I must say that BT Sport coverage of the Aviva Premiership is so far ahead of Sky's coverage of Super League it's not funny. Educated debate and intelligent discussion in comparison to Sky's usual diet of screaming, shouting and balling over mountains made out of molehills.

Looking forward to seeing how Sam fares on his debut on Friday night.

Against a 15 man defence with no 10m gap?

He'll run the ball in hard, perhaps occasionally flattening a would-be tackler before being engulfed. But not that often.
Defence-wise he'll put in the odd big hit. If he comes on at around 60 minutes he might make five or six tackles.

In the eyes of the headline writers, his will have been the outstanding contribution.

Enjoy.

The camera work on Sky's coverage of SL is excellent, so is the in game editing and far outweighs any other UK company (Channel 9's coverage in Oz is unsurpassable). It's the so called 'experts' they employ to summarize the games that let their coverage down. The drag everything down to the intellectual level of your average Daily Mail reader.

Which TV company was broadcasting the 4Ns from Aus to the Beeb? I thought the camera work was shocking.

Sky's game day coverage hits the same buzz-phrases and manufactured controversies as it has for 15 years. If it ever worked, it certainly doesn't work now. But the main players (producer, commentator, summarisor) are so entrenched there's no stopping them. Honestly think Sky's coverage is the single largest thing holding this game back in this country. The BBC's coverage, which was equally embarrassing in the French/Murphy days, has learned lessons, changed, and is absolutely miles ahead.

Spot on.

The BBC have two producers on their team who are avid Rugby League fans, who are well aware of the poor image of RL that the SKY guys portray, and aim to show RL in it's best light. This, along with having a proper commentry team who are there purely to commentate and inform the audience, a separate presenter and some good analysis in the studio mean their coverage has improved.

SKY is awful to watch on the otherhand. Five voices during the game, bickering with eachother, informing the audience of nothing. A total refresh is needed, except for the analysis with Jon Wells, he's the silver lining.

The problem with SKY is that the main producer isn't a Rugby League person. They don't understand the game well enough to understand the garbage that pours out of Eddie, Stevo & Clarkeys mouths, or give freee reign to Clark to bore us with his traffic light stats. The producer they use is inheriting their production setup, inheriting the presenters and the format, and will continue as is until they move onto something else. There simply isn't the appetite at the moment to ive it the overhaul it needs.

He won't be running against a 15 man defence, in the same way that he never ran against a 13 man defence in RL.

Does Sky's coverage of SL pander to what it perhaps considers to be an extremely thick, loud and gormless sector of its subscriber demographic?

I'm of the opinion that Sky's coverage is far more embarrassing than what the BBC has ever produced, even when the BBC coverage was at its most patronising.

they would be spot on in your case

I think there's a genuine air listening to the Sky coverage of a clique of mates talking about the game down the pub. The presentation lacks the polish you get from the BBC, where you feel like you're being talked to by a bunch of broadcasting professionals - even the ex-players they use are more eloquent and intelligent than those rolled out by Sky.

Stevo is the main problem, the same old every game, silly penalties NO try etc , opinionated dinosaur, throw in the Sky/Wigan love affair

they need a revamp but i won't be holding my breath,

Whether is Mark Chapman or Claire Balding before him both are broadcasting professionals both appear to have more knowledge about the sport than Eddie and their presentational skills are on a different stratosphere. They are adaptable used to flitting from sport to sport but giving each the required degree of gravitas. Could you imagine Eddie doing Royal Ascot!!

I'd be pretty satisfied with the BBC were they to ditch their worst - Davies - and sign up Sky's best - Wells. Even so, their team isn't bad as it stands.

I believe both Chappers and Balding do/did a fantastic job. Balding seemed to know what she was talking about and Chapman has a true passion for RL. When you put them up against Eddie and Stevo it's like comparing a filet mignon to a BigMac.

I don't know if it is because of shame, embarrassment or the fact they'd get completely ridiculed, but I have yet to find anyone who believes that Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber do a decent job.

Astonishingly, there was a thread on the VT a few months back in which a couple of posters expressed that view. I'm fairly sure they were being serious.

Whatever the pros & cons about the Sky commentary team at least all of us who subscribe get to see live Rugby League every week during the season apart from cup weekends.
I do agree though that it's time for Sky to ditch Eddie, Stevo & Phil Clarke.
They're all well past their sell-by date.
I'd also dump Tez & Baz.

Me too it too cosy a club and projects the wrong image - same goes for John Kear, Paul Cullen - thankfully Sean McRae is gone home or we would have to suffer him too

Sounds like the basis for a reality TV series.

Just watched the last 20 minutes when he came on, and in that time he touched the ball only twice. Completely boring, genuinely no idea why people find Union entertaining. I hope he himself gets bored and comes back.

I tuned in with 35 minutes left and I can honestly say I dont think I have seen a worse sporting occasion than that..maybe the grand national that never was runs it close but awful absolutely awful.

Burgess said he enjoyed it in his after match interview...I hope he was lying it was garbage.
Harlequins had the ball on three or four separate occasions in that last 35, and they passed the ball once...(and had three men sent to the sin bin!)

Burgess stats for 20 minutes play = two carries & no tackles.

Of the two passes he received the first was a hospital pass and the second was a yard forward....welcome to Rugby Union

Rugby Union hate it or hate it....!!!

But the majority of people around the world do find Union entertaining. Perhaps if you watched more than 20 minutes you would learn why! In this particular game in the final quarter the rain was lashing down, Harlequins had 3 players in the bin, Bath had the game won and nothing much left to play for. Sam made one good carry and laid the ball well and he also made a really impressive clear out. Eastmond scored a try and had a very good all round game.

Have you been messing with the Rugby Union Calculator? It's of interest to at most around 2% of the world's population. Being generous.

Any evidence to back up the claim that 3.5 billion people find Union entertaining?

The majority? That's a lot of people! I've watched my fair share of Union, and I see what you're saying.

Still boring though.

Sounds like a sport that Ian Kirke would excel in.