Ref reveals his side of controversial time-wasting call

The referee at the centre of the storm surrounding the controversial ending of the All Blacks' 39-37 defeat of the Wallabies in Melbourne earlier this month has doubled down on his stance that Australia deserved to be held to account for time-wasting.

In the dying minutes of the match in question, Mathieu Raynal awarded a scrum to New Zealand after he ruled that Wallabies first five-eighth Bernard Foley had taken too long to kick the ball into touch after the side won a penalty on their own goal line.

The decision sparked heated arguments across the rugby world, both backing up and criticising Raynal, and even provoked Wallabies coach Dave Rennie to send a formal letter to World Rugby asking for an explanation. Rennie later revealed that the governing body had backed his own view that the decision was heavy-handed.

However, the man in question had, until this week, not shared his own take on what had happened, especially in retrospect. Raynal had a chance to do so after winning an award for referee of the year from French Rugby and said he had no choice but to take the stand he did that night in Melbourne.

"I didn't make the decision," Raynal told media in Paris. "The player forced me to make that decision. When I gave three warnings, when I stopped the time, gave an official warning, asked him five times to play the ball, and when he didn't play it he forced me to make this decision.

"When I engage in that process with a player he has to listen to me. I think I was very clear in what I expected from him. I have no option after that. I had to make a big decision at the end of a big game like that. That didn't make me happy but when you engage in the process you have to go until the end I think.

"Nic White came after the last game on Saturday night [at Eden Park] with two beers in the changing room. He came to talk to me and I really appreciate what he told me in his name and in the name of the Australia team. I will not say publicly what our discussion was but I really appreciate what he did that night in Auckland."

One of the points that critics of Raynal had made was that he had ruled inconsistently when it came to time-wasting, especially when it came to penalty and conversion kicks at goal. However, the Frenchman pointed out that the two situations could not be compared.

"We don't speak about the same law – kick to goal is 60 seconds, kick to touch is without delay," Raynal said. "That's two different laws in the law book.

"I made that [Foley] decision because I was facing a particular situation with particular facts. If you change the game, change the situation, change the facts, then you potentially change the decision. But... making that decision, I stand by it, because there were facts and a clear process that I engaged in with the players.

"[Cracking down on time-wasting] is not my role. But what do we want in our sport? What kind of picture do we want to deliver to the young viewers? Do you want to see your child wasting time on the ball? Do you want to see your child diving and play-acting? That's the real question. But my job is to referee."

Raynal also revealed that he had also felt forced to delete all his social media accounts and access to news, amongst the media frenzy that followed the match.

"When I make a decision like that, I know what the referee's role is, and I know what's going to happen after that so, just to protect myself and be comfortable for the second [Bledisloe] game, I deleted my social-media and newspaper apps - I only kept Candy Crush," Raynal added.

"I tried to protect my family and my son from the noise and everything around that. I made sure that they were comfortable and that they weren't affected.

"But it's my job. I know exactly what I want from the players and what I expect from them. I trust my process and most of the time I try to follow my process and respect my philosophy. Obviously, there is talk and noise, but it's my job to accept that and to stay strong in facing that situation."