Flying prop??? Flying pr1ck more like.

Their negativity is quite damaging to the sport.
Compare it to other sports, and we're way out of line.

I'll sort your quote out for you



Why am I not surprised to see you glorifying a Leeds player being hurt? There was no intention but part of Chase's arm clearly made contact with Sinfield's jaw. IMO it was probably a penalty but that wasn't the point I was making. It was that Stevo claimed Kev was hurt by his head jarring backwards.

As for the forward passes - it pretty clear they were all borderline as I expressed sympathy for cas who I think got a raw deal. None were conclusive after watching the footage. I'll say again - I'd have probably allowed all 3.

Stevo's not the problem, it's Eddie. Eddie has forgotten his role. Eddie is there for commentary, we have ex players Stevo, Clarke and Carney for analysis. Let them analyse.

Eddie should simply commentate.

Time for a good clearout. Stevo, Hemmings, Clarke, Cullen to go.
I quite like Carney and Wells but workung with the above long term could change that.

Oh and I'd let O'Connor go as well. Not sure about Barrie.

That's not likely to and probably shouldn't happen. They need to be phased out gradually.

Tbh despite Barrie and Terry's warm personalities I'm not sure either of them are very good mic in hand. I like there role they have taken in Grand Finals pitch side but can't ever see them being main stays of a commentary team

Eddie's ego was for me summed up in the commentary of our game at Hull KR the other week.

There was a shot of Shaun Briscoe, Stevo says "there's the man with the most distinctive nose in Super League"

Eddie "You always say I have the most distinctive nose in Super League"

Stevo "Yes, but you're not in Super League Eddie"

Their incompetence was highlighted again today with the Saints penalty at the end. Despite replays showing otherwise and Carney, Clarke and Wells telling them otherwise they still went off air insisting Washbrook wasn't going for the ball! Unbelievable!

Who do ou trust to analyse the game, those who have played it or those who talk like they have?

I honestly don't think that's as important as people think. I've only played at school level but feel I have a pretty good understanding of it and have never felt out of my depth in discussion about any game. Stevo has played the game and yet vehemently disagreed with 3 other ex players today about something which was cut and dried after seeing replays

I notice the lack of stamping feet and calls of injustice when several forward passes and Briscoes "touch in goal" went unpunished/un-noticed.

I often agree with Brian Carney & Jon Wells analysis. I often agree with the rugby god worshipper when he's not commentating on Wigan games.
I also often agree with the World Cup winner on the commentry team.
The only one not to have played top class rugby is Eddie, who as G1 pointed out, is an adequate commentator when not delving too deep into analysis.

To suggest Stevo only "talks like" he's played the game is a tad disingenuous. Also as Andy R pointed out just because someone has played the game doesn't mean their knowledge or analysis is any better than someone who hasn't.

Agree regarding eddie but not a big fan of stevo either, constantly banging on about forward passes. Thought wells comments at our game were quite pointed " and infact they were both forward"

Wells is by far the best analyst an I quite like him as a character but guess he could come across a bit dull. Carney is obviously the pin up boy, had played at an elite level and is popular amongst player, while also providing good analysis. Clarke I'm torn on but he's got worse over the years. The other 2 have carried it for years and perhaps need to pass the torch. They need to find someone to do eddie's job as Bill Arthur is not that man!

For me carney is the best and does talk sense, also like wells. Eddie and stevo are poor and Clarke is going the same route

Wells and Carney are now the only ones worth listening to, both talk sense and can relate the action to fans in a way that helps novices to the game understand.

Eddie and Stevo are both degenerating before our very eyes.

Jon Wilkins 40/20...As soon as Wilkin looked to kick I looked to see if he was in or out of the 40...I noticed he was in...I then looked to see if the ball went out of play behind the 20...it did. 40/20 I said to my pal sat next to me. Yet the dumb fookers who are getting paid to pick up on those things didn't even notice until Ganson called for the video ref to check...I mean they are getting paid to inform the viewers and yet again they failed to spot such a huge factor in a game of Rugby League.

If you're saying Wells called the two Chase passes to Owen forward then he's as clueless as the rest of the commentary team and Silverwood.

I worry about you this year tvoc, and fear someone's hacking your login.



The second cas try on Friday was clearly forward. My mate, a big cas fan (and a ref I might add) stood absolutely in line with it and called it forward immediately. The first one you are indeed correct, and in reflection I personally would say had the second been allowed you could have understand after chalking off the first.

This is what made dumb and dumber look so ridiculous at the game yesterday. The Saints try dissallowed was less forward than the second Cas one on Friday and yet they immediately called it forward, and Stevo had the cheek to even say 1.5 to 2 metres forward.

To make the day even more embarrasing for dumb and dumber, when Hull got pulled for the obstruction from the kick, Eddie's immeditate response in despair was to say that Keith Senior had been getting away with that for years. Why you would bring a player into it who was not even on the pitch shows a distinct lack of class, and a clear bias.

They're certainly not doing the game any favours. I don't think it's bias if I'm honest. I don't really subscribe to this whole bias thing (including refs). I just think it's an inability to do the job. If the staff are incapable of doing the job, and yet are employed to do the job, surely any blame should rest at the feet of the employers?

Aren't we expecting an announcement on a new television deal for RL soon?

I don't mind Eddie & Stevo one bit, they are obviously passionate about the game and mildly entertaining

I can see what happening on the pitch by watching the TV screen with my own eye's

Fair enough, but I can also appreciate that a part of any rugby league audience is potentially going to be new to the game, particularly on a Bank Holiday afternoon when folk might be channel hopping to find some live sport to watch.

If your first introduction to rugby league is listening to Stevo arguing that black is white until he's frothing at the mouth, what does that teach you about the game other than reinforcing the stereotype of the chippy northerner?

As I've said elsewhere, he's a poor version of Phil Gould. While Gus may be argumentative and colourful, he's usually talking sense through it all. Stevo is usually talking out of his backside. His attempt yesterday to accuse Danny Washbrook of deliberately taking a Saints player out in the air, his over-the-top reaction to what was basically a mis-timed hand-off from Ben Cross on Friday are all attempts to be "controversial" that detract from the product rather than enhancing it.

If he's doing it deliberately, then Neville Smith at Sky needs to have a word in his ear and get him to tone it down. If his employers are encouraging him to do it - which is entirely possible given their delight in replaying supposedly "controversial" incidents while the game is still going on - then they are in danger of turning the game into a sideshow, little more than a comedy vehicle for the two buffoons.

I know it will attract the usual class-based comments, but the contrast couldn't be greater between Eddie & Stevo and Stuart Barnes & Miles Harrison on Sky's rugby union coverage. They strike the perfect balance between entertainment and information, their studio guests usually appear at ease and willing to offer their insight without being dragged into petty squabbles between the two main presenters. It's time Sky gave their rugby league coverage a similar makeover - more airtime for the likes of Brian Carney and Jon Wells would be a good start.

An excellent post.

Oh, and there is not, nor has there ever been, a "momentum rule".

Where the passer ends up in relation to the ball has no relevance in determining whether it's a forward pass or not. It's not a difficult concept to grasp, if it travels forward from the hands then it's a forward pass. If it goes backwards from the hands, it's not - even if it subsequently drifts forward.

Yet nobody in the Sky commentary team fronts up to Stevo and tells him he's talking garbage every time he uses it. Why?