Okay, Lets break this down.

1.) People on here have complained about Eddie and Stevo being biased against Wigan, stating that this is out of order and that they shouldn't be kept on Sky.

2.) The Opening Poster then states that he Likes the Bias that Clarke shows. (The Opening Poster, not me. Says THAT PHIL CLARKE IS BIASED TOWARDS WIGAN.)

3.) I then commented that they complain about Eddie and Stevo being biased, but it is okay for Clarke to be biased towards Wigan. Please tell me where I have complained about any of the commentators?

There we go, all that done without having to resort to insults about being a kid and having too much Calpol. Pretty good that isn't it?

Well I'm confused. Why is it wrong for WIGAN fans to complain when there is bias against their team and enjoy bias for it? Thought the people on these boards were sports fans who support THEIR team? Have we become the united nations or something without anyone telling me?

To be honest I don't think Clarke favours Wigan, he IMO always favours the flavour of the month but nearly always gives saints a big wrap and always compares teams to saints as we've been the bench mark in the super league era.

What I don't understand is the Wigan= gold, saints = silver and wolves = bronze, I'm not being funny but for the full 80 mins saints just dominated the game from start to finish, not just a good 2nd half display but the full 80 mins.

Saints kept a team to zero while scoring 54 points, that in my eyes is the complete performance, also we did it with lomax, meli, gidley, soliolia, wheeler, wilkin and maurie all out injured!

For me saints had to get the gold.

Maybe Clarke does favour you pies after all

Clarkey justified his obvious bias (

) by stating that Wigan had had the tougher opposition. It didn't look like that to me, frankly, since Hudds lay down and asked for their tummies to be tickled in the second half. And in the first half they couldn't make pay all the gifted field position they had. However, that was Mr Clarke's justification for his obvious bias.

Not that I'm bothered. I just felt so happy at the performance Saints put in for a second week on the trot. They haven't been able to back up even half decent performances for about 18 months, so watching some of those tries was very happy-making. It's fecking great to see and long may it continue!

An in form Quins in the Challenge Cup next week.

Let's see how good you really are!!!

So absorbing everything a very physical side has to throw at you for the first 40, and then in the second 40, when you've beasted the game's beasts, turning it on and running them ragged, is not playing well for the full match?

RL is not about ballet dancing through truly crap opposition. That's no test of any side.

I didn't mean it like that, i was making the point of a team keeping the other at zero while putting 54 points on them with 6-7 players out is a complete performance imo and should have been a gold medal performance from mr wigan(clarke)

You can only beat what's in front of you but I don't see what Saints can take away from that performance, Hull KR just didn't turn up. Briscoe had a shocker, I'm starting to worry about him as England's only real option at FB as he's not had a good start.

You don't see what saints can take from that game! Come on, it was a top class performance. To keep any team zero while putting 54 points on the board is very good imo. It was a complete performance from a injury struck team.

I do agree about briscoe, fullback will be a problem for england.

As bad as it is to change Eastmonds position, I think we'd look a lot stronger with Eastmond at FB, and Tomkins and Brough in the halves.

Eastmond is a option as there ain't much elese out there playing fullback.

I said that yesterday. Tomkins or Eastmond to FB, then Myler and either Tomkins or Eastmond in the halves

Myler.

I was saying the same after we turned over Les Cats 58-0, it's great for the league table and a bit of a rest/confidence boost for the players but it's easy to walk over a team that just doesn't turn up, because you're playing under little pressure. I can see you guys going on a bit of an unbeaten run in the league now with Salford, Hull K.R and Hull F.C as your next opponents. If you're struck down with injuries it's certainly a time when you can afford them.

We need a full back at full back. I can't see Eastmond being up to it positionally in defence, I really thought Briscoe would start to up his game this season and make the spot his own, he did well for us in the four nations.

I hope so, it's hard to keep backing up with so many young lads in the team at the moment.

Nothing wrong with it. I Just find it funny that you all call for 2 people to be kicked off Sky with one of the reason's being the bias that you claim they show against Wigan, yet support someone else showing that same emotion.

Totally agree, thought you made a valid point. At the very least, the fans who complain about everyone else on sky but praise clarke, are being hypocritical but I actually think they are deluded because I think that other than Eddie, who will praise a tackle on a Wigan player who's just run 80 yards without mentioning the break itself, but the others seem fair to me.

+1.

-2

The grievance is with Eddie being biased against a team, showing bitterness and hate. Phil Clarke does not show that against any team. I have no problem with Eddie being bias towards Wire, its his team, we all understand that. I personally don't think Stevo shows bias against Wigan but he did describe Huddersfield as 'we' yesterday. Don't know if anyone noticed.

Not really. We put 50-odd to zip against Catalans earlier in the season. As pretty to watch as that was, yesterday was a much more complete game of rugby as both sides of the game were tested and found to be up to it. Mate, if there's no one on the pitch but your team you can waltz in for tries all day. Doesn't make it a complete performance though. I'm not knocking Saints here. As the saying goes, 'you can only beat what's in front of you'. O'Loughlin played in the match at KR and the match against Wire and reckons that the first half yesterday was the toughest of the season. That's plenty enough justification for Clarke's choice for me.

Is it just me......Or did anyonel else find the games where Just For Men WASNT commentating to be far more balanced and interesting?
Stevo i can live with, and the rest of the Sky team are all pretty good (including Cullen).
But Hemmings is beyond a joke.
His comments about us going back to the top, after the Hudds game, were cringeworthy.
Even a suprised looking Cullen, quickly dismissed his childish rantings!


Time for him to go......

Well first of all I don't recall saying they should be kicked off. That aside, there's still nothing wrong with it. This is a fan's forum not some political/politically correct debating society. Of course fans favour their team. Look at SaintsFan who, although she never stops posting on here, never has a positive thing to say about Wigan but thinks everything to do with Saints is SuperDooper!

The fact is (and I'm sure you're the same) when the papers or tv say something good about my team I like it. When they say something negative, I don't. There's no obligation to be neutral. That's the essence of being a fan.

Do you know were I can get one of those hats ?