....would you have given it?

No

i think Halls reaction swung it, unfortunately, he didn,t think he had scored it, but having said that in ultra slow motion it looked a try, why did england stop playing after the break, aussies grew into the game after being there for the taking, so frustrating as this always seems to happen against them.

Why would I not?

Yes. Because it was a try and not because I'm English. I can't see an argument for it not been a try. It's a myth about having control of the ball, if the balls on the floor and you place a finger on it it's a try. You were never in control of the ball but you enacted downward pressure on the ball with your finger which forms part of your hand.

Inglis touches the ball dead before Hall touches it down, no try Aussie drop out.

Think he touched it as much as Hall did

Either give it or give us the ball back one or the other.

Come on. Even in SL you know that doesn't count as grounding. Inglis was palms up to bat the ball out upwards. No intention of grounding therefore no grounding by him.

It was a try the way they normally view them.

Would I consider it a try? No, but like I said the way they normally go, that was no different.

Inglis never grounded the ball, never in a million years.

No. No matter how many straws we clutch at, it wasn't a try.

My initial reaction seeing it on the slo mo was it was not a try. The photos of certain angles make it look like it is but for me Hall does not have control of the ball. But still is a 50/50 call though. Biggest problem is it was an Australian Video Ref and that is more shocking than any decision on the day.