It’s a sad but true state of affairs that teams now feel obliged to almost spend as much time analysing their next referee as their next opponents.

Indeed, so much of modern day penalties, especially at the breakdown, but also the scrums, hinge on the varying interpretations of referees from match to match, that there was an argument for having the same referee in charge for all three Tests in this series.

Refereeing egos and political correctness would probably ensure that never happened, but if that was the case, then Craig Joubert would assuredly have been the most popular choice. The Lions management and players had few quibbles with the penalties given against them by Joubert himself, less so with those called by his assistants.

And all in all, given they have placed such a huge emphasis on discipline in all forms, the Lions’ collective frustration over the amount of 50-50 calls which have gone against them is actually greater than the two judicial hearings which have cleared James Horwill of foul play; not that they would privately have been too enamoured with that either.

Take for example the Australian targeting of Mako Vunipola. Andy Farrell eluded to this on Sunday when saying that the Lions felt the interpretation of the set-pieces was "a little bit of a lottery at times", adding: "We felt that Mako (Vunipola) had a binding issue from his opposing prop a couple of times early doors. I think Australia are very streetwise.

"They were playing the referee, there's no doubt about that."

Going to ground
Recently-retired Wallabies captain and lock Nathan Sharpe admitted on the Fox Sports commentary that Vunipola's ability to take the bind had been raised with the officials, and it was touchjudge Chris Pollock who sanctioned Vunipola for going to ground for the Wallabies' first three-pointer last Saturday.

Yet the Lions were livid that Ben Alexander didn’t bind on Vunipola’s back but rather on his left arm, thereby illegally pulling him down.

Farrell also referenced Joubert penalising the Lions for crossing onto the Wallabies’ side of the lineout, which the Lions would have less problem with if Ben Mowen hadn’t been allowed to do the same to Jamie Heaslip. “But that’s the game and they were streetwise and got away with it, and fair play to them,” said Farrell.

The offside call against Dan Lydiate by the other touchjudge, Romain Poite, is also disputed, not least as the Wallabies were ahead of the Wallabies' hindmost foot repeatedly, but the one that took the biscuit was following a long kick-off by Jonny Sexton, which Wycliff Palu ran back infield.

Tommy Bowe makes the tackle and Tom Youngs is in first and set to steal the ball or force a penalty for holding when Michael Hooper comes in from the side; his entry is actually from a 90 degree angle to the ruck.

Remarkable
How Poite and Joubert contrived to miss that is remarkable. From the recycle, Mowen clearly 'bridges' in securing the ball without punishment, an offence which had cost the Lions three points in the first Test.

The Lions tour manager Andy Irvine believes there would be some merit in having the same referee for all three Tests, but in stating that the laws of the game required "a complete rethink", especially at the breakdown and scrum, where 20 or 30 per cent of the time a decision could just as easily be made by tossing a coin.

“I’m not blaming the referees, because I think referees have got almost an impossible job,” said Irvine.

“I think the scrummage is a nightmare and the breakdown situation is not much better. I quite often watch Rabo games and I try to sit next to Jim Fleming, the former international referee and assessor. Quite often I’ll say, ‘Jim, what was that for?’ He’ll say, ‘X’. I’ll say ‘Do you agree with that?’ and he replies: ‘Not really’. He will say that four or five times in a game.

"I'm not blaming the referees because they are in a very, very difficult situation."

Clear communication
But at least Joubert is consistent, especially at the breakdown in allowing a contest while generally keeping players on their feet, and he also allows reasoned and clear communication through the respective captains. Not so Poite.

“He’s kind of a no-nonsense referee,” said Brian O’Driscoll diplomatically earlier in the week.

“He just likes to be left to referee the game the way he does. I don’t think communicating with him too much during the game often has a bearing on what happens.

“You are not going to change his mind.”

Indeed, as a host of Irish provincial and international captains can testify, and as Paul O’Connell in particular discovered, a captain is more likely to turn Poite against him and his team by engaging in dialogue. And this is not a uniquely Irish perspective; French-based coaches and players have confirmed as much.

Irish teams have had good days with Poite, such as Leinster’s memorable comeback win over Northampton in the 2011 Heineken Cup final, or Ireland’s Six Nations opening day win in Cardiff this year, as well as bad ones, not least Poite’s handling of the RaboDirect PRO12 final just over a year ago between Leinster and the Ospreys and that profoundly flawed sin-binning of Nathan White for the last eight minutes.

Comparatively card happy as well as unpredictable, Poite seems to penalise the retreating scrum regardless of how the scrum going forward may have achieved their ascendancy, and it comes as no surprise that the Six Nations’ games under his watch averaged six scrum penalties per match, and all against the defending side.

A la Jerome Garces in the Brumbies match, the breakdown is more liable to see a pile-up of bodies; what you might call a form of French trench warfare.

Quite why Poite has been chosen to oversee possibly the biggest single game of the year in world rugby is a moot point.

But as in so many modern day matches, and all the more with Monsieur Poite in charge, there is a real risk of this game hinging as much on a referee’s interpretation as a moment of playing brilliance.