Well I'm going to wade into this one, with an edited version of my post on the front page.
When Walsh didn't come back on for the second half I thought he'd been subbed for a poor performance, but then the new ref (Smith?) had me pining for Aussie Steve pretty quickly.
Surely after so many scrum infringements in their own 22 there should have been a penalty try. I don't believe that every set of scrums should mean a the 'number of allowed scrum penalties' meter should be set to zero. Collapsed scrums aren't just an infringement that may potentially prevent a try (as diving over a ruck or handling on the ground might), they are dangerous. If those were ruck infringements there would have been a card issued. A pretty much certain try was prevented, it was a repeated offence, and it was dangerous (I know Taf wasn't great going into those scrums, but I'm pretty sure the collapses didn't help). Try, card, game.
Usually when a referee detects a knock on they put out their arm to indicate advantage. Anyone who has the facility might be interested to review the 'knock on' before the Beale 'try'. The 'knock on' looked to be a down and back (hence the direction the ball moved), and the ref was not interested in it at all until Beale had crossed for the 'try' quite some time later. If he really thought it was a knock on why didn't he call it and pull it up? There was no advantage being played. Try, game.
The rolling maul try was a tough one. I can accept that the video man couldn't see a grounding, but I can't accept the call that the ball had not crossed the try line - the whole fucking Waratah plus hangers on was over the line! Probably a try, at the very least a 5 scrum (but see above for what utter scrum dominance gets you).
On high tackles - Cross' high tackle was poor, and rightly penalised. Unfortunately Cooper made a high tackle (well a tackle by his standards) on Turner in the second half - nothing happens at all (the refs obviously hate Turner as he copped an unheralded one last week too). Penalty.
All in all we didn't learn much from that match, but many things were reinforced - Cross is too slow, the Waratahs backs are lacking direction and flair, the Reds backs have loads of flair and pace, the Reds scrum is soft as shit (like the Wallabies scrum when there are too many Reds in it), Cooper is super flaky and brilliant in turns.
The Reds' defensive effort in the second half was a highlight. I am a little disappointed that the Waratahs didn't test it better, but they will struggle to win matches if they have to always rely on good refereeing.
There was one advantage to pounding the Reds scrum and line during the second half for so long - the Reds didn't have the ball, so their opportunities for cutting lose with their backline were severely limited.
I was surprised that the Reds didn't target Cross more, and I'm sure other opponents will have been taking notes (again). The Tahs pack did pretty well (well enough to take the honours, although the lineouts were evenly sloppy), so I would keep the same or similar line up, maybe with an aim to ruck, maul or pick and drive but don't stay static for so long. In the backs, whether or not Barnes is back, I think Turner or Kingston should be given a run at 13. Both are quick and can tackle (unless Horne is due back for a couple of games between injuries). Mitchell is a big loss for the Waratahs and the Wallabies. Burgess - no more kicking, and beyond that do what you like but do it fast.
The Reds have some scrum issues to sort out (understatement), and (like the Tahs) could tidy up their lineout. Cooper kicked like shit, but that is part of the package when dealing with mercurial talent. The Reds pack had a real (recent Deans) Wallaby feel to it - workrate without power, joke scrum, dogged defending.
Anyway, bad luck Waratahs, good luck to you Reds. I'll continue watching in hope rather than expectation.