is still completely unfair if it had been an english ref then all the ozzies would have been bi*chen. And as for all the people saying ozzy is better than nz, get off my nut, r u serious, the nrl is an australian compition with 15 ozzy teams and over 30 feeder clubs and nz has 1 club and 1 feeder club and 1 WORLD CUP TROPHY. Face even with the numbers against us and the refs out to get us(Warriors most penalised team in the NRL, no coincidence) were still number 1. Its sad how u can control the whole game but still get betten by the under dogs

You put an Australian referee in charge of a game involving Australia. And it's Tony Archer no less. What did anyone expect would happen? There is apparent bias in the NRL all over the place. The Dragons are not as big of a club when compared to the Eels, but on 9, they drew up twice as many games this year. The Roosters are the same. They have limitted fan numbers, yet they get more air time than the 9th biggest sporting club in Australia, and 2nd biggest in the NRL (Broncos is 1st).

My father has stopped watching it, believing it has become so bias, it is ridiculous. After seeing the first match between the Dragons and Rabbitohs this year, I almost followed him. That game of refereeing, which was almost as bad as Bulldogs v Dragons the year before, I still believe cost the Rabbits their entire season. Up until that point, they were working as a team. After being robbed by the hands of Archer, they fell apart again. Granted, they probably would have fallen apart at the next loss, but had they won, they would have made the Top 8 at the very least.

Anyway, while I am a passionate supporter of Rugby League, I believe it is too corrupt in its bias. From referees to the judiciary board to the IRLF, I believe favouritsm and bias rules supreme.

Then again, maybe I am over-reacting.

I thought it would be run by the International Rugby League and not the ARL but I could be wrong. Sure, some of the calls were a bit dodgy but not enough to affect the result

I agree with you, there should have been a neutrel referee for the game. Having an australian referee refereeing Australia vs England in Australia undermines International Rugby Leagues Standing

Blaming the ref? Seriously? Grow the f--k up.

Read Craig and Bill's answers you big sook, you might learn a thing or two from them.

If the international game is to get stronger, the other countries had better pull their finger out and get better. Don't whinge because we are better than you.