Wayne Mardle

[Murphio]

Interesting discussion - and of course the argument that you have to have won something or had a glittering career in chosen field to understand it is laughable. Jurgen Klopp, Brendan Rodgers and Jose Mourinho won nothing as players and didn't even make it at the top - how dare they give advice to top professionals. How dare that failed golfer Pete Cowan teach Rory McIlroy how to swing a golf club or Don Lawrence teach Lady Gaga how to hold a note.

Very true, but those individuals have proven themselves to be expert coaches and managers, starting out in a career and working their way through the ranks and earning respect by their respective in their fields. Coaching and managing.

Mardle has achieved precisely nowt as a coach or a manager of anything. His entire qualification to be on the tellybox is his playing career, which was very good but not good enough to tell players like Rob Cross how to improve.

They didn't prove themselves before they were given a chance to do so. What had Klopp won at Mainz before he started telling professionals what to do? Darts coaching is a relatively new phenomenon - what is he supposed to have achieved at this stage? He was working with Peterson for a while who was throwing some good darts after. I see absolutely no reason why any professional would take umbrage at another ex-pro because he didn't win much. The argument that you have to have medals to understand the mechanics of success in a certain field is just pure nonsense. Freddie Roach was just an average journeyman boxer before he agreed to train Mickey Rourke and the rest is history. If I were Rob Cross I'd want every bit of constructive criticism I could get. Mardle's wins as a player are neither here nor there in relation to his ability to coach and understand the mechanics of a throw.

[meetthefeebles]

Interesting discussion - and of course the argument that you have to have won something or had a glittering career in chosen field to understand it is laughable. Jurgen Klopp, Brendan Rodgers and Jose Mourinho won nothing as players and didn't even make it at the top - how dare they give advice to top professionals. How dare that failed golfer Pete Cowan teach Rory McIlroy how to swing a golf club or Don Lawrence teach Lady Gaga how to hold a note.

Very true, but those individuals have proven themselves to be expert coaches and managers, starting out in a career and working their way through the ranks and earning respect by their respective in their fields. Coaching and managing.

Mardle has achieved precisely nowt as a coach or a manager of anything. His entire qualification to be on the tellybox is his playing career, which was very good but not good enough to tell players like Rob Cross how to improve.

They didn't prove themselves before they were given a chance to do so. What had Klopp won at Mainz before he started telling professionals what to do? Darts coaching is a relatively new phenomenon - what is he supposed to have achieved at this stage? He was working with Peterson for a while who was throwing some good darts after. I see absolutely no reason why any professional would take umbrage at another ex-pro because he didn't win much. The argument that you have to have medals to understand the mechanics of success in a certain field is just pure nonsense. Freddie Roach was just an average journeyman boxer before he agreed to train Mickey Rourke and the rest is history. If I were Rob Cross I'd want every bit of constructive criticism I could get. Mardle's wins as a player are neither here nor there in relation to his ability to coach and understand the mechanics of a throw.

My point still stands, though. There is a difference between a successful manager, coach or trainer and a bloke who had never done any of those things sitting in a telly studio chatting shit about players who have won world titles and other major tournaments.

Easy to sit in the studio criticising. Look at all the so-called top football pundits sitting on the telly who failed utterly at actual coaching. Is Mardle holding himself out as a coach to PDC professionals? If Mardle wants to coach players, let him actually do it and see how he gets on. If he proves a success, good for him. Until then, his entire qualification for being in that studio is his playing career. To pretend otherwise is to ignore the graphic Sky attached to his name when his face appears on the screen.

[Murphio]

Interesting discussion - and of course the argument that you have to have won something or had a glittering career in chosen field to understand it is laughable. Jurgen Klopp, Brendan Rodgers and Jose Mourinho won nothing as players and didn't even make it at the top - how dare they give advice to top professionals. How dare that failed golfer Pete Cowan teach Rory McIlroy how to swing a golf club or Don Lawrence teach Lady Gaga how to hold a note.

Very true, but those individuals have proven themselves to be expert coaches and managers, starting out in a career and working their way through the ranks and earning respect by their respective in their fields. Coaching and managing.

Mardle has achieved precisely nowt as a coach or a manager of anything. His entire qualification to be on the tellybox is his playing career, which was very good but not good enough to tell players like Rob Cross how to improve.

They didn't prove themselves before they were given a chance to do so. What had Klopp won at Mainz before he started telling professionals what to do? Darts coaching is a relatively new phenomenon - what is he supposed to have achieved at this stage? He was working with Peterson for a while who was throwing some good darts after. I see absolutely no reason why any professional would take umbrage at another ex-pro because he didn't win much. The argument that you have to have medals to understand the mechanics of success in a certain field is just pure nonsense. Freddie Roach was just an average journeyman boxer before he agreed to train Mickey Rourke and the rest is history. If I were Rob Cross I'd want every bit of constructive criticism I could get. Mardle's wins as a player are neither here nor there in relation to his ability to coach and understand the mechanics of a throw.

My point still stands, though. There is a difference between a successful manager, coach or trainer and a bloke who had never done any of those things sitting in a telly studio chatting shit about players who have won world titles and other major tournaments.

Your point doesn't stand - at all. Klopp had won nothing as a professional player or manager before he started telling pros what to do at Mainz. Rodgers had won nothing as a player or coach before he started coaching professionals at Watford. Mourinho had won nothing professionally as a player or manager when he started at Benfica. Freddie Roach had win nothing in pro boxing as a boxer or coach when he started training Virgil Hill. Not only that - some of the people who have actually won stuff as players make for some of the worst pundits and coaches. They had the talent to do it but ask them to pass that on and many don't have a clue.

[Rout]

I think Gary Neville is really good at his job as a co commentator and pundit and can understand why Sky use him so often and for the big games.

But there is no doubt his embarrassing failure at Valencia discredits his opinion somewhat a lot of the time.

[Murphio]

I think Gary Neville is really good at his job as a co commentator and pundit and can understand why Sky use him so often and for the big games.

But there is no doubt his embarrassing failure at Valencia discredits his opinion somewhat a lot of the time.

Coaching in football requires not only an understanding of the game, tactics etc (which he is obviously excellent at) but an ability and personality to man manage a group of 20 millionaires. That, coupled with the language barrier etc makes Valencia an easy stick to b'eat Neville with. Compare his insightful punditry with Roy Keane (who won the Championship) whose analysis rarely goes much beyond cliches like 'people doing their jobs. There is no direct relationship between being a good player and a good coach - though of course there is an overlap.

[meetthefeebles]

Interesting discussion - and of course the argument that you have to have won something or had a glittering career in chosen field to understand it is laughable. Jurgen Klopp, Brendan Rodgers and Jose Mourinho won nothing as players and didn't even make it at the top - how dare they give advice to top professionals. How dare that failed golfer Pete Cowan teach Rory McIlroy how to swing a golf club or Don Lawrence teach Lady Gaga how to hold a note.

Very true, but those individuals have proven themselves to be expert coaches and managers, starting out in a career and working their way through the ranks and earning respect by their respective in their fields. Coaching and managing.

Mardle has achieved precisely nowt as a coach or a manager of anything. His entire qualification to be on the tellybox is his playing career, which was very good but not good enough to tell players like Rob Cross how to improve.

They didn't prove themselves before they were given a chance to do so. What had Klopp won at Mainz before he started telling professionals what to do? Darts coaching is a relatively new phenomenon - what is he supposed to have achieved at this stage? He was working with Peterson for a while who was throwing some good darts after. I see absolutely no reason why any professional would take umbrage at another ex-pro because he didn't win much. The argument that you have to have medals to understand the mechanics of success in a certain field is just pure nonsense. Freddie Roach was just an average journeyman boxer before he agreed to train Mickey Rourke and the rest is history. If I were Rob Cross I'd want every bit of constructive criticism I could get. Mardle's wins as a player are neither here nor there in relation to his ability to coach and understand the mechanics of a throw.

My point still stands, though. There is a difference between a successful manager, coach or trainer and a bloke who had never done any of those things sitting in a telly studio chatting shit about players who have won world titles and other major tournaments.

Your point doesn't stand - at all. Klopp had won nothing as a professional player or manager before he started telling pros what to do at Mainz. Rodgers had won nothing as a player or coach before he started coaching professionals at Watford. Mourinho had won nothing professionally as a player or manager when he started at Benfica. Freddie Roach had win nothing in pro boxing as a boxer or coach when he started training Virgil Hill. Not only that - some of the people who have actually won stuff as players make for some of the worst pundits and coaches. They had the talent to do it but ask them to pass that on and many don't have a clue.

Klopp was a club stalwart at Mainz which was why he got that job. Played hundred and hundreds of games for them. Rogers traveled Spain learning how to coach from lists of coaches and started coaching young un's, then reserves, before getting his first proper role. He trained as a coach before actually becoming one. Jose did his studentship with Bobby Robson at Sporting and Barcelona, then again with Van Gaal. Again, he trained as a coach, before actually becoming a coach.

Is Wayne Mardle a darts coach/manager? Or is he a paid mouth on the tellybox, telling former world champs how to throw darts?

[meetthefeebles]

I think Gary Neville is really good at his job as a co commentator and pundit and can understand why Sky use him so often and for the big games.

But there is no doubt his embarrassing failure at Valencia discredits his opinion somewhat a lot of the time.

Neville proved to be a dreadful coach but he is a good pundit. That's the point. They are not the same thing.

[Buzz Fledderjohn]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

[Skewball]

I have never understood why people think a decent player can't be a great/good pundit. Whilst I think Mardle goes a bit OTT in his commentary style , his analysis can be very very good. Happens in loads of sports with no issues. Darts is no different, why would it be ?

I would have thought that most pros would be happy to have a coaching session with him if they were struggling.

[Buzz Fledderjohn]

I've no time for Mardle the commentator at all, but Mardle the analyst is worth listening to.

At the time when Mardle made his comments Cross was so far off from what he showed when he won the World Championship there was clearly something wrong / missing with his game.
Mardle gets paid to analyse and comment on things like that, and I don't recall him saying anything particularly controversial at the time.

[Murphio]

I've no time for Mardle the commentator at all, but Mardle the analyst is worth listening to.

At the time when Mardle made his comments Cross was so far off from what he showed when he won the World Championship there was clearly something wrong / missing with his game.
Mardle gets paid to analyse and comment on things like that, and I don't recall him saying anything particularly controversial at the time.

Totally agree - there isn't another darts commentator about who goes through the mechanics of a throw and what might he going wrong with it like Mardle does. If he doesn't understand it, he is a very good blagger.

[meetthefeebles]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

Again, as I have said elsewhere, I completely agree that Mardle is an 'expert' when it comes to darts. He was an elite level professional for at least a decade, making numerous major finals and semi-finals and competing well against the best player ever. He then spent the last decade in and around the game since his retirement and he has ever right to sit and talk about the mechanics of other players' throws etc.

As discussed above, it is possible that non-players are capable of being qualified to perform similar analysis and there are examples in other sports/games where non-elite level players are able to comment expertly on the mechanics of the game but they are rarer and there are almost no examples in darts.

Mardle is probably better qualified than 99% of people to comment authoritatively on other players' throwing actions. And I also agree that I much prefer his analysis to his commentary. I think his commentary is hideous.

But when he starts commenting on the throw of a player who has won far more than he did, including the two premier events in the PDC, then he is on shakier ground, because that player is perfectly entitled to ask why he should listen to someone telling him there is a problem with his throw when that person a. didn't win what he won and b. was noticeable as a player for having a hideous throw which regularly went wrong in big games.

Mardle is entitled to comment. But Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

[fling]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

Again, as I have said elsewhere, I completely agree that Mardle is an 'expert' when it comes to darts. He was an elite level professional for at least a decade, making numerous major finals and semi-finals and competing well against the best player ever. He then spent the last decade in and around the game since his retirement and he has ever right to sit and talk about the mechanics of other players' throws etc.

As discussed above, it is possible that non-players are capable of being qualified to perform similar analysis and there are examples in other sports/games where non-elite level players are able to comment expertly on the mechanics of the game but they are rarer and there are almost no examples in darts.

Mardle is probably better qualified than 99% of people to comment authoritatively on other players' throwing actions. And I also agree that I much prefer his analysis to his commentary. I think his commentary is hideous.

But when he starts commenting on the throw of a player who has won far more than he did, including the two premier events in the PDC, then he is on shakier ground, because that player is perfectly entitled to ask why he should listen to someone telling him there is a problem with his throw when that person a. didn't win what he won and b. was noticeable as a player for having a hideous throw which regularly went wrong in big games.

Mardle is entitled to comment. But Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

If Cross doesn't realise there is something wrong with his throw at present then pretty sure he is deluded.
I think Cross may do well to listen to Mardle's advice like a few other players have done.

[meetthefeebles]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

Again, as I have said elsewhere, I completely agree that Mardle is an 'expert' when it comes to darts. He was an elite level professional for at least a decade, making numerous major finals and semi-finals and competing well against the best player ever. He then spent the last decade in and around the game since his retirement and he has ever right to sit and talk about the mechanics of other players' throws etc.

As discussed above, it is possible that non-players are capable of being qualified to perform similar analysis and there are examples in other sports/games where non-elite level players are able to comment expertly on the mechanics of the game but they are rarer and there are almost no examples in darts.

Mardle is probably better qualified than 99% of people to comment authoritatively on other players' throwing actions. And I also agree that I much prefer his analysis to his commentary. I think his commentary is hideous.

But when he starts commenting on the throw of a player who has won far more than he did, including the two premier events in the PDC, then he is on shakier ground, because that player is perfectly entitled to ask why he should listen to someone telling him there is a problem with his throw when that person a. didn't win what he won and b. was noticeable as a player for having a hideous throw which regularly went wrong in big games.

Mardle is entitled to comment. But Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

If Cross doesn't realise there is something wrong with his throw at present then pretty sure he is deluded.
I think Cross may do well to listen to Mardle's advice like a few other players have done.

How many other former world champions have listened to Wayne Mardle's advice on how to improve their throw?

[meetthefeebles]

The way I look at it is this: how many of you would be pleased to hear unsolicited, unpaid for, publicly stated 'advice' on how to do your job better, provided by someone who used to do your job but not as well as you do it?

[Rout]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

This is the key point.

Mardle had been hired to do a job and critiquing players is part of his job. People can say there are better qualified people (and they'd be right) but that's not Mardles fault that someone decided he is the best man for it.

But part of that job of working in the media is to have much thicker skin when people criticise your criticism. If you dont want it back, then dont get a job in the media analysing darts.

[fling]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

Again, as I have said elsewhere, I completely agree that Mardle is an 'expert' when it comes to darts. He was an elite level professional for at least a decade, making numerous major finals and semi-finals and competing well against the best player ever. He then spent the last decade in and around the game since his retirement and he has ever right to sit and talk about the mechanics of other players' throws etc.

As discussed above, it is possible that non-players are capable of being qualified to perform similar analysis and there are examples in other sports/games where non-elite level players are able to comment expertly on the mechanics of the game but they are rarer and there are almost no examples in darts.

Mardle is probably better qualified than 99% of people to comment authoritatively on other players' throwing actions. And I also agree that I much prefer his analysis to his commentary. I think his commentary is hideous.

But when he starts commenting on the throw of a player who has won far more than he did, including the two premier events in the PDC, then he is on shakier ground, because that player is perfectly entitled to ask why he should listen to someone telling him there is a problem with his throw when that person a. didn't win what he won and b. was noticeable as a player for having a hideous throw which regularly went wrong in big games.

Mardle is entitled to comment. But Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

If Cross doesn't realise there is something wrong with his throw at present then pretty sure he is deluded.
I think Cross may do well to listen to Mardle's advice like a few other players have done.

How many other former world champions have listened to Wayne Mardle's advice on how to improve their throw?

So you are saying because Cross is an ex WC he shouldn't listen to advice to help him improve to get back to where he was.
If you compare his throw now to when he won the World Champs you can see that he is now more snatchy.

[meetthefeebles]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

Again, as I have said elsewhere, I completely agree that Mardle is an 'expert' when it comes to darts. He was an elite level professional for at least a decade, making numerous major finals and semi-finals and competing well against the best player ever. He then spent the last decade in and around the game since his retirement and he has ever right to sit and talk about the mechanics of other players' throws etc.

As discussed above, it is possible that non-players are capable of being qualified to perform similar analysis and there are examples in other sports/games where non-elite level players are able to comment expertly on the mechanics of the game but they are rarer and there are almost no examples in darts.

Mardle is probably better qualified than 99% of people to comment authoritatively on other players' throwing actions. And I also agree that I much prefer his analysis to his commentary. I think his commentary is hideous.

But when he starts commenting on the throw of a player who has won far more than he did, including the two premier events in the PDC, then he is on shakier ground, because that player is perfectly entitled to ask why he should listen to someone telling him there is a problem with his throw when that person a. didn't win what he won and b. was noticeable as a player for having a hideous throw which regularly went wrong in big games.

Mardle is entitled to comment. But Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

If Cross doesn't realise there is something wrong with his throw at present then pretty sure he is deluded.
I think Cross may do well to listen to Mardle's advice like a few other players have done.

How many other former world champions have listened to Wayne Mardle's advice on how to improve their throw?

So you are saying because Cross is an ex WC he shouldn't listen to advice to help him improve to get back to where he was.
If you compare his throw now to when he won the World Champs you can see that he is now more snatchy.

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that, if Cross wants advice, I'm sure he'll ask someone he wants it from to provide it. I'm also saying that if he wants to ignore the unsolicited advice of someone who once did the same thing as him but wasn't as good as it as he was, he's perfectly entitled to say publicly that he will ignore it.

As I asked above. Would you take the unsolicited advice of the person who did your job before you, but not as well, on how to improve your work? I wouldn't.

[meetthefeebles]

There's a bit of goalpost moving going on here.

The initial spat between Mardle and Cross (and by extension Cross fans on social media) had nothing to do with whether Mardle was a decent coach or not.
It was the tired old idea of "You aren't allowed to criticise, constructively or otherwise, any player who has won tournament X if you yourself have never won tournament X".
It's an argument which was endorsed by a mod on here when Devon Petersen was asked to give his opinion and proceeded to do so in a most respectful manner earlier this year.

Mardle may never have been a world champion, but not many people who played during the Taylor era were. It doesn't make his opinion invalid (an opinion he's paid to give). Some people are reacting like Mardle was nothing more than a pub chucker, or as if it was Laura Woods telling Cross how to throw a dart.

If Cross doesn't want to listen, fine. But there's nothing to be gained by throwing a hissy fit about it.

Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

This is the key point.

Mardle had been hired to do a job and critiquing players is part of his job. People can say there are better qualified people (and they'd be right) but that's not Mardles fault that someone decided he is the best man for it.

But part of that job of working in the media is to have much thicker skin when people criticise your criticism. If you dont want it back, then dont get a job in the media analysing darts.

Indeed. Mardle must know that, in taking the role he takes, that a tiny handful of players might take the view l, rightly it wrongly, that he isn't qualified to criticise what they do because it achievements indicate that they do it better than he did. This isn't an unusual state of affairs, it is why sports broadcasters, when hire ex-pros as analysts, try to hire the most successful ex-pros they can find.

Mardle is entitled to take the pay offered him by Sky. No-one can criticise him for that. They offered him a post that he wanted to take and he took it. No issues there. But if he decides to offer a detailed critique of players who have achieved more than him, and it is his choice to do that, then he had to be prepared for the possibility that they might not like it and might question his credibility in doing it. He then either defends his corner or he runs away. He ran away.

[fling]

Again, as I have said elsewhere, I completely agree that Mardle is an 'expert' when it comes to darts. He was an elite level professional for at least a decade, making numerous major finals and semi-finals and competing well against the best player ever. He then spent the last decade in and around the game since his retirement and he has ever right to sit and talk about the mechanics of other players' throws etc.

As discussed above, it is possible that non-players are capable of being qualified to perform similar analysis and there are examples in other sports/games where non-elite level players are able to comment expertly on the mechanics of the game but they are rarer and there are almost no examples in darts.

Mardle is probably better qualified than 99% of people to comment authoritatively on other players' throwing actions. And I also agree that I much prefer his analysis to his commentary. I think his commentary is hideous.

But when he starts commenting on the throw of a player who has won far more than he did, including the two premier events in the PDC, then he is on shakier ground, because that player is perfectly entitled to ask why he should listen to someone telling him there is a problem with his throw when that person a. didn't win what he won and b. was noticeable as a player for having a hideous throw which regularly went wrong in big games.

Mardle is entitled to comment. But Cross is entitled to respond and, when he did, for Mardle to run and hide was a bit soft imo.

If Cross doesn't realise there is something wrong with his throw at present then pretty sure he is deluded.
I think Cross may do well to listen to Mardle's advice like a few other players have done.

How many other former world champions have listened to Wayne Mardle's advice on how to improve their throw?

So you are saying because Cross is an ex WC he shouldn't listen to advice to help him improve to get back to where he was.
If you compare his throw now to when he won the World Champs you can see that he is now more snatchy.

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that, if Cross wants advice, I'm sure he'll ask someone he wants it from to provide it. I'm also saying that if he wants to ignore the unsolicited advice of someone who once did the same thing as him but wasn't as good as it as he was, he's perfectly entitled to say publicly that he will ignore it.

As I asked above. Would you take the unsolicited advice of the person who did your job before you, but not as well, on how to improve your work? I wouldn't.

But was Mardle giving advice or pointing out what was wrong with Cross's throw.

As for my job I would listen to suggestions and then do it the way I would have done it anyway.