I agree - had he been signed by Leeds the majority of those now decrying his signing by Hull would have been proclaiming it as something wonderful.

There's 3 risk factors though - how well he recovers from injury, how well he adapts to the British game and how well he adapts to life in the UK.

Leaving those aside (and the 2nd two are there for any Aussie) its a quality signing.

He was a great player - sadly now he is a very average player and how he will recover from a knee reconstruction at his age is anyone's guess

A very poor signing IMO a complete waste of money - a case of a coach being blinded by a big name from the NRL

Bradley Clyde. I'll leave it there... hang on, Dave Barnhill. There I'll stop now.

Phil Clarke made those excellent points at saturdays game. Stevo also said it was a huge gamble... made me laugh when eddie was saying Hull have had terrible luck with injuries and then Stevo said ''and they've signed 2 more who are badly injured''

Brett Mullins...

Probably Phil Clarkes only excellent points. If you knew nothing about RL and watcehd a Sky game you would be left wondering what the hell was going on. At no time do any of the three of them add any tactical analysis of attacking or defensive play (other than the occaisional "he's lost the plot" - or "time for soemthing different - maybe a chip over the top"icon_wink.gif. Clarke has his factoids pre-prepared ("Saints are the team that makes most metres on tackle 3 in the middle third of the field on a Friday when it's slightly overcast"icon_wink.gif but defensive alignment? attacking moves? Zippo. And what is the obsession with going back several plays to pick out a "controversial" incident after every score? It does the game no service whatsoever. I honestly believe Sky have cut down on the likes of Paul Cullen and Shaun McCrae being in the box because they make their resident team sound like morons. Barrie Mac did an excellent job when used on Saturday, and shows he knows more about the game than the three of them put together.
Come on Sky, treat your viewers like adults with a few brain cells (you can send a different commentry to Hull via the red button if you want).

Indeed - the loss of the likes of Rea and Cullen from our screens to be replaced by more air time for Clarke, Offiah, Stevo and co has dumbed down Sky's coverage of the game dramatically.

While I realise you have to make the commentary accessible to those who are casual or new fans to the game, a little analysis of why things work (or don't) the way they do wouldn't go amiss.

As for Stevo, he no longer needs to be in the box for games. You can just set up his various cliches on a loop and play them randomly at given intervals and nobody would know the difference. Often what he babbles on about has little or no relevance to what is going on in the game itself. Time he was put out to pasture, along with Ray French on the BBC.

Agree 100%. Cullen and Mcrae are superb so is Barry Mac. The trouble is Clarke and co have probably been given contracts over a length of time and can't be removed without being taken to court...

Your so right about Clarkes 'stats' and eddie and stevos comentary. It pains me to say it but the RU team on sky are far better. So is the NRL... by a long way.

How bad is Offiah....







he's dreadful

Given the way Sky use "The Front Line" in their Union coverage or "The Third Man" in cricket to illustrate key points in the game with video and graphics I'm surprised they don't do something similar for League. Just a couple of minutes at half-time with someone like Barrie Mac or Paul Cullen illustrating key plays in the game would be a refreshing change from listening to Eddie and Stevo basically filling time.

Tony Rea was head and shoulders above the rest of the team. He's been a huge loss. I used to enjoy listening to him talk about the game, pointing things out I hadn't noticed. When I was new to the game, his analysis helped me learn to look a bit further than the flashy offload or the big hit all the time.

Barrie Mac talks a lot of sense. That's about it now.

'Tez' just says the same thing. "The forwards are dominant, getting the quick play the ball"

Stevo and Eddie have no clue at all.

I know its wrong sort of thread, but Clarke also made another excellent point on Saturday night.

Whilst those two numpties Eddie and Stevo were trying to make out that if a ref awards very few penalties, he has had a good game. Clarkey took the opportunity to challenge them, and aks how they can come up with that. Absolutely correct.

By the same token, if he had have signed for Leeds then those saying it's a good signing would have been up in arms because we'd signed another Mullins/Clyde.

You're right in saying that there's risks, but judging by the reports of his performances at the Roosters and the season ending injury I'd say this was a big risk for any club, even more so somewhere like Hull where they appear to have an injury crisis every year.

Some on the Hull board are saying it's just an arthroscopy now, I don't know where they got it from. As the guy on SKY before the match (think he works for Hull?) seemed to suggesting it was a big one. I'm sure he said something about it being a good thing as he'll have a big lay off..

Got the alias data yet?

We were spoilt by rea's in depth and enlightening analysis now we are left wondering WTF most of the others are on about offiah is painfull to watch on a sunday night and clarke's irrelevant stats are boring.

His latest one being 'Lee smith will be Leeds full back for the next 5 years' during the coverage on Saturdya.

What day was that then?

[url=http://www.sydneyroosters.com.au/default.aspx?s=newsdisplay&id=18007Roosters' website[/url.

You mean the ones who denied Readon a spot a Hull when his signing was subject to a medical. Hull have some of the best medical staff in the league, and some of the most experienced!

Of course exploratory surgery to a knee is going to leave you out of proffesional Rugby League for 3 months, screw you head back on.

(BTW, I don't know exactly what this surgery is, it may well be a reconstruction, however that has not been mentiond by official sources as far as I am aware).

The return time from a scope shouldn't be 3 months. Not even near! It's a half an hour job, and you're home within a few hours.

They must've gone in to clear it out and found something that needed more work. 3 months is too long for something so simple. I say simple but obviously no surgery is simple!

Glad to see a sensible assesment of the signing, and I agree entirely. It should also be mentioned that Hull were far from the only club from trying to capture his signature.

Recovery times vary wildly depending on whats happened and whats been done, and the fact of the matter is we simply don't know, nor do we know if the media reports of "3 months" are simply a stab in the dark either, as they often are.

The way the guy on SKY was talking about it, it sounded like ligament damage. But as you say, it could be anything

Is it right he's been dropped from the Roosters team before the injury? I've honestly heard nothing about him since his Bulldogs days. When they had a bit of a monster pack!

What you/we should be worried about is none of the clubs you speak of were Australian!!