Bami V Barnes, British Light Welter title.

whicker · Post by **whicker** » 11 Mar 2008, 19:51

That was out of the blue! Didn't notice it was planned - should be a decent scrap, anyway.

Undercard looks-- typical for an undercard.

whicker · Post by **whicker** » 14 Mar 2008, 08:49

Anyone going? Seems like a decent enough match up.

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 14 Mar 2008, 08:54

im going watching Jono Rocco

should be a war - rematch both have the one blip so its 50/50

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 14 Mar 2008, 09:09

Judging by his last performance I didn't think Bami looked back to championship form. I would of thought a good mover like Barnes is the last thing Ted needs. It's a question of who can impose their style on the other most for me. Barnes had major problems with Okine and Bami's style and strength of punch is similar to his so a stoppage win for Ted can't be ruled out and Barnes' opposition since Okine has been nothing to shout about.

Tricky one. Lean towards Barnes' movement to cause Bami problems and pick up a points win.

n1ebf · Post by **n1ebf** » 14 Mar 2008, 13:52

lean toward Bami. only seen fleeting glimpses of him mind you.

Barnes was a welterweight 3 or 4 years ago aren't you meant to get heavier as you get older, if he could make LW why wasn't he doing it years ago and why change down after winning the title in with heavier guys.

Maybe he was just super talented and got away with boxing bigger blokes then came unstuck, maybe LW is his natural weight.......something about the whole thing doesn't seem right,

I started with an incling.....I finish without a fcking clue. Not the first time

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 14 Mar 2008, 15:55

If Barnes' head is right i tip him on points, but one decent Bami punch and he could crumble again into self destruct mode.

Spud · Post by **Spud** » 14 Mar 2008, 16:13

I agree with Steve on this - If "Smudgers" head is right and he has trained correctly then he wins the fight - I think Ted Bami has had his day.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 14 Mar 2008, 16:33

Again, sorry not a dig at you Spud, calls that a British fighter at freaking just turned 30 with just a highly inactive 23 fights over 10 years - and he is considered possibly over the hill?

Rediculous?

Sorry Spud, not a dig - just been hearing comments like this about other fighters from other posters (e.g. Carl Johanneson etc).

Why do our fighters going into the "faded" stage before anyone else.

People said that same about Ricky Hatton at 27 and Colin Lynes 2-3 years ago (oops!!).

Spud · Post by **Spud** » 14 Mar 2008, 16:39

Fair enough comment Stu

We will see tonight then.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 14 Mar 2008, 16:48

Spud wrote:Fair enough comment Stu

We will see tonight then.

If Bami loses, he was simply not good enough - not shot.

He put in one decent showing against an ill prepared Lauri who didn't know what to expect. Lauri aint no shakes.

Why cannot people just say - so and so lost because he is not good enough, not because he is past his prime. Ill prepared maybe is feasable, but shot or faded means irrespective of preparation.

As I said.. Colin Lynes.

ogii3 · Post by **ogii3** » 14 Mar 2008, 18:04

Someone Sopcast channel?

n1ebf · Post by **n1ebf** » 14 Mar 2008, 18:12

Barnes' tactic appears to me to be to stoop whenever they come together. I never thought you could do that. On top of that he is leaning back in the clinches with his head erratically........reminds me of when Klinnsman used to get "fouled" . The ref is buying the whole thing and Bami is not getting any rhythm going as a result. Disappointing affair if u ask me.

Spud · Post by **Spud** » 14 Mar 2008, 18:38

Delighted for Smudger.

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 14 Mar 2008, 18:40

bleddy ex squaddies

Romi · Post by **Romi** » 14 Mar 2008, 18:57

who won the fight?

Romi · Post by **Romi** » 14 Mar 2008, 18:57

who won the fight?

n1ebf · Post by **n1ebf** » 14 Mar 2008, 19:03

Romi wrote:who won the fight?

Barnes on points.

you're right search Barnes was better than Bami but the first 4 or 5 rounds he just stooped threw the jab and pretented to get headbutted, totally spoiled IMO. But if you wanna nitpick then sure, end of th eday Bami couldn't deal with it. And it was pleasing to see what the title meant to Barnes. He has more potential that Bami I would say.

what about Muttley's opponent, I thought they counted to ten for a reason. Guy stands up at 9 from a knockdown and does all the right things and it gets waved off. Home result.

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 14 Mar 2008, 20:14

Fecking hell a reasoned post from search for a change.

Didn't see the fight but thanks mate - I knew you had within you.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 14 Mar 2008, 20:31

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:
Romi wrote:who won the fight?
Barnes on points.

you're right search Barnes was better than Bami but the first 4 or 5 rounds he just stooped threw the jab and pretented to get headbutted, totally spoiled IMO. But if you wanna nitpick then sure, end of th eday Bami couldn't deal with it. And it was pleasing to see what the title meant to Barnes. He has more potential that Bami I would say.

what about Muttley's opponent, I thought they counted to ten for a reason. Guy stands up at 9 from a knockdown and does all the right things and it gets waved off. Home result.

Too true. I was shocked by Jim Watt's defence of it.

Since when are you counted out even if you rise clearly at nine looking perfectly fine to continue. His eyes were clear, he looked strong still, and he was willing to continue.

Watt i have a lot of time for, but he was talking shite there.

oscar · Post by **oscar** » 15 Mar 2008, 11:29

worst fight for this title for ages, i do not see barnes progressing past british level, as for bami no comment

Spud · Post by **Spud** » 15 Mar 2008, 12:23

oscar wrote:worst fight for this title for ages, i do not see barnes progressing past british level, as for bami no comment

A tadge harsh.

You are probably right about Smudger but at least he has won the title fair and square - and in comparison to some of his past performances I thought he did okay.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 15 Mar 2008, 15:11

What happened to Jamie Coyle as Mutley's opponent?

n1ebf · Post by **n1ebf** » 15 Mar 2008, 15:28

steve689 wrote:What happened to Jamie Coyle as Mutley's opponent?

Coyle boxed on the Mcintyre Anderson undercard about 1 or 2 weeks ago. Also he's LM whereas I believe YM is campaigning at LW this year.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 15 Mar 2008, 15:58

Maybe i'm naive but i never thought it wasn't going to be Coyle. Was that always just a rumour? I assumed it was cut and dried and he must have pulled out late through injury or something

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 17 Mar 2008, 10:17

Landslide win for Barnes. Did not appreciate his tactics one bit though. Another fight ruined by a referee who can't deal with boxers who employ excessive holding into their tactics

very frustrating to watch.

Re: Mutley's win. I could be wrong but from memory I think a boxer has to be standing at the count of 8 facing the referee and ready box on.

If this is the case, it begs the question...why have a count of ten?

Anyway, i think a lot of referees do their own thing...some will allow a boxer to continue if they are up at 9, some don't.

To me, Mutley's opponent look done for the night anyway and was showing weak resistence.