I like Phill Clarke when he is not talking about Wigan

Me too. Also a very nice bloke in person.

don't get the Clarke hate personally. Although some of his stuff has become rather irrelevant.

Eddie is the worst imo, like an annoying uncle you would be glad to see just once a year, if that, to talk about RL.

Can't see the problem with Eddie and Stevo, they don't say much different to Andrew Voss. Voss mentioned someone's ribs being on the floor and putting BBQ sauce on them the other week, if Stevo had have said that he would have been slaughtered on these boards as talking nonsense again.

And I can't believe the subject heading is classing it as important.

Eddie and Stevo (and Clarkey) love they game as much as we do so let's give them a break.

Exactly what I thought.

I didn't question Phil Clarke's character or off-set personality, or whether he was a nice bloke in person. I was questioning his value to the telecast.

Somebody sign Mr Voss ASAP.

Phil Clarke is terrible. Carney used to be good but they've beaten all the humour and insight out of him recently.

Not quite sure why, but he comes across as so miserable. Not sure why they persist with him presenting things when Eddie isn't about, he is terrible at it.

Why do we need a commentary?

I remember some years ago you could watch the game with just the stadium sound and that was excellent. Pity they don't offer the service now.

Commentary is not very important if you already know the game, however if you are a more casual viewer then commentary is very important in helping to follow the game albeit on a simplified basis.

The Sky team are actually very good at that, the dumbing down that Eddie and Stevo do may infuriate heartland viewers, but they will tune in anyway.

Andrew Voss comes from a market where there is a wider knowledge of the game. In Sky's market the comms have to dumb down. The fact that SL gets better viewing figures than Union shows how well Eddie, Stevo et all actually do.

I wouldn't put that down to the commentators. I would imagine the neutral viewer would rather watch League as its easier to understand, more exciting and less stop-start.

Familiarity breeds contempt; time for a long overdue change.

I'd be happy to see Voss brought in to replace Eddie - he has a likeable persona and is a knowledgeable and relaxed broadcaster. Replace Stevo with a player of a) more recent pedigree and b) a new set of clichés. I like Carney, although I'm sure there are other candidates.

Commentary is not very important..hahahaha.. 99.9% of so called 'professional' commentators are under the impression they do a good job because they tend to hold down a job for an eon, the art has pretty much died a death, even with modern technology integrating into sport commentators fail, time & time again, both on radio & on TV. Some are so lacking in essential areas of communication we end up with dross, some just end up not giving a flying one about the job and some are just not able to grasp what is going on either quick enough or don't have the technical know-how to convey what is happening properly. That's actually a pretty sad indicment tbh...

The art of good commentating (& there are relatively very very few top notch sports commentators anywhere in the English speaking world and none within UK RL circles at this moment in time...) is describing the events in a way that flows, grasps the essence of it, that is not only balanced but informs with knowledgeable understanding the sometimes obvious (As this carries the listener/viewer from one part of the game to another) and the intricate nouances of the activity itself.
It needs to be the right balance of enough about the action without distracting the discerning viewer/fan whilst interjecting with essentiali/informative factoids at appropriate times (Something French could never do in a month of Sundays) and be able to know when to directly communicate/interact with co-commentators/summerisers at critical points (Woods is actually pretty good at this for the most part)
It has to be a complete symbiosis of commentator and event so you actually really don't notice the commentator, they ARE a part of the action as you would be seeing it.

COMMENTATING IS THE WHOLE ACT, if you think that commentating is purely describing the physical act of say X player passing to Y player or A player tackling B player and IS NOT VERY IMPORTANT then you have ZERO grasp of what commentating actually means..

Personally, I don't see what Phil Clarke offers that the work experience boy at Opta couldn't.

It's one thing to regurgitate stats, it's another to add some meaningful insight to it. I don't really see much of the latter.

"Oh, Wigan have had a lot of play the balls near to the opposition posts; that'll explain why they've scored three tries." Cheers Phil.