The informed viewer can pick holes galore in a lot of the commentary. They certainly can with Davies; I can't abide his nasal ramblings. But for the casual viewer, who these games need to attract, they don't generally know their butt from a wing forward. So if Davies says something it must be accurate as he was a great player, albeit his contribution was massively overstated. I get it on other sports from friends and family who have little idea of the sport. They just repeat what they have heard in commentary or read it in the gutter press. So we do need informed, educated and well-known figures to present and keep other media interested.

Some Davies bingo:

"hee shot out of the line there!" "Where's the dummeee runnner?" "Very pooooor defence".

Ray French:

"I did my pre season training on Blackpool beach!" "boots like carpet slipppers these days". "has he got the legs to go all the way?" fnarr

My favourite Frenchism was "and he's thur", which he used to describe routine barge overs and length of the field cup winning efforts alike. All said and done, I can't say today's replay obsessed controversy monkeys have taken RL commentary forward.

And the classic "I played with his Dad".

The comment about Paul Anderson being left in the 'growing bag' as a youngster stuck with me.

And was it French who liked a good 'raw-boned front row forward'?

University of Leeds alumnus as well

Tempted to mute the game and watch in blissful silence

Nsemba is looking good early on

If the tackle on Bateman warrants 10 mins, it was a forceful shot to the head according to Kendall, then player saftey would demand Bateman needs an HIA, surely?

Sounds more like ref fed up of repeat hits to the head on the border of being a penalty and his warning was ignored.

Deffo the softest of the high hits so far

As for HiA do international have different rules ?