I thought Archer was quite neutral. He let a lot off stuff slide from both teams, but he let the game flow a lot more than any other refs have so far in this tournament.
England were ok in Attack JJ, they nearly crossed Oz'z try line a lot of times but you have to admit their defence was at bartercard cup level. No way were they even on the same page as Australia (in defence). They also showed they're defensive incapabilities in the PNG game as well.
On the other hand, I think NZ have been defending a lot better then they have been attacking.
England > NZ in attack.
NZ > England in defence.
Yeah mate, the English went agonisingly close so many times. And yes, their defense was weak. They slid, as did the Kiwis. I reckon we need to get up in their (Australia's) faces to have a chance.
I agree on Archer letting things slide. I think by virtue of being an NRL ref, the Australians were more suited to his refereeing. There was a lot of wrestling going on there. Of course, when England and Australia are the only top level countries that have professional league, your referees are going to come from one or the other, and it'll suit one team more.
I think our attack woke up a lot on the England, even though it was PNG. Benji was our spark in the first half, and Issac Luke was our spark in the second. The likes of Vatuvei, who as we all know is devastgating with the ball in hand, haven't had that much of a look in, such is the problem with weak halves. Get the ball out wide and let Vatuvei and Folau collide - I know which kid I'd be backing!
