i would suggest you need a sense of humour!

Fascinating.

thanks

I wasnt too sure whether I'd gone a bit too far with the bum banging theme.

I have thought about setting up a Brigantes-esq type super fan gang called the Wire Boom bangers......
Ive got an Avatar and everything...

Ive left a voicemail with Lulu to see if she will become an ambassdor, what do you think, has it got legs...?

You have highlighted the fundamental flaw in Sky's structure. Hemming's role is to commentate on the games, summarising (stats, opinion, reviewing plays) is by the other party. Hemmings seemingly wants to cross both spheres, which leads to both parties talking over each other. The white noise is made worse when you factor in the additional summarisers. At best it is farcical, in reality it is rank amateur.

Id like to see Jon Wells given more of a role. Provides more insight then the rest put together, seem's to have a bit of bant as well.

That you can tell, when you watch any match he commentates.

He gets genuinely passionate, unlike the Sky muppets who just shout names, worn out slogans like T-R-Y and any 'controversial' (read: wrong) opinion to basically keep doing what they think Sky's coverage is 'renowned' for.

Sky has done so much for the game, and Eddie and Stevo I'm afraid must think they go hand in glove with all those good things. They don't.

I live in a college with 56 other lads and many don't watch RL. If I'm watching a game, casual observers just take the P155 at how idiotic the commentary is, I think it's fair to say it means a few of them don't take our sport seriously.

And don't get me started on Eddie's talent of naming players. Look at Friday, Joel goes in to score and we get 'MICHAEL MONAGHAN, MICHAEL MONAGHAAAAAN'.

End of a bell as are the rest of the 'team', with the exception of Carney and Wells really.

Banter? God forbid! Everyone is up in arms because Eddie said if you are going to read it do it properly...

i still say i'd be the ideal replacement for stevo!