TV View:  They just don't make those straws like they used to judging by the wispy, insubstantial fumbling that the rugby panel on Sky Sports was reduced to last Saturday. The studio was illuminated by the high-wattage grin of former All Black captain and hooker Sean Fitzpatrick both before and after the second Test match, writes John O'Sullivan.

It was almost possible to envisage Fitzpatrick standing before the mirror prior to going on air, desperately trying to remove the smug grin and corral as many platitudes as he could muster on behalf of the Lions. His musings were peppered with little nuggets of hope for the Lions, but he still struggled not to sound like a double-glazing salesperson.

Scott Quinnell manfully tried to inject some enthusiasm to proceedings and he thumbed through reasons why the Lions could level the series. It was a short pamphlet. Dewi Morris simply looked morose, fearing the worst beforehand and having those misgivings realised within a couple of hours in Wellington.

It was possible to imagine the producer imploring the two former internationals and ex-Lions players pre-show to present cogent arguments as to why the Lions could win and therefore justify to the skittish viewer a reason for climbing out of bed and watching the match rather than hiding under the bedcovers.

Quinnell displayed an appetite for the task, but that cheeky Morris grin was non-existent, his features taciturn. By the end of the transmission his demeanour suggested that an impending encounter with alcohol would be the prescribed antidote.

Studio anchor Simon Lazenby had tried to generate some pre-game momentum that suggested a match and even at half-time tried to maintain a pretence that we were watching a contest rather than the preamble to a rout.

Sky, in their inimitable fashion, had over-hyped the tour completely, and when faced with the fact the Lions were largely underachieving they were still required to run with the ball.

There would also have been some red faces at Sky Sports HQ with regard to the Brian O'Driscoll incident in the first Test.

The satellite broadcaster has a deserved reputation for providing comprehensive coverage of any sporting event they take on and usually have every angle covered, literally. The fact that they could not provide the definitive footage of O'Driscoll damaging his shoulder would have rankled not least because for all their pre-game rambling - it is extensive and strictly for those with a high boredom threshold - they didn't service the viewer adequately when the situation demanded.

Despite the fact that Quinnell, Morris and Fitzpatrick are all perfectly affable, there wasn't much out of the ordinary in terms of pre-game analysis; the latter owed more to Northern Hemisphere wishful thinking that anything than could be supported with hard evidence.

The pundits were also quick to play the blame game; consistently harping on about Clive Woodward's poorly conceived first Test selection and gameplan.

This was akin to shooting ducks in the bath. Constantly droning on about Woodward's inadequacies becomes a bit tiresome. The former England coach has given his critics plenty of rods with which to beat him.

He's made so many errors that it would require a documentary to unravel the shortcomings on a tour that has been an unmitigated disaster.

The studio analysts adopted funereal tones as they worked their way through one "Clive-ism" after another.

The problem for the viewer was that they weren't offering too many viable alternatives other than, in the case of Morris and Quinnell, to champion players of their own nationality. This was a demonstration of how to be subjective rather than objective and therefore an irritant: much like the team selection out in New Zealand.

Stuart Barnes's analysis was pretty sharp and he didn't put a tooth in it when calling the action. Miles Harrison is too effusive for this column, long on superlatives. By the time the match had concluded the series was neatly parcelled in favour of the All Blacks and the studio were left to celebrate a wonderful individual performance by Daniel Carter and a fine team performance.

Yet even provided with the evidence the panel couldn't bring themselves to utter what was patently obvious: the Lions don't have enough world-class players. And apart from the guy at Sky Sports who worries about viewing figures, the likely composition of the Lions team for the third Test was an irrelevancy on Saturday morning.