Aside from all the one-eyed supporter nonsense, the only thing that is actually tiring is when commentators don't give credit where credit is due.

He may well think that St Helens have, over the full course of the previous two seasons, played what was in his opinion the most enjoyable rugby to watch, but when it came to the crunch they weren't good enough - they were beaten by a better team effort on the occasions that mattered most.

That's the nature of how sport works, and as a neutral commentator he ought to acknowledge this rather than appearing dissapointed in the result.

The partisan nature of the SKY team seems to me to be becoming more pronounced. Watching the Warrington vs Hull match last night all bar Barrie seemed really disappointed that Warrington had come through to win. I was highly impressed by the Warrington forwards in the second half, especially Carvell and Morley. I thought that was first class rugby but didn't get the credit that it deserved. I think it is time for the coverage to have an option to have the commentary turned off with perhaps a directional mike towards the referee. Tweedle dee and tweedle dum just irritate me now, they get more excited about shirt colours and referee decisions than the game. They are full of the same cliches week after week. I genuinely enjoy Barrie and Terry O'Connors' comments as they seem much more grounded and understanding of the players viewpoints.

Well said

You backed me into a corner? I asked for the bet, not you. It's just you were the only one who would take me up on the offer, no one else would.

You want to retract that before I link to the thread and prove your wrong, again?

In fact, you want to have a small bet on who proposed the bet?

I've always felt his bias was towards Saints, a view that was enhanced after hearing him speak at the FAE the other year, during his and Stevo's coast to coast walk.

Not really heard his comments on Friday, but if they were anything like the stuff he came out with after the Grand Final I can imagine why some could get upset.

Hemmings didn't want Wire to win, are you sure? He may have to tone it down to avoid criticisms of bias, and end up going too far towards the other team, but don't for 1 second think he doesn't want Warrington to win every game.

Beat me to it, isn't that his "local" side?

Believe so. I seem to remember he's reached the height of fame in Warrington and had a bus named after him!

I think a lot of the stuff last year was because Saints had been the best side for most of last season certainly from the point of view of quality and consistency of rugby. I don;t think anyone was bias, just maybe sad that the best team did now win on the day, although Leeds were clearly the best performers on the day

Most of last season? Sure they finished the regular rounds on top, and had played the best rugby in the closing couple of months, but everybody appeared to have forgotten our start to the season, where we were just as dominant as Saints were towards the end.

In results yes, but I always was impressed when I saw Saints play, and was often less than impressed when I saw us play. Although this could have been inverse rose tinting going on

Phil Clarke has a rule to decide the best team and that is to look at the points for and points against.

When St Helens have the best attack and best defence (2006, 2007) then St Helens are the best team. When St Helens have the best attack but not the best defence (200icon_cool.gif then St Helens are the best team. When St Helens have neither the best attack or best defence (2005) then St Helens are the best team.

Simples.

Amen brother.