Just got my paper, Warren/Sheehan having a pop at Billy Grah

harrygreb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2341
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 05:02

Post by harrygreb »

warreeen is a promoter meaning he hasnt got a good enough eye for the subtleties of our sport. he paints with a broad brush. this is perfect for our tabloid loving brothers - the majority of boxing fans - who view boxing in the same way he does. its not for me, though.
hatton didnt carry out grahams good advice. why? i dont know, and warrreen certainly doesnt know. he can put on a good show sometimes though can frank
chinny
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1536
Joined: 18 Jun 2007, 09:33

Post by chinny »

Was surprised that warrens column didn't mention the Arthur fight though as as others have mentioned the whole point of it is to advertise his fights.
Jabby
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 79
Joined: 09 Nov 2003, 23:36

Post by Jabby »

Two points I'd like to make. After 41 years in boxing, these are the things that apply to the Hatton/Graham situation. They've been resolved in the same way many times during that period.

1. If Manchester has a bad year, do they fire the team or fire the manager? You do the logic. If Billy Graham were giving Ricky the absolute right solution to what Floyd was doing and Ricky wasn't listening, it's time to get someone that he will listen to.

2. There's no such thing as loyalty in pro sports. It's a business that attempts to maximize profits. Boxing is a ruthless business with brutal ramifications for failure. There's enormous money at stake. If a team feels that it can be improved by adding or replacing a team member, it will be done. This is NOT personal. Chemistry also must be accounted for. Ask Manny Steward and Jermaine Taylor about that.

These have been the modus operandi of boxing for the 41 years that I've been involved.
Post Reply