John Drake: Rules are rules but let the game flow, ref

COMMENT

First things first.

I'm not about to bag the referees prior to the World Cup, in fact far from it.

I've got a a lot of sympathy for the men in the middle, and the players as well, dealing with some rules.

But I'm absolutely certain that the referees, and in particular their interpretation of the ruck and maul area, will be a big factor in determining who wins the World Cup.

There's a word of warning here for the All Blacks, because if penalties dictate the outcome, I don't fancy our chances against Jonny Wilkinson in particular. Our goalkicking armory isn't looking flash.

Back to the interpretations. Paul Honiss will set the tone in the first match between Australia and Argentina, which is an interesting situation because he is the closest we've got to a Northern Hemisphere-type referee.

And I'm sure the tone will be set for Honiss and his fellow officials by the IRB bigwigs, as it should be. They must dictate to the referees how they want the games controlled, because you don't want referees ruling differently.

The game has been pretty well sorted out in most areas - scrums, lineouts, foul play (none) and high tackles, etc.

However, the IRB is, I believe, torn between wanting to have a magnificent show piece and having the referees rule to the letter of the law.

The ruck and maul could be the deciding factor in this tournament. There are basically two interpretations. The Six Nations allow players coming into the breakdowns from different directions. In the Southern Hemisphere, there is a clear understanding that you've got to come in from the back.

John Mitchell complained that the English were killing the ball, but they would argue they are contesting possession.

For what it's worth, I prefer the northern hemisphere ruling because it allows for more rough and tumble, and there is greater latitude. I think that is the system they will go for, and that might play into England's hands. The key is, good sides get quick ball, although we couldn't do much with it against England this year because of the quality of their defensive screen.

I really do feel sorry for the referees in this area. It's easy for us watching television, where we get three replays every time there is a penalty. They don't. It's tough on the players as well, because they have to make split second decisions.

For instance, two players can be involved in a tackle, with each believing they are the tackler. One will go for the ball, and find that the referee are right in their own way.

Injuries could be the other big factor, and here the All Blacks and England look strong in depth.

I would nominate Chris Jack and Jonny Wilkinson as the players each side could afford to lose the least.

England have shown they might be shaky in depth around first and second five-eighths by bringing Mike Catt back. Much rests on Wilkinson's shoulders. But they have quality back-up elsewhere.

Lock is an area where the All Blacks World Cup squad is thin and Jack is the key man, but the return to form of Norm Maxwell in the NPC is a major relief.

It's impossible to comment on whether Ali Williams should go because we don't fully understand the extent of his injury. My understanding is that he has had a very small pin inserted in the damaged foot, and they are reasonably confident he will be okay.

But there would be no problem in throwing Maxwell into the fray - he's been in great form in recent weeks after fading off the radar screen because of injuries and his liability to give away penalties.

The Australians are obviously placing a lot of store on the return of Stirling Mortlock to bolster their backline. But if a player like Stephen Larkham was injured, Australia would be in some turmoil. And I just don't think the South Africans have the talent to succeed, apart from the other problems they seem to strike.

England though have depth all over the place, and I can't believe people here keep underestimating their backs. They are not only a fine unit, but have some great athletes.

I rate the French highly - they are the most consistent team never to have won the trophy, and Argentina may not have a team this good for some time again.

The All Blacks have game breakers out wide, but the big worry for them is that their weak pool could leave them underdone, while conversely the Australians would gain confidence if they can impress in a tough pool including Argentina and Ireland.

Australia are talking up their prospects, but it is wishful thinking. There are parallels between them and the 1991 All Blacks - a number of their players are just a bit far gone for this assignment.

Full World Cup coverage