Tests now are everybody's property. Millions watch them. That means millions watch the referees. Not only do they watch them, but they can hear them as well. Other referees, above all, watch referees, and understand what is going on. Many will not understand and believe what commentators say, which is a risky business indeed.

Not everybody who watches matches and referees is unbiased! There are commentators who are clearly biased, which makes them suspect critics of referees.

This week we are going to discuss a few points from the matches between New Zealand and Ireland, Australia and France, and England and Argentina, the liveliest of which was at Eden Park in Auckland.

1. Tap kicks yet again

We discussed this last week, but it is worth discussing again.

There is nothing in the law book which allows a referee to stop a player of the non-infringing side from taking a tap kick for a penalty or a free kick.

We should say that over and over.

Nowhere in the law does it give the referee the right to slow the game down.

There is the obvious, overriding, commonsense need to see to the players' safety, but the referee has no right to stop a tapped kick from happening.

If the Pumas are 5m from the England line the referee has no right to slow things down, getting his body in the way and stopping the kick so that they, in frustrated resignation, end up kicking for goal when they would rather have scored a try.

It's an understandable matter of management that the referee gets into a position more slowly when advancing the 10m when the kicker's opponents have infringed but once he has given the mark, the tap is on. The team is allowed to play.

The referee is required to see that the tapped kick happens correctly - the correct kick at the correct place.

That's the second point.

If the kicker takes the kick from the wrong place or fails to carry out the kicking procedure correctly, the referee is required to give a scrum. That's the law.

Law 21 again: Any infringement by the kicker's team results in a scrum at the mark. The opposing team throws in the ball.

The law does not give the referee the right to give him a second chance.

Second chance is what is happening.

It is understandable that the referee insists that the kick be taken again if it happens behind his back, in other words if he cannot see what had happened. But otherwise there should be no second chance.

If there were no second chance, players would not take the risk of taking the kick from the wrong place.

That brings us to the mark - the place of infringement.

Law 21: 1 WHERE PENALTY AND FREE KICKS ARE AWARDED
Unless a law states otherwise, the mark for a penalty or free kick is at the place of infringement.

2 WHERE PENALTY AND FREE KICKS ARE TAKEN
(a) The kicker must take the penalty or free kick at the mark or anywhere behind it on a line through the mark. If the place for a penalty or free kick is within 5 metres of the opponents' goal-line, the mark for the kick is 5 metres from the goal-line, opposite the place of infringement.

No infringement happens on a referee's heel mark. An infringement, for example when backs are off-side, can take place over a large area. That means that the tapped kick could be taken over a large area. That is the place of infringement.

At a scrum infringement, when the infringement happened in the front row and there has been no collapse or aggression, there is no reason why a player may not take the tapped kick from behind the scrum - not at the side, but from behind.

Those three things are worth thinking about:

- The referee must allow tapped free kicks and penalties.
- The kick must be taken from the correct place or a scrum will be awarded.
- The place of infringement can be a large area.

2. Stamping consistency

Alan Quinlan arrived on the field as a replacement for Ireland. His first real act was at a tackle-thing. He arrived and sent his right leg off on a deviation to put his boot into the lower back area of a prone All Black. The ball was not near the action.

The referee gave him a yellow card and his side played with 14 men for ten minutes, during which time the All Blacks scored 12 points, going from 28 to 40.

When England played Argentina in Buenos Aires. Alex Codling was penalised, for going out of his way to stamp on a prone Argentinian.

The referee told him his action had been "nowhere near the ball", just as the referee in Auckland had done.

The difference? Codling was not shown a yellow card, just told: "It had better not happen again."

Same laws, same level of rugby - different outcome.

Why would a player deliberately - voluntarily is the word the Law book now prefers to use for some obscure reason - go out of his way to put an aggressive boot onto an opponent's body?

Surely he does it only to inflict pain on the opponent. That's not a great idea. Surely it warrants a yellow card.

3. Tackle over

Imagine this as a scenario. Charlie Hodgson breaks and passes to big Ben Johnston who charges for the line. In comes Puma fullback Ignacio Corleto. Corleto dives and grasps Johnston around the leg bringing him to ground. Corleto is holding Johnston's legs when the centre hits the ground. Corleto releases Johnston. Johnston then gets up and surges again for the line.

Legal? In other words, is Johnston allowed to get up and play on when he is no longer held?

Definition: A tackle occurs when a ball-carrier in a standing position is simultaneously held by one or more opponents and is brought to the ground and/or the ball touches the ground.

The way we described it a tackle had occurred.

Getting up with the ball is then not one of Johnston's options. His option is to make the ball available for play - by others - immediately.

The Law:
(a) A tackled player must try to make the ball available immediately so that play can continue.
(b) A tackled player must immediately pass the ball or release it. That player must also get up or move away from it at once.
(c) A tackled player may release the ball by putting it on the ground in any direction, provided this is done immediately.

The only way in which he can play it again is contained in (b) - getting up after release to play the ball.

Then, you say, what about Ben Kay's try?

He was tackled short of the line, rolled over and placed the ball on the line - and the referee awarded a try.

The same Law 15 says: If players are tackled near to the goal-line, these players may immediately reach out and ground the ball on or over the goal-line to score a try and make a touch-down

That's what Kay did.

That's why the referee awarded a try.

The referee was right.

4. Poux helped to score

The French attacked late in the game. They were darting at the line. Frédéric Michalak seemed to be over but was grounded short. In they piled and then Jean-Baptiste Poux, a veteran prop but a newcomer to Test rugby, got the ball and burst to his left near the ruck-thing.

Ahead of him, pulling him, was fellow-prop Arnaud Martinez. He pulled with outstretched arm and down Poux (Pooks to the commentator) went for the try.

Fair?

Were you going to penalise Martinez for obstruction, when there was no Wallaby close enough to have a real chance to stop Poux? (It obviously was not a case of accidental off-side.) Can you obstruct nobody?

In fact Martinez's "help" may have been entirely unnecessary.

It's worth a thought.

5. Directly into touch

François Gelez, the French flyhalf kicks off high and shallow towards the touch-line. Aurélien Rougerie, the right win runs down the touch and tries to play the ball. He gets his hands to it and taps it back over his head where it comes to earth outside the touch-line. It no time does it touch the ground.

Is it a line-out?

Is it an option to Australia of a kick again or a scrum or a line-out because the ball has gone directly into touch?

Law 19: ‘Kicked directly into touch’ means that the ball was kicked into touch without landing on the playing area, and without touching a player or the referee.

Rougerie was a player all right. Therefore the kick was not directly in touch. Therefore the line-out should have been awarded where the ball went into touch.

In fact that is what happened. The touch judge and the referee got it right.