I actually felt a bit sorry for him tonight. He was clearly out of his depth (especially at the back end of the first half). Let that much go/be so inconsisitent in the NW Counties and stand back and watch the fireworks. I think you have to look at who gave him the game in the first place.

Alibert was poor tonight but are you all forgetting Bill Harrigan?
He was awful beyond belief but got away with it.
Wrong decision after wrong decision from him, coincidentally all going the Aussie or Kiwi way.
Of the two I'd rather have a genuinly poor ref like Alibert who makes mistakes both ways than what Harrigan and later Mander served up.
Is no one been surprised that since the Aussies have not had an NRL man reffing finals they've had difficulty winning them?

2005 Tri Nations lost 24-0
2006 Tri Nations drawn at full time won in extra time.
2008 World Cup lost.

If there's one good thing in us having full time refs has brought, it's that SL refs get to be in charge of finals where Australia & New Zealand compete.
Ganson must get the final, after all Hayne is not used to refereeing matches where he's the only ref out there. Hayne's not good enough anyway!

Anyone remember Robbie catching Keef in the air, also Eng/GB vs NZ, also at Huddersfield, eleven years ago. Awesome bit of athleticism, but totally illegal. Harrigan gave the pen but not the penalty try that would have won GB the game.

Yes. I thought of it when the similar incident happened today. We were done that time, but overcame it this time.

I agree. What exactly do Touch Judges do apart from mark the 10 & put their flag up for a conversion? They don't even bother to put their flag up if a player goes into touch anymore, especially if theres a VR,
What are TJs? Are they trainee refs? or are they refs that haven't made the grade? Are they full time professionals?

I was at the match and he didn’t do too badly. Armchair fans really don’t see a full picture..

Which match?

I was at the game and Allibert was WOEFUL.....no other word for it!

England v New Zealand.

As far as I’m concerned he made a few mistakes like people do but his decisions didn’t affect the game whatsoever. Its just the same with people complaining about how anonymous Tomkins has been tonight - it didn’t affect the outcome of the game whatsoever.

England rightfully won the game through a fantastic team performance via Sinfield and the pack. Anyone who criticises an England player on the pitch tonight needs to take a long look in the mirror. People certainly need to stop obsessing about the refs as well.

Some people on these forums would have robot players and robot referee’s!

The reasons his decisions didn't affect the game is because they were equally shocking across the board.

Not sure Tomkins was anonymous, thought he had a good game.. Marshall was anonymous

Keep hearing how fantastic Marshall and Hayne are and all we’ve got over here is shadows of the reports!

Just got back from the game where I was perplexed at some decisions. Justifiably so too. Watching it back now and he is way out of his depth.

With PNG replacing France in the Four Nations next season, does that mean we're going to lose Alibert and get a PNG referee instead? Seems only fair . . .

He's a Kiwi referee. Therefore, under the ARL's own rules, he is somehow ineligible to referee any Australia game that involves either GB/England or New Zealand.



Leon Williamson has been pretty good all tournament, but due to his nationality and the fact that he'll never get the chance to referee full time (because no-one will give him that chance!), then he'll be denied the big games.

It was funny back in 2004 when Glen Black refereed GB v Australia twice in the Tri-Nations. The Ockers were absolutely livid and demanded that he be removed, but for some bizarre reason, someone acutally grew a set of balls and stuck with the appointments.

A few months later, the ARL offered a "position" in the NRL to Glen Black. However, there were catches (surprise suprise). They wanted him to relocate his family to Australia, they wanted him to train under Robert Finch and they wanted to start him in the NSWRL Premier League and he would be eligible for promotion to the NRL "based on performance"........which bascially meant that he was in the hands of the ARL who would make the career decisions for him. He would never have made it to the NRL because the ARL wouldn't have given him that opportunity.

Needless to say, Black stuck to his guns and told the ARL to **** off.

No, probably means we will get another sub standard Ocker referee.

Probably that **** Tony Archer.

I watched the game from my armchair and he was poor.

I don't think you'd have a clue if you watched it at the game, watched a recording and then had a team of referees to explain everything to you.

I think Alibert got two of these decisions wrong tonight. The first one was in our favour. The Kiwi full back jumped in the air to claim the ball, an England player clipped his legs and the full back lost the ball when going down. The contact with the Kiwi players legs should have resulted in a Kiwi pen but Alibert played on (?) with England getting the ball back.

The other one was the tackle in the air on our winger. Defenders are allowed to tackle attackers in the air, but Alibert needs to know that the defender is only allowed to tackle when the attacker actually has the ball. The Kiwi defender tackled him well before the ball was close. Alibert gave that as a knock on from England.

[iMid-air tackle 1. (b) It is illegal to tackle an opposing player attempting to
field a kick whilst the player is in mid-air. The catcher must have returned to the ground before being tackled.[/i

These were the rules in 2004 - I don't think they've been altered since then.

IIRC it was the TJ who flagged it.

The Aussie tithead wouldn't even have given the pen left to his own devices yet it was a nailed-on penalty try.

I was at the game and he was shocking for both sides, as for Tomkins being anonymous I feel he has a good game... His intensity in defence and his spark in attack was a pleasure to watch. Shame he plays for Wigan and not us.

My understanding is that only applies to defensive playerss. If you put a bomb in the air to a full back or winger then you've got to allow him to land before making contact.

I don't think that protection is offered to attacking players though. The attacking team are choosing to put the ball in the air, the attacking player is choosing to jump into the air to collect the ball. You don't get the protection, and obvious advantage, of being allowed to land when your the team who has chosen that attacking strategy.

The Senior incident at that time should've been given as a penalty try. But after that the rules were changed and it was clarified that attackers could be tackled in those situations but not defenders.

I might be wrong though. It has happened a couple of times before in my life.

That used to be a rule in the NRL but they got rid of it as well because even they realised it was a stupid, unfair and dangerous rule. You cannot tackle any player in the air, you have to wait for at least 1 foot to hit the ground again. A tackle is also complete if a player leaves the ground during a tackle.

Does it say that in the rules?

My recollection is that the rule was introduced to protect players who were vulnerable while airborne. That would apply equally to attackers or defenders.

IIRC the ARL wanted to use the NRL's two referees system in this Four Nations series, which would not only have helped refs from all countries (i.e. Hayne, Ganson, Williamson and Alibert) keep pace with the game, but make fewer mistakes, keep a more accurate 10 gap and police the ruck more accurately. However the RFL vetoed it.

Look if the NRL wants to keep changing things every week then that's their problem, but it's a local rule only, not in the international rules.

Sorry, but you don't own Rugby League.