Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:33 pm  

post wrote:

Get rid of Wells and O'Connor and have a separate commentary team of Hemmings, Carney and McDermott.

Pre game, half time and full time have John Davies from Sky Sports News along with Phil Clarke and a guest summariser/coach/former player and another guest player.

If you prefer Clarke and McDermott to Wells I don't know what to say to you.

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 9:19 pm  

headhunter wrote:

If you prefer Clarke and McDermott to Wells I don't know what to say to you.

John Wells is excellent , it's the job he has been given that's the problem

Far too much guessing/analysing of what has happened and what this , that or another player should/shouldn't have done , just because SKY and the Beeb are willing to pay millions to past players to talk to us like we are idiots doesn't mean we want the same in RL , we can generally see what happened we don't need somebody else to try to make up stuff to make the game look more technical or interesting , we are not football or RU

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 9:48 pm  

GUBRATS wrote:

John Wells is excellent , it's the job he has been given that's the problem

Far too much guessing/analysing of what has happened and what this , that or another player should/shouldn't have done , just because SKY and the Beeb are willing to pay millions to past players to talk to us like we are idiots doesn't mean we want the same in RL , we can generally see what happened we don't need somebody else to try to make up stuff to make the game look more technical or interesting , we are not football or RU

Wells' analysis is pretty much the only thing that Sky get right about their RL coverage. Although I know we're now in the Brexit 'post-expert' age and people don't want to hear rational analysis or informed opinion.

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 9:56 pm  

headhunter wrote:

Wells' analysis is pretty much the only thing that Sky get right about their RL coverage. Although I know we're now in the Brexit 'post-expert' age and people don't want to hear rational analysis or informed opinion.

Well maybe you just don't know as much as others about the game

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:01 pm  

GUBRATS wrote:

Well maybe you just don't know as much as others about the game

Yeah that must be it.

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:02 pm  

Pamela Stephenson or Pamela Anderson

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:42 pm  

Ste100Centurions wrote:

Pamela Stephenson or Pamela Anderson

Both at the same time would have been fun

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:55 pm  

GUBRATS wrote:

Both at the same time would have been fun

You said that about Eddie & Stevo, and look how that's turned out.


Personally I'll miss Stevo, sure he regurgitates the same old platitudes, but the other night when there was a bit of a fracas he came out with something like "There's more handbags than a Moroccan Bazaar" he still manages to make me chuckle.

I just hope Eddie & Co don't make too much of his retirement on G.F. night, ultimately he's just a bit player & it shouldn't detract from the main event - but it probably will.

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Sun Sep 11, 2016 11:34 pm  

Andrew Voss

Re: Who should replace Michael Stephenson? : Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:23 am  

Whilst his passion for RL cannot be questioned and he does have his occasional funny moments, so does my dad, but I wouldn't have him anywhere near the Sky commentary team. Stevo should've been replaced a long time ago.

His role alongside Eddie (who should be the host/commentator) should be to offer the viewers insight into the game, highlight little things they may have missed, explain tactical decisions - basically what Wellsy does.

But what we get is a bloke who offers nothing apart from one-liners and bluster, no insight, he doesn't understand half the rules and helps take the commentary team off on tangents about issues away from the match being played.