Now that the beeb has dropped boxing many people are saying it could weel sound the beginning of the end of the sport. Being bored at work the other day i gave this a bit of thought.
with the profile of boxing almost disappearing in the mind of the average joe punter in the street then it could be argued that in order to raise this profile and in an attempt to make themselves more money promoters large and small, will have to work harder at producing quality shows, featuring decent fighters in match ups we want to see.
Far from being the end of the game this could be a renaissance for the sport. More shows producing better quality fights to get punters through the door to maximise promotional pounds. The putting on of fights that people genuinlly want to see instead of the usual home fighter versus a.n other (ie what hatton is doing just now).
The onus is now on promoters, if they want to make money, to do the work themselves.After all at the risk of stating the obvious a promoters job is to promote. now they will have to do this without relying solely on tv to buy whatever rubbish they throw together. By putting on quality shows that get people in the street talking will raise the profile of boxing thus creating more interest.
After all boxing in this country survived 100 years without regular TV coverage. I appreciate that there were other factors in this survival but one of the main factors was that people saw fights that promoters knew thay had to put on, or they wouldnt make the money.
Whilst i dont think for a moment that we will see shows up and down the country on a regular basis as was the case in what many older folks refer to as the halcyon days of british boxing, i do think it may not all be doom and gloom. it may take a while but we may still get there yet.
So is this just wishful thinking? has tv opened a pandoras box which has marginalised boxing or do others think that maybe, in years to come this decision by the beeb could well have a silver lining?
Is the beeb dropping boxing necessarily a bad thing?
Some good insight there, however TV tends to inspire kids as Robin Reid once said - after Rocky is shown, loads of kids go to boxing clubs and fancy themselves as the new champion - many soon find out the reality, but others continue to train and then fight.
People will still go to football clubs to be the next Wayne Rooney etc, and I notice many kids hitting a tennis ball against a wall during the Wimbledon fortnight - what is there going to be for boxing.
I'm not saying the BBC coverage was a saviour, because it was on so late and was on the whole quite dire in format. However, I think the loss of boxing from ITV (when it was on prime time) has seen more clubs fold and less interest in the game from the kids.
People will still go to football clubs to be the next Wayne Rooney etc, and I notice many kids hitting a tennis ball against a wall during the Wimbledon fortnight - what is there going to be for boxing.
I'm not saying the BBC coverage was a saviour, because it was on so late and was on the whole quite dire in format. However, I think the loss of boxing from ITV (when it was on prime time) has seen more clubs fold and less interest in the game from the kids.
fair point but i dont think the fact that TV pulled out of boxing was a massive factor in clubs closing etc, banning it in schools, losing booths, the proliferation of other televised sports, a change in lifestyle for youngsters these days, new sports coming along etc etc have all played a part in clubs going to the wall.
Films like Rocky will always be shown and therefore theres always inspiration to be taken from that.
Children still had role models and idols before the advent of mass marketed televised boxing. When promoters done their job correctly and made fights the public wanted to see these were reported on radio and in the newspapers. People on the street would talk about them. Fighters were household despite the lack of TV coverage. Big fights, genuine fights generate their own excitement and thats what puts bums on seats.
If these type of fights are made people will still take an interest. that interest will develop and create more interest. Then a head of steam is produced. Suddenly we have a situation where people are going back to live shows again and gradually TV may become interested.
Im certainly not harking back to any kind of golden age and know fully that the world has changed. But if promoters want to stay in business then they must now have to put up or shut up.
Films like Rocky will always be shown and therefore theres always inspiration to be taken from that.
Children still had role models and idols before the advent of mass marketed televised boxing. When promoters done their job correctly and made fights the public wanted to see these were reported on radio and in the newspapers. People on the street would talk about them. Fighters were household despite the lack of TV coverage. Big fights, genuine fights generate their own excitement and thats what puts bums on seats.
If these type of fights are made people will still take an interest. that interest will develop and create more interest. Then a head of steam is produced. Suddenly we have a situation where people are going back to live shows again and gradually TV may become interested.
Im certainly not harking back to any kind of golden age and know fully that the world has changed. But if promoters want to stay in business then they must now have to put up or shut up.
Neil, again some good points - all I can say from a personal pospective. I know in the 90's 3 local clubs closed down (2 have just re-opened). Also, when I was growing up in the 80's, Rocky was still a relatively new movie and was shown on prime time TV - I can't remember the last time it was shown on Prime time.
You mention new sports coming through, why are they coming through - cause they had exposure from the media. Even if its segmants on a Saturday kids show it is still there.
I would say Boxing not being in schools may play a part, after all Kids tend to play seriously the sports they are good at, how can they find out if they are good at boxing in a suitable enviroment. However, Boxing has been barred from schools for years and the talent we had in the 80's and 90's (which was a good era) never boxed in their school.
As I have said before, when Boxing was on ITV it was an event - my mates would miss a night on the town to watch a good fight, it was talked about in schools - EVERYBODY new the likes of Hodkinson, McMillan, Robinson, Hamed etc - ask any kid to name British boxers, they would struggle - and they might half like the sport.
You mention new sports coming through, why are they coming through - cause they had exposure from the media. Even if its segmants on a Saturday kids show it is still there.
I would say Boxing not being in schools may play a part, after all Kids tend to play seriously the sports they are good at, how can they find out if they are good at boxing in a suitable enviroment. However, Boxing has been barred from schools for years and the talent we had in the 80's and 90's (which was a good era) never boxed in their school.
As I have said before, when Boxing was on ITV it was an event - my mates would miss a night on the town to watch a good fight, it was talked about in schools - EVERYBODY new the likes of Hodkinson, McMillan, Robinson, Hamed etc - ask any kid to name British boxers, they would struggle - and they might half like the sport.
The only possible good thing i can see from the BBC disappearing is that the talented fighters who's possible unifications/matchups were being marred by promotional differences may now be resolved. For example a talented fighter like Carl Froch is unlikely to stay with a promoter who cannot provide TV coverage the same as David Haye, Junior Witter etc so they are more likely to sign with a SKY promoter this making fights more feasible. The recent switch by Sprott/Williams to SKY and now Pickering/Cook opens a wider range of fights for the people mentioned. Let's face it how likely was Haye V Maccarinelli or Haye V Hobson when BBC showed his fights? Now if the better men sign with Hearn/Gilmour/Warren etc we are more likely to see the best fights than we were before.
Cheers mate, nah still alive. Unfortunately i had a massive virus on my PC which is still not fixed (i am using my neighbours torturously slow 56k at the mo!) and then i went on holiday to Greece so i have been none existant here. Can't wait to get back, watching the fights but not coming straight on and discussing them has been murder...damn that little shit somewhere out there who wrote the virus 
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 45229
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Haye is still fighting for the BBC for the time being, his next four will be shown on Beeb.
The lack of boxing on terrestrial TV will be a disaster, and you have to remember that despite all these great matchups, they will only be visible to those with Sky sports....
How can boxing attract new fans if it has no presence outside of those who have ALREADY subscribed to Sky sports.
The lack of boxing on terrestrial TV will be a disaster, and you have to remember that despite all these great matchups, they will only be visible to those with Sky sports....
How can boxing attract new fans if it has no presence outside of those who have ALREADY subscribed to Sky sports.
I think we boxing fans are just going to have to face facts. Boxing is too unreliable as a spectacle. Look at what we've had recently on tv:
"world class banger" Maccarinelli sensibly negates 12 rounds in a bore fest.
Reid v Magee had knockdowns but it was too scrappy to be thrilling.
Froch was boring last time out. So was Hatton.
Barrera clinical but essentially dull to the causal observer.
De La Hoya was in a good fight but who was Sturm? Hopkins was busy curing insomnia..
Last time we saw Roy Jones on tv he was awful.
Even Gatti is fighting safety first these days, Branco fight not exciting.
I know we've had good fights too but I think you've really got to be in love with this sport to give a shit about it at the moment.
"world class banger" Maccarinelli sensibly negates 12 rounds in a bore fest.
Reid v Magee had knockdowns but it was too scrappy to be thrilling.
Froch was boring last time out. So was Hatton.
Barrera clinical but essentially dull to the causal observer.
De La Hoya was in a good fight but who was Sturm? Hopkins was busy curing insomnia..
Last time we saw Roy Jones on tv he was awful.
Even Gatti is fighting safety first these days, Branco fight not exciting.
I know we've had good fights too but I think you've really got to be in love with this sport to give a shit about it at the moment.
-
glittermonkey
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 2658
- Joined: 28 Feb 2004, 18:03
I don’t see it as such a bad thing that the BBC has dropped boxing. I don’t think it was ever anything other than an attempt to cash in on an Olympic champion, and towards the end it was beginning to feel like a bit of a token gesture.
Because of the timeslot that boxing was given, it had little ability to improve its fanbase or popularity. A midnight start is just too late to bring in any younger fans. It seems to me that the BBC was only interested in bringing in the Saturday night drinkers, who want to see something less than taxing after a few jars. Few from this group are ever going to become boxing fans. They’re the most casual of casual supporters, if boxing’s on they’ll watch, if it isn’t then it’s no great loss. The only way the BBC could have done some real good for the sport was to give it a primetime slot. Obviously “Come Dancing” was more deserving.
I’d love to be able to share your view Neil, but I’m not that much of an optimist. Any promoter that’s not in it for the love of the game will try to find something more profitable. As for the rest, without TV coverage it’s a slow death, how can they make ends meet without TV or the revenue it brings in? I think that it’s up to the promoters who currently have their shows broadcast by sky to provide more competitive matches, or the sport could be marginalised still further. I can’t see sky continuing to pay the money they do now, if the standard doesn’t improve. It’s sad to say it, but because of his virtual monopoly, the future rests mainly with allegedly.
Because of the timeslot that boxing was given, it had little ability to improve its fanbase or popularity. A midnight start is just too late to bring in any younger fans. It seems to me that the BBC was only interested in bringing in the Saturday night drinkers, who want to see something less than taxing after a few jars. Few from this group are ever going to become boxing fans. They’re the most casual of casual supporters, if boxing’s on they’ll watch, if it isn’t then it’s no great loss. The only way the BBC could have done some real good for the sport was to give it a primetime slot. Obviously “Come Dancing” was more deserving.
I’d love to be able to share your view Neil, but I’m not that much of an optimist. Any promoter that’s not in it for the love of the game will try to find something more profitable. As for the rest, without TV coverage it’s a slow death, how can they make ends meet without TV or the revenue it brings in? I think that it’s up to the promoters who currently have their shows broadcast by sky to provide more competitive matches, or the sport could be marginalised still further. I can’t see sky continuing to pay the money they do now, if the standard doesn’t improve. It’s sad to say it, but because of his virtual monopoly, the future rests mainly with allegedly.