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.