The number of Test matches tainted by refereeing mistakes in Northern Hemisphere rugby is reaching epidemic proportions. Saturday at Lansdowne Road was merely another episode in what has become a soap opera of officiating errors.

The examples are legion in recent seasons: Ireland v France (2002), Scotland v Italy (2004), Scotland v France (2005), England v Ireland (2005), and now Ireland v Italy (2006). All those matches were dogged by decisions that were later proved to be wrong. If that number of errors cropped up in any other sport there would be a furore.

It's simply happening too often for the International Rugby Board (IRB) to sit idly by and hope the situation rights itself. It won't.

There has to be sympathy for the referees in that everyone is aware of just how hard it is to officiate at any level never mind a Test match. But something has to be done to cut the error rate.

The premise is simple. It's about putting structures in place that help the referees discharge their duties to best effect. The emphasis in rugby these days is all about the awarding of the try rather than arriving at the correct decision. The irony is that the technology is in place but it is just not being implemented correctly.

Rugby league has cleaned up the game in terms of helping the decision-making process for referees by use of the video ref. The number of officiating errors is now minuscule, and such precision is to the benefit of any sport. It's not about pointing the finger at referees but about trying to establish a sensible system in a mature and far-sighted way. Everyone has to buy into it.

If you look at rugby league and cricket, they have fine-tuned the influence of the video referee or umpire, and union needs to take a look at the role of the television match official. In league the referee can check with the man in the booth if a player scoring a try was, say, originally onside; consultation is not limited to the grounding of the ball.

It is the way forward. Surely the occasional hold-up before a decision is made is a small price to play if the correct ruling ensues. It may take a little time to bed in with spectators, but is that really a reason not to use technology to ensure the correct outcomes?

It has to be better to arrive at the right decision than risk having the sport tainted by miscarriages of justice.

Here in Australia the only topic of conversation following Ireland's win over Italy is the fact that certainly one and possibly two of the tries should not have been awarded. You want people to talk about the rugby and not the officiating.

There is a massive reluctance in the officiating community to embrace the technology to assist officials, and no one has given me a satisfactory reason why.

Leaving aside the try issues for a moment, Ireland's opening Six Nations match made for poor viewing. But then when was the last time you saw a game involving Italy and said to yourself, "That was good to watch"? I've come up with zero.

The Italians did exactly as outlined before the game and deserve credit for the manner in which they defended. There was good line speed and they targeted Ireland's danger men and contained them.

What was disappointing from an Irish perspective was the appearance of a team that seems to lack enthusiasm and pep.

Ireland teams in the past generally had an abundance of enthusiasm - among other qualities - but that spark seems to be missing. There is a stale quality to the patterns and that X-factor is not there.

I believe the balance of the team is wrong and will have to be addressed for Paris.

Some thought will have to go into recalling some mature players capable of leadership, like Girvan Dempsey, Keith Gleeson and Anthony Foley; those three are playing well, and if they don't start they should be on the bench.

If things go wrong, and there are days when that just happens, you need players that can come on and change a game.

At the moment Ireland's go-forward patterns are predictable, the support and continuity is without enthusiasm and purpose, and there are holes defensively. It's like watching a bunch of individuals lacking that common purpose whereby the team outweighs all peripheral concerns.

Ireland had no runners attacking the inside shoulder. They basically tried to run around the Italians. If they repeat this against France they are in big trouble.

The French don't drift until after the ball has passed them; they come up hard and aggressive, and if Ireland pursue their outside-shoulder options they'll be vulnerable to some crunching hits.

As far as last Saturday is concerned no one wants to play Italy. If you beat them up by 50 points everyone says they're poor. If you just win a scrappy match you cop a lot of flak. And God help you if you lose.

The Ireland teams needs to be changed. I'd bring Gleeson into the backrow, and you need a flier on the wing who'll cause them problems when you get in behind. You also need to win all your set-pieces or you don't have a prayer.

Paris will be about maturity, composure, precision and enthusiasm. Tomorrow's selection will tell its own tale long before the Ireland players arrive in France.