When they first brought it in, I thought the refereeing standard did improve, for a while at least. Nowadays as you say it's extremely inconsistent to a point where it is farcical. Even the video refs seem to blatantly screw up much more often then they should. I think it may be because some of the older, more experience refs have disappeared/retireed (i.e. Tony Archer) and we now have some of the younger guys still finding their feet. Hopefully it should improve with time anyway. I don't think they should have fired Bill Harrigan either for one bad run of decisions. What I would like to see, is one on ground referee and then have the guys in the video ref box be more involved in decisions other than for tries. For example, if two guys contest the ball, and neither gets a clean catch and the ref rules a knock on against Team A, but while they are packing the scrum, and showing the replay, it becomes apparent that it was actually Team B which knocked on, then the ref should be able to say, ok sorry video ref ruled that Team A gets the feed. I don't see why they must always follow their first decision, when many times it's obvious before play resumes that it was wrong. A kind of continuous supporting role by the video ref, where they can't interupt play, but just relay the video evidence to the ref, could work out well I think
One ref, with the video ref to be pro active, actually letting the on field ref know what the punter on the couch can blatantly see instead of waiting to be asked.
There's not much we can do but I do understand about the two ref problem.
