DartsNews Podcast | “Can you imagine if Luke Littler said that?” – Michael van Gerwen's fiery interview sparks double standard debate

Michael van Gerwen’s latest post-match interview has reignited a familiar debate in darts, but not for the reason many might expect. The words themselves were striking. The reaction to them, however, has raised an even bigger question. One debated on the latest episode of the DartsNews Podcast.

Speaking on the 5th instalment of the DartsNews Podcast, our regular team of expert hosts Kieran Wood and Nicolas Gayer unpacked the Dutchman’s comments after his win over Michael Unterbuchner in Sindelfingen. And as Wood put it: “Can you imagine if Luke Littler said that?”

The remarks came after a routine victory for Van Gerwen on the European Tour stage, but it was what followed, rather than the result itself, that quickly became the talking point.

Van Gerwen did not hold back in his assessment of Unterbuchner after their meeting at the European Darts Grand Prix. “He’s never beaten me. He will never beat me. He’s not good enough. Even my B game beats him. The day I worry about Michael Unterbuchner is the day I’ll quit darts.”

Blunt. Direct. Unmistakably Van Gerwen.

Yet rather than sparking widespread criticism, the reaction was relatively muted. As Wood highlighted on the podcast, context and perception appear to be doing much of the work. “The difference is, though, when Van Gerwen says it and he has that cheeky smile on his face, we laugh, don’t we? We take it as a joke,” he explained. “Can you imagine if Luke Littler said those exact words about an opponent he’d beaten?”

Gayer was quick to agree with the premise, pointing to a clear shift in how similar behaviour is received depending on who delivers it. “I think there’s so much truth in that,” he said. “If Van Gerwen says something like that in 2012, 2013, 2014, people would have gotten really mad at him. Back then he was the big opponent. He wasn’t liked as much as he is right now. And I think, as you said, if Luke Littler said something like that, we would be speaking about it very differently.”

The contrast is not just about personality. It is about where each player sits in the sport right now.

Van Gerwen, once the dominant force chasing down Phil Taylor’s legacy, is now viewed through a different lens. His recent dip from the very top has, in Gayer’s view, shifted how fans interpret moments like this. “I think right now, Michael van Gerwen is a bit like the legend who has dropped down the rankings a bit,” he explained. “When people are successful, they aren’t liked as much. And when they aren’t that successful anymore, they gain sympathy.”

That shift in perception allows comments that might once have been seen as arrogant to now be framed as part of the “MvG character”. Entertaining. Even welcome. “To be honest, I like to see Michael van Gerwen like that,” Gayer added. “In a phase where people are discussing whether he is still fully focused on darts, I think it’s good to see that kind of mindset and attitude.”

Wood, meanwhile, made clear that the issue is not the comments themselves, but the inconsistency in how they are received. “That wasn’t to jump on van Gerwen,” he said. “I think he was saying it with a wink, with a tongue in cheek. He’s enjoying life at the moment. My point is more that one player can say something and everyone says it’s a joke, it’s a laugh, and it gets brushed off. Another player says something and it becomes a media storm.”

The discussion ultimately returns to a broader question for the sport, and one that even those covering it are not immune from. “We’re as bad as other sites out there,” Wood admitted. “Our last podcast where we talked about Van Veen and Littler is our most viewed one.”

It is an acknowledgement that the spotlight around certain players does not just happen, it is amplified. Luke Littler, now the most visible and scrutinised figure in darts, operates under a different level of attention. Every comment, every reaction, every perceived slight is magnified.

Van Gerwen, by contrast, appears to benefit from experience, legacy, and shifting expectations. “It would have been a very different story if Luke Littler had decided to have a few words like that,” Gayer admitted.

And as Wood concluded, this is not unique to darts. “That’s just the whole of sport, isn’t it? Fans want the underdog to win rather than the all-conquering top dog.”

The difference now is that in Littler, darts may already have its next dominant figure. And if that is the case, the scrutiny that comes with it is unlikely to fade any time soon. Which only makes the original question all the more relevant.

If Luke Littler had said it, would people really have laughed?