The All Blacks silence critics, the Warriors' soul-destroying final chapter and Kiwi Marcus Armstong on the Formula 2 podium - Cheree Kinnear gives the highs and lows of the weekend's sport all in 90 seconds. Video / Photosport / Getty Images
OPINION:
To some degree, Pumas coach Michael Cheika was right when he said that in the last few years the general standard of refereeing in international rugby has improved.
Some of the worst habits that plagued the game in the last World Cup cycle have been fixed.
Now teams can'tedge their defensive line to an offside position and get away with it, and no longer can players who were in front of a kick move into a strong defensive position earlier than the laws allow.
The failure to referee the basics was wildly frustrating, but at least now that no longer happens and there is a firm sense that at last officials have realised that the offside line isn't a little thing they can choose to ignore.
But there remains one area of maddening inconsistency: one facet of the game where teams can operate almost with impunity one week depending on the referee, to seemingly have everything reversed the next.
And that of course is the horribly termed breakdown or tackled ball area, where in the series between New Zealand and Argentina, it was refereed to two extremes to produce two entirely different test match experiences and two vastly different results.
In Christchurch, the young, Georgian referee Nika Amashukeli penalised the All Blacks 14 times, nearly all of which were at the tackled ball.
Referee Nika Amashukeli talks to All Blacks captain Sam Cane during the first test against Argentina. Photo / Photosport
He was mostly labelled pedantic and some even branded his decisions bizarre. His interpretation of what was legal certainly left All Blacks head coach Ian Foster bemused, as he said after the game: "Overall, I just felt that they got away with some stuff at the breakdown, not releasing the ball carrier on the ground, and we weren't able to deal with it.
"It was an area where we got hammered in the penalty count at critical times. I'm probably a little bit bemused by some of that."
And this is the crazy thing about the international game at the moment – Foster was bemused by Amashukeli, while Cheika lauded the young referee's work and who would know which of them was right?
The following week, the more experienced Nic Berry had control in Hamilton and the All Blacks were clinical, ruthless and highly disciplined at the breakdown.
They produced the quick ball they were after, barely lost a turnover and their ability in that area produced an endless stream of penalties against the Pumas.
The breakdown is a busy area, lots of bodies flying in, dynamic movements happening which produce high impact collisions, the legality of which are not easy to determine in real time.
No one doubts it's a hard area to referee and difficult for officials to strike that desired balance of allowing a fair contest for the ball, while ensuring that the game continues to flow.
But as hard as it may be, it can't surely be so complex as to produce such vastly different interpretations from test to test depending on the referee.
Referee Wayne Barnes awards a penalty. Photo / Photosport
There must be a way to generate greater consistency of rule interpretation and law application to reduce the volatility we have seen in performance and outcome so far this year.
This problem of breakdown interpretation was visible in the series against Ireland as well. In the first test, Ireland felt the All Blacks were able to exaggerate the depth and width of the ruck in the first test, something which helped the home side storm to a comfortable win.
In the second test, a new referee came in and ruled that area differently and the All Blacks were heavily penalised and it does appear as if the international game is effectively holding itself hostage to the way one person will view one particular component.
Despite the general improvements that have been made in the last few years in the general standard of officiating, the tackled ball area has descended into such an unpredictable and unfathomable mess that it has the potential to turn the World Cup into a farce.
France 2023 may not be won by the best team, but by the team which can best anticipate and adapt to how a referee will rule the breakdown and if the randomness of it all is confusing to hard-core rugby heads who feel they have some understanding of how this area should be refereed, imagine what it will look like to the uninitiated who fancy seeing next year if they can use the World Cup as a means to get into the sport.
When Foster said after the loss in Christchurch that his team needs to get better at adapting to the referee in real time, he was right.
But it shouldn't be like that. Players should have some confidence that what they encounter one week at the breakdown will look similar to what they will face the next time they play and test matches shouldn't be determined by what a team can get away with.
