I like Wilkin as a pundit

Phil Clarke; "From every other part of the field Kevin Sinfield is a world class goal kicker, apart from here, 5 yards in from the right hand touch line".

Kevin Sinfield: kicks the goal.

To be fair to Clarke on this one I know what he means as I've thought the same in that Sinfield usually nails it from bang on the touch line but a few metres in occasionally misses.

It was daft to say it when he did though because Sinfield doesn't miss 2 in that situation. One of Sinfields best attributes is obviously his mentality and you know that if he misses a kick he's going to nail the next one. And he did, straight down the middle.

Clarke is still a douche though.

Phil Clarke thought that he owned the rugby gods until Magsy shoved it up him big style on saturday
We wont win another game eh Phil?

Clarke's paid to offer opinions on things, which he does.

That it winds so many up is to an extent to his credit. It generates discussion and conversation about the game.

Unlike some on the Sky commentary (McDermott, O'Connor, Stevo, Hemmings) the coverage would be duller for his absence.

The thing is though Andy that it's not always opinion, there is far too much desperation in his voice for it to be opinion when he is saying things along the "that's a Leeds knock on", or "he's never got that down" etc. But it's the way he says things rather than what he says.

You can't tell me you honestly don't think he is bias against Leeds ? It's not a wind up, it's blatant, and makes him sound like a baby who has lost his rattle when he is almost crying, trying in any way he can to convince the others on the commentary team he is right, and the decision must go against Leeds.

One thing for sure is that he is in no way as vocal, nor as critical when it comes to any other club, in fact he is fairly dull when commentating on games that don't involve Leeds so I fail to see how all this should be to his credit, when as a summariser he should show nothing but impartiality which we all know he doesn't....even you.

So he's Sky Sports equivalent of AP? I think it's ridiculous to suggest he's paid to wind up the viewers and subscribers.

He's paid to offer a degree of analysis and expertise along with opinion. He's supposed to offer more than an average Wigan fan from the terrace, given his background as a player. That he is unable to hide his obvious bias and is often so fundamentally wrong (Salford to win/Leeds didn't play well at Wembley etc) is not to the broadcasters credit at all. That his colleagues took such great delight in embarrassing him about his nonsense shows how much they think of him.

The only conversation he generates is what a biased fool he is. Do you think Sky and the game should be happy about that?

If he is doing that at Sky's bidding then he is prostituting himself and doing the game a great disservice and showing disrespect to RL fans .I think it's his way ,he can't change from being born and bred into that Wigan culture which is being discussed eslewhere

Totally agree.

He should be able to keep out the obvious dislike he has of Leeds from his analysis if not his predictions.

so would i but would you expect them to to say any different if they thought differently?

has kev ever said a wrong word , even guarded on the shambolically entertaining rugby am

anyways poss with evolution rather than revolution mc d has his medals for the table.

I'll always prob remember 99 for being 1st major trophy though john player had all same teams , and for prob seeing our first decent pack in years

But surely a chap of his "stature" has an onus to talk sense not clap trap.Thats the trouble with the sky commentary team prescious few do talk sense.They seem to want to create controversy when there quite frankly is none.

There's opinions, and there's pure rubbish. When he spoke to Jon Wells before the Grand Final, Clarke said it would be the best final in history. Then a sentence later, he says Wigan will win comfortably. I just love how Leeds keep making him eat his words!

For Phil Clarke the two sentences don't contradict each other.

clarke: it's going to be the best final in history eddeh!
hemmings: predictions?
clarke: wigan will win by 30 eddeh
hemmings: okayyyyyyyy

Just rewatching the game. For all the Wigan fans moaning about the McGuire non-knockon...even Phil Clarke said it didn't go forward

And tbf when the others are saying Leeds should go for 2 points when we get the late penalty he's the only one who calls it right to keep the ball and keep field position down that end. Wigan had 3 more sets after that and they started them all around 95m away from our try line.

Yep, he was also the only one to say Wigan shouldn't have taken the two

He does talk much more sense than Eddie and stevo but then let's himself down with stupid bias (for example trying to argue that it wasn't a penalty when manfredi dumped hall on his head)

And guess who was the only other person to think it wasn't a penalty? The other commentator who is hugely unprofessional, Terry O'Connor.

There's many things that annoy me about the Sky coverage of RL but the top of the list is having unprofessional people like O'Connor and Clarke (on too many occasions) on the show. It makes the whole thing look like its a 2nd tier production that Sky aren't really bothered about.
Football, Cricket and Union never (or very rarely) seem to have people on their coverage who either can't hide their bias or can't speak properly.

His Wigan accent is very strong

In the mid 90s we almost had to move out of Headingley and down to Elland road like paupers and the Sleeve and Caddick came in and 2004 we won SL first title for 32 years we have now won 7 Super League titles in 11years .Now Mr Clarke that is the Rugby Gods at work

I can honestly say I said the same as Clarke, two points could have quite easily given them the field position advantage from the kick off

I think virtually everyone where I was sitting thought the same. The sense of relief was palpable. To be honest, this doesn't say a huge amount for Clarke's perceptiveness, it's more an indication of a lack of it by Stevo and Eddie. That said, I reckon Clarke is a fairly decent summariser when he's not over-exhilarated by unfolding events on the field, a trait that's less and less evident these days.

Out of all the teams in SL & NRL realistically who wouldn't have gone for 2?

I think the field position after taking 2 points is a bit of a red herring. I think Leeds were looking at a repeat set near a tired opponents line and we're trying to kill the match by scoring a try. Right call for me.

Clarke has a knowledge of RL that should make him an asset to Sky's coverage on a par with Jon Wells and Brian Carney. I don't expect commentators not to follow and be passionate about a team. But I do expect them to be professional enough to kerb their bias whilst on air to the extent that their commentary doesn't oscillate between denigrating whom ever Wigan happen to be playing and creaming over how good Wigan are. If he can't contain his loyalty and blind passion for Wigan he should jog on and get a job in their marketing team or with their cheer leaders.