I watched it and all it did was point out AB infringements and a half hearted French on. I have re-watch the game and in the first 40 minutes if the ref was to be totally to the letter of the law and based on other decisions in previous WC games the feanch should have been penalised a futher 10 times and the AB's 4. Now what Samoa were red carded for against SA, the French #4 did to Thorn and Richie was told to speak to Thorn when he stood up for himself (Thorn should have dived on the ground like the SA did in the Samoa game) also French # 8 attacked the face of Woodcock in a rolling maul, and a French tackler lead with a forearm to Kaino's head so I too if I was a TV commentator could do something similar. But why, all games can be dissected to show what ever you want, its not the players or the ref that needs to change, its the stupid laws that allow for 10 people to see the same play but yet view 10 different rulings that could be taken depending on view point, and yet be justified for their decision. Players and Ref's do what they think is right at the time and I for one can't wait till the player can sort it out themselves with in reason.
The NZ Media were a bunch of immature tossers and some of the stories that ran leading upto the final pointing out French past wrong doings was totally inappropriate. I hope they are ready to have the NH media doo exactly the same to the AB's in 4 years time and they have only themselves to blame. If I was AB's media manager I would not give that publication any access to the team during any WC in the future.
You make a comment about a fist from McCaw, if a boxer made a fist like that the opponent would laugh in his face. A fist is when the hand is closed not open. Then you dismiss the claim of the head butt, you show that you are against the AB's and look only at their wrong doings. Get impartial and be someone worth listening to. If McCaw hit Parra with a fist then McCaw was definately head butted, have to be fair both ways.