REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

Each to their own but I can't possibly see how anyone could think ATR is superior to RUK. The latter has better presenters, more analysis, proper replays (and replay programmes in the evening instead of US dross).

I like Chapman though - he'd be a good choice to fulfil the McCrirrick-style loudmouth buffoon role in the new coverage. He's much more knowledgeable than people give him credit for (probably because he likes playing the idiot).

To be honest now RUK is HD I couldn't give a fcuk who they choose as I'll rarely be watching.

[QUOTE="BennyB, post: 2420649, member: 65563"] Each to their own but I can't possibly see how anyone could think ATR is superior to RUK. The latter has better presenters, more analysis, proper replays (and replay programmes in the evening instead of US dross). I like Chapman though - he'd be a good choice to fulfil the McCrirrick-style loudmouth buffoon role in the new coverage. He's much more knowledgeable than people give him credit for (probably because he likes playing the idiot). To be honest now RUK is HD I couldn't give a fcuk who they choose as I'll rarely be watching. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?