Originally Posted by
Gray77
Sky take the blame usually, but at some point we need to look at the game itself and realise that if less people are watching then maybe less people want to watch. The old lines were all about Eddie and Stevo and how we needed younger presenters who didn't look like Northern stereotypes, but we now have Carney who is youngish and the likes of Wells, who presents himself professionally. I don't honestly think Baz and Tez turn anyone away. They may annoy actual fans but I don't think the average punter who decides to give the RL a watch on a Friday night cares that there are two Northern 'biff and bash' artists on the commentary anymore than the average punter cares that RU has the likes of Brian Moore who has a similar (if more eloquant) attitude.
Fox in Australia have Blocker Roach who does a similar job of being the 'boof-head' ex-forward who they go to for similar comments, but it doesn't detract from the presentation because for every wordy ex-half back there needs to be an ex-forward who has played in the trenches, because both need to be represented ideally. It works in Australia on Fox and Nine because the quality on the field is the star, and the commentators and analysts are merely adding to what would be decent regardless. PL football is the same. If I'm watching a big game I can put up with anyone on commentary because they aren't central to what I'm watching, but give me Bournemouth v Palace and I'll be picking holes in every comment because frankly I'm not bothered about the game and I want the commentators to give me something to add to the occasion.
Now yes, sometimes the commentators can actively dilute the enjoyment of a big RL game on Sky with their stupidity, but I find that this happens less now because Arthur doesn't see himself as the voice of the sport unlike his predecessor, and the others (whilst at times daft or just plain wrong) aren't larger than life like Stevo. So, at the end of the day, the modern presentation is basically okay with bits of stupidity, but it's not going to drive anyone away IMO. The ref schtick is pointless, but unfortunately everyone has an 'official' onsite to tell us what we can see with our own eyes these days, so we're stuck with it.
Maybe back in 2000 or whenever, more people watched games because frankly the league was better, the big teams were better, the big games felt bigger and the competition at the top was stiffer. Saints, Bradford and to a lesser degree Wigan and Leeds had teams that could pull punters in, and when the play off format was young and teams still treated the league like it was massive every week we had compelling games and compelling races for top spot that felt big and made viewers want to watch. Nowadays the play-off format is 20-odd years old and everybody has worked out that the weekly rounds are not vital. The best teams aren't as good as they were, and so neutrals and the general sports fan isn't as bothered to watch games than maybe they once were.
Sky could present the game better, and could hype it better throughout the week, but we could have said that for the entirety of the 25+ years they've been doing this. Less people tune in now not because of Sky but because they are less bothered to watch RL, and whether it's the style of play, the structure of the league, the quality of teams etc, it's not going to change because Sky give it a new lick of paint. We may be happier as fans of the game, but people who aren't will not care either way.