Phil Clarke : Fri Mar 06, 2020 7:41 pm  

“ Castleford by 20 points, they have to win..............er Warrington by 20 points”

The man is either drunk, drugged or brain dead.

Re: Phil Clarke : Fri Mar 06, 2020 7:45 pm  

Or he just got mixed up during his sentence. We've all done it. What would indicate his inebriation however is saying we'll win by 20 period.

Re: Phil Clarke : Fri Mar 06, 2020 7:46 pm  

reffy wrote:

“ Castleford by 20 points, they have to win..............er Warrington by 20 points”

The man is either drunk, drugged or brain dead.

Just so bizarre. Why 20 points too???

Another parody character who should be turfed off air

Re: Phil Clarke : Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:41 pm  

reffy wrote:

“ Castleford by 20 points, they have to win..............er Warrington by 20 points”

The man is either drunk, drugged or brain dead.

Think his eyes and his thoughts might be elsewhere

Re: Phil Clarke : Fri Mar 06, 2020 9:25 pm  

Surprised he didn’t say Wigan would win by 20 tonight

Re: Phil Clarke : Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:38 pm  

Oh for God's sake everyone makes a verbal faux occasionally. It was funny. They corrected it. Move on.

Re: Phil Clarke : Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:56 pm  

Why does he talk so posh. Was he born in Wigan or Westminster ?

Re: Phil Clarke : Mon Mar 09, 2020 2:46 pm  

Every sports commentator gets things wrong and if you take Clarkes Wigan bias out of the equation, he's a knowledgeable bloke.
Everyone seemed to rip Stevo and Hemmings apart but, considering how often they did the commentary and how long they had been doing it, they were pretty good.
RL suffers because it's a low budget sport, without adequate resource to really make a vibrant program and especially as its on the box 3/4 times a week.

Even well renowned pundits, like Murray Walker in Motor Sport or, Alan Hansen in football make mistakes and struggle to keep it fresh, although neither are commentating now, but, some folk expect miracles.
I'd still take Clark ove Jonathan Davies's commentary/ comment all day long.

Re: Phil Clarke : Mon Mar 09, 2020 3:08 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

I'd still take Clark ove Jonathan Davies's commentary/ comment all day long.

This

Re: Phil Clarke : Mon Mar 09, 2020 3:53 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Every sports commentator gets things wrong and if you take Clarkes Wigan bias out of the equation, he's a knowledgeable bloke.
Everyone seemed to rip Stevo and Hemmings apart but, considering how often they did the commentary and how long they had been doing it, they were pretty good.
RL suffers because it's a low budget sport, without adequate resource to really make a vibrant program and especially as its on the box 3/4 times a week.

Even well renowned pundits, like Murray Walker in Motor Sport or, Alan Hansen in football make mistakes and struggle to keep it fresh, although neither are commentating now, but, some folk expect miracles.
I'd still take Clark ove Jonathan Davies's commentary/ comment all day long.

I'm not jumping on his back for a slip of the tongue but he is consistently abysmal. He is definately not a 'knowledgeable bloke'. If he is, then far too often he lets his own bias get in the way. For example he keeps repeating that Olpherts was Salford's third best player last year yet it is a fact that Salford's form improved significantly after he was dropped permanently two thirds of the way through the season. Olpherts did not play in the long winning run or any playoff games. Either he doesn't know what he is talking about or he is mates with Olpherts/his agent - either way that makes him a terrible analyst.