by Phil Clarke. Does he know he's working for Sky and he is supposed to be neutral, or does he think he's working for Hull TV? Because that's the way it came across. Everything he said was from a Hull perspective. He was asking questions on behalf of Hull and how they can respond and how it would impact on their game and season.

He was willing Hull on through every phase of the game. It became unacceptable when he and Brian Carney began to moan like children with exaggerated moans when decisions went against Hull. And when Hull appeared to have scored the winner they sounded pleased, even sharing a joke together. Clarke has been like this against Saints ever since Wigan's resurgence and I think Sky seriously need to look into it today by reviewing that 80 minutes.

Oh shut up. People like you just say things like this because it's popular opinion and you can't think for yourself. Why not talk about the decent game of rugby that was just played.

Its ok Eddie and stevo were creaming every time Ea$tmond and foster got the ball and said washy never attempted to get the ball

we have phil clarke, you get steve ganson, think that's how it works

Could say the same about the reffing

pity it was towards Hull though. Home team bias.

I think they need to look at it. Especially when Clarke ruins the normally excellent Carney by encouraging him to follow his lead.

He was having a right paddy over that penalty. I didn't see the same reaction over the forward pass at the Pie Dome the other week.

Couple of people here need to go on the Steve Ganson bias thread, this is the Phil Clarke bias thread. Are we not allowed to have an independent opinion about something without the suspicion that we're favouring the team we support? I've thought about this Phil Clarke bias for sometime, should I just keep biting my tongue and never state my opinion on it? Given the 80 minutes that have just preceded, it is perfect, fresh evidence.



You really have gone out on a limb here, I'm talking as an intelligent adult about an issue I believe in. I wish I could think for myself like you, then I could make presumptions. Mate, this is a forum where we have the freedom to talk about all aspects of the game, by your logic we should have 10 posts about how good todays game was and we would all agree with each other.

Thats what you get when you half have a commentary team that consists of a couple of pie eaters and a couple of sensationalist morons. I used to like Clarky but lately he's been shocking

I thought the point of Phil Clarke was to provide some balance given Eddie and Stevo's long running love affair with the self-styled "Entertainers"...

No, the point of Phil Clarke is a "job for the boys". He is there to give us pointless stats that mean nothing, nor does anyone care about.

by balance you mean Cherry and White tinted bias?


And as for Eddie ' wouldnt it be nice to have 2 different teams in the grand final this year *COUGH Warrington *COUGH ... yeah , real saints bias

Well said!

Phil sounded a bit daft on occasion. What he should have been aiming for is to create tension around the match as a whole, not just for Hull to get back. The problem is, Saints have been so successful during Superleague that no-one wants us to win anything, especially with a team full of young players (showing just how good our production line is).

Since Phil and Eddie are partners in crime ... just let me mention that I thought Eddie Hemmings saying 'wouldn't it be nice to have two totally different teams at the Grand Final' was out of order. Phil, to his credit, corrected him by saying that he wanted to see the two [ibest[/i teams at the Grand Final. Although I think Eddie H is a great anchor man (although a little scatty this season with regard to the names of players), sometimes he opens his mouth before engaging his brain, and makes himself look very daft in the process.

Do you know, Eddie, Saints have scored more tries from kicks rebounding off the s of opposition defenders in the last 10 minutes of the first half of all their home games than any other side in Super League?

And do you know, Eddie, one day I might come up with a relevant statistic or an interesting observation, but you have to doubt that very much.

Got back from the KC quick didn't you.

Clarke and Carney were spot on with that last decision. Never a penalty.

Or are you to bothered about watching Gareth Hock train?

Don't get so edgy because of evidence that the entire universe does not hate Wigan. The paranoid hysteria on C&W about the Sky team (and, of course, the rest of the population of Earth) may have just shaken a little.

Didnt go.

Hey, England squad announced soon. Is this the year McIllorum finally fulfills your prophecy?

Actually it's the bias thread not the Steve Ganson bias thread or the Phil Clarke bias thread. You didn't specify and I'm sure most people would have assumed it was Ganson after some of the decisions he made today.

Penalty my ****!

Incorrect, it WAS a penalty and the stats will tell you so



Also did you manage to rub the Cherry and White paint off your specs long enough to see the pathetic forward passathon by Hull in the first half?

Now there's a surprise



How good was Danny Houghton today as a scotrer hooker?

I agree with you, they have lauded Saints more than they should have down the years. I think that's Eddie and Stevo's way though, they get excited when they spot a trend. Whoever are champions and in form, they will ask can anyone beat this team? Can anyone stop them this season? And will become obsessed with particular players too, but I don't think this is done with any sinister intent. Eddie puts tags on things - like in the past 12 months he bangs on about Jamie Foster being able to kick blind folded. And no surprise to hear him talk up our 'comeback kings' credentials.

He is not a Saints fan though, and Stevo is of course a proud Yorkshireman. We just happen to be the only 'big 2' side throughout the entire super league, so we've more acclaim more often with the success. I agree it's irksome, but it is not done with genuine bias like Phil Clarke who is earnestly and distastefully supporting any team that plays against us.

Maybe the scooting hooker is the way the game is going now.

It's what the Aussies did three years ago and then changed to the likes of Ennis and Smith.

To be fair mate, it's what fits for that particular team. Roby scooting suits saints as it puts us on the front foot and helps us get a roll on. It's the way saints play and works for us.

Some teams prefer the ball playing hooker like smith.

Great little scoot from the scrum for the try

I hope no one accuses me of anti Saints bias on this one. I hate it and have fought my corner with Wigan fans on when Micky Higham came to Wigan.

They went very quiet when Ridell showed them which way a hooker was supposed to play though.