is it just me or was Paul Cullen so much better when he did the match analysis

watch it every now and then when i can be bothered..it was a decent programme years ago but now its turned into an kissing programme to which a few certain players backsides get kissed more than anyone elses..had wigan walloped us saturday we wouldnt of spent chunks of the show watching key moments of brad and kr...fwiw i like john kear very decent bloke who speaks very well

Yes he was although he always seemed to moan about kickoffs that went on the full and sliding defence in your own 20

At least he showed why games were won and lost made it easy to understand and didn't just read figures from a teleprompter

Exactly he had shown why a try was scored rather than saying Saints had 2 more PTB's than Wakefield but still lost

So a thread on a Warrington forum is critical of blatantly Wigan biased Phil Clarke, and then someone suggests that blatantly Warrington biased Paul Cullen was much better.

Whodathunkit?

Dont watch it anymore, adds nothing.

Clarkey's stats are nonsense hence the reason they dumped the Wankometer, it almost always showed the wrong side winning until the last 5 minutes.
If you want to know what wins games, watch the bleeding match !