Graham sues Ricky!

[HPI]

Alot of the PPV's for Hatton-PBF were sold off the back of the truly excellent 24/7 series IMO, which Graham played a BIG part in. Also did Ricky sacrifice some of his purse for the UK PPV rights? If so surely Graham deserves 'some' (not necessarily 10%) of that money

He didnt have to tho did he? Graham wanted to do this cause he loved the limelight, just like he loved the back slappers in vegas for the malignaggi fight, there was no reason for him to be there other than to have the fans suck up to him

it would seem with all these 24/7's hatton was shown very little, if it werent Graham in the mayweather one it was kayes on tv and for this last one, well it may as well of been the mayweather show

[HPI]

My point has always been that so many are quick to jump in and slag hatton by saying pay the man etc when they have no clue as to what has gone on.

Merely trying to even the debate out

Surely the man deserves paying something?

did he agree to train Hatton for nothing?

im sure that if the hattons are prepared to stand up in court they must have paid him for services rendered

[Spud]

My point has always been that so many are quick to jump in and slag hatton by saying pay the man etc when they have no clue as to what has gone on.

Merely trying to even the debate out

Surely the man deserves paying something?

did he agree to train Hatton for nothing?

im sure that if the hattons are prepared to stand up in court they must have paid him for services rendered

Maybe so!!

[Chambers2]

Alot of the PPV's for Hatton-PBF were sold off the back of the truly excellent 24/7 series IMO, which Graham played a BIG part in. Also did Ricky sacrifice some of his purse for the UK PPV rights? If so surely Graham deserves 'some' (not necessarily 10%) of that money

He didnt have to tho did he? Graham wanted to do this cause he loved the limelight, just like he loved the back slappers in vegas for the malignaggi fight, there was no reason for him to be there other than to have the fans suck up to him

it would seem with all these 24/7's hatton was shown very little, if it werent Graham in the mayweather one it was kayes on tv and for this last one, well it may as well of been the mayweather show

Freddie Roach had a BIG part as well as did Floyd and Roger Mayweather in the RH-PBF 24/7 series, so it wasn't exclusive to the Hatton camp.

[hurlock]

bottom line is they had a marrage & ricky broke it.46 fights under graham is a good lenghty career
personally i think graham is a ponce & a bumhole & couldnt careless for him, but am dissapointed hatton has turnt on him.

[Spud]

I find all of this very very strange indeed - mainly because there are 2 paricular bits of Ricky's first book which bring things home just a tadge and of course I am merely stating my opinion:

The first piece I am getting confused at is in the acknolwedgements of "Ricky Hatton - The Hitman - My Story":

Thanks not only to my professional coach but my very close friend Billy Graham. We have always had more than a boxing and business relationship. From day one to the current day you've been a real friend. In all the years you have trained me we've never needed a single contract, it has always been nothing but a handshake and that is the respect we have each other, not only as boxing people, but as mates. You've been with me every step of the way on this rollercoaster, and what a ride it's been, and it isn't over yet! Words cannot describe how much you mean to meand how grateful I am for what you've done."

I then get further confused at the following - again taken from "Ricky Hatton - The Hitman - My Story" - its on page 53:

Billy and I have a very unusual relationship in boxing. We have never had a contract between us and there will never be one. We don't need one. We don't really do anything by the book.

Let me explain my confusion - if the above is true - up until and including the Castillo fight - if the rumours are true Billy and Ricky had the same verbal agreement and shook on things as eluded in the above pieces taken from Ricky's book - if then whoever wanted to renegoitiate things for the Mayweather fight onwards - then surely it would have been most prudent of Team Hatton especially as they have a lawyer as their CEO they would have put something in writing as it was a very clear change of direction from the long standing arrangement between the Hatton/Graham arrangement.

Law is very very strange indeed and to us people that are not familiar to it what seems completely ok may not be the case - if however I was the judge - I know who I would be ruling for - you cannot prove or otherwise verbal contracts - thus all you have to go on is what has gone on in the fighter and trainers career until the point of dispute??

Am I simplifying things in my simple little world too much

[hurlock]

bottom line is they had a marrage & ricky broke it.46 fights under graham is a good lenghty career
personally i think graham is a ponce & a bumhole & couldnt careless for him, but am dissapointed hatton has turnt on him.

hatton was the last fighter to leave him, if my memory serves me correctly. no trainer is worth ten percent of a fighters purse when they are earning 10/15 million, they really should have had a contract in place, its a shame such a good relationship has come to this.

id agree on you with,a coach like mayweather who just takes the cream.

your opinion anger's me to a degree, when you get trainers losing money,losing family time to help a boxer pursue his dreams,it's a partnership.
a fighter gets a purse of a grand & gives the trainer a longun its pittance,so once the fighters money goes up so does the trainers.
we have read on this site fighters leaving trainers 4 not enough one on one.

[Spud]

If a boxer and trainer are together since day one normally there is no change in the overall mechanics of a contract.

If a percentage is agreed at the beginning of a boxers career you have to remember something - in the early stages sometimes a fighter can earn only something like £1000 - £3000 a fight - if the trainers split is 10% that is a very small payback to travel the length and bredth of the country especially if the fighter does not progress.

If you are a trainer of a fighter who gets to World Championship level and then a step further into super stardom level - its a bit like winning the lottery - you have spent years of getting 10% or whatever of very little purses - at this stage remember how often a fighter actually fights and thus if your boxer is not a superstar and on superstars wages you are going to get very little payback.

I will state again if you get to superstar level its a bit like winning the lottery and thus that doesn't happen very often - as such if your fighter gets there you deserve every luck in the world and thus reap the benefits that comes with that fighter.

[Spud]

im not saying he shouldn't pay him well, off course he should. but i think half a million is fine, for 12 weeks work at a time. it isn't a full time job, and ricky takes all the risks. how much does roach get of manny? how much does rmw get of pbf? what does dlh pay?

What about the years and years of the sh*t fight fees and thus even smaller money for the trainer.

Set fees that are normally heard of in America is when a fighter is bought in for a fight by fight contract.

[Scrap]

Spud is spot on, those who say the trainer doesnt take the Knocks, havent a clue

[Spud]

hatton was earning decent money for years selling out the m.e.n, graham is hardly a pauper is he? the biggest problem is the lack of a contract, but if he agreed 10% before the fights he should pay him. but i dont think graham is worth 10% of 10/15 million pound.

Whether Billy Graham is wealthy or not has absolutely no relevance to this at all - NONE.

Whether people feel sorry for Billy Graham or Ricky Hatton in this saga also has absolutely no relevance.

Whether people think Billy Graham was worth the money also has absolutely no relevance.

The Judge will be asking what percentage was Billy Graham being paid - the clear rumours I am hearing is that it was something like 10%, this happenened up until the Castillo fight.

When Hatton left Fight Academy and decided to go with Golden Boy Promotions - this is where the confusion is - as it seems and please correct me if I am wrong there seems to have been a "set fee" arranged for both the Mayweather fight and the Lazacano one. Now due to the lack of written contracts the judge will have to decide if there was a change in the "verbal arrangement" which seems to have stood for a few years why on earth to ensure there was no confusion why something was not put in writing - now the judge may think both parties are at fault for this - I ACTUALLY THINK THEY ARE - however my opinion counts for f*ck all - but the judge may have to lay the blame at the door of the party who has made the change after having the same arrangement for so many years as there is no written evidence and if that is the case - Billy Graham could win this case.

Come on lawyers on here - there are plenty of you - what is the position here ??

[Carbo]

hatton was earning decent money for years selling out the m.e.n, graham is hardly a pauper is he? the biggest problem is the lack of a contract, but if he agreed 10% before the fights he should pay him. but i dont think graham is worth 10% of 10/15 million pound.

Whether Billy Graham is wealthy or not has absolutely no relevance to this at all - NONE.

Whether people feel sorry for Billy Graham or Ricky Hatton in this saga also has absolutely no relevance.

Whether people think Billy Graham was worth the money also has absolutely no relevance.

The Judge will be asking what percentage was Billy Graham being paid - the clear rumours I am hearing is that it was something like 10%, this happenened up until the Castillo fight.

When Hatton left Fight Academy and decided to go with Golden Boy Promotions - this is where the confusion is - as it seems and please correct me if I am wrong there seems to have been a "set fee" arranged for both the Mayweather fight and the Lazacano one. Now due to the lack of written contracts the judge will have to decide if there was a change in the "verbal arrangement" which seems to have stood for a few years why on earth to ensure there was no confusion why something was not put in writing - now the judge may think both parties are at fault for this - I ACTUALLY THINK THEY ARE - however my opinion counts for f*ck all - but the judge may have to lay the blame at the door of the party who has made the change after having the same arrangement for so many years as there is no written evidence and if that is the case - Billy Graham could win this case.

Come on lawyers on here - there are plenty of you - what is the position here ??

Bugger me... Spud has just summed up the salient points of this matter in a well written, concise post.

I have nothing to add.

[HPI]

hatton was earning decent money for years selling out the m.e.n, graham is hardly a pauper is he? the biggest problem is the lack of a contract, but if he agreed 10% before the fights he should pay him. but i dont think graham is worth 10% of 10/15 million pound.

Whether Billy Graham is wealthy or not has absolutely no relevance to this at all - NONE.

Whether people feel sorry for Billy Graham or Ricky Hatton in this saga also has absolutely no relevance.

Whether people think Billy Graham was worth the money also has absolutely no relevance.

The Judge will be asking what percentage was Billy Graham being paid - the clear rumours I am hearing is that it was something like 10%, this happenened up until the Castillo fight.

When Hatton left Fight Academy and decided to go with Golden Boy Promotions - this is where the confusion is - as it seems and please correct me if I am wrong there seems to have been a "set fee" arranged for both the Mayweather fight and the Lazacano one. Now due to the lack of written contracts the judge will have to decide if there was a change in the "verbal arrangement" which seems to have stood for a few years why on earth to ensure there was no confusion why something was not put in writing - now the judge may think both parties are at fault for this - I ACTUALLY THINK THEY ARE - however my opinion counts for f*ck all - but the judge may have to lay the blame at the door of the party who has made the change after having the same arrangement for so many years as there is no written evidence and if that is the case - Billy Graham could win this case.

Come on lawyers on here - there are plenty of you - what is the position here ??

By that token, do you think it will make a difference what Grahams input was? in the early years no doubt he put 100% into the training of Hatton, the same which cannot be said of the last few training camps

[big lennox]

Broadly speaking, I just think it is a real shame that it has finnished like this. For a long time they were a fantastic team and ddi extremely well, and whilst partnerships do come to end sometimes, it is very sad that they are no longer mates.I hope that changes.

[twenty six]

There is no "position" Spudster.
The Civil Courts in situations like this are difficult to predict.
All comes down to the day in Court - and therein lies the problem.
It's often not about the disputed amount sued for - it's about costs against risk.
That's why these matters are often settled in the corridor.
Have you any idea for instance what the anticipated costs are on both sides should this matter proceed to a hearing ?
They would proably allocate a week for it.
Scary figures mate, scary figures.

[stujones]

Agreed and Signed are two different things. It will be a very straight forward case. Whatever Graham SIGNED for he will get paid.

If he signed nothing - then he will get paid that.

[Loynesy]

Thats not quite true Stu - if Graham can demonstrate a binding oral agreement, he's perfectly entitled to his money.

None of us know enough of the facts to make anything other than a guess of the correct legal position.

[stujones]

Thats not quite true Stu - if Graham can demonstrate a binding oral agreement, he's perfectly entitled to his money.

None of us know enough of the facts to make anything other than a guess of the correct legal position.

I'm sure we will find out.... a binding oral agreement is a tough one to have, hasn't it got to be evidenced as such (e.g. dictophone?).

[Spud]

Agreed and Signed are two different things. It will be a very straight forward case. Whatever Graham SIGNED for he will get paid.

If he signed nothing - then he will get paid that.

WRONG, WRONG & WRONG.

You are barking way way up the wrong tree.

The verbal agreement between Hatton & Graham was a long standing one - an agreed percentage was paid for quite a considerable time - like I have stated until the Mayweather fight - where it is disputed a set fee/percentage was then agreed for further fights - this is being hotly disputed.

The onus I think you will find is not on Billy Graham - but actually Team Hatton to prove in writing that they have changed what was a long standing agreement.

It is very very strange indeed for a boxer/trainer percentage fee to be changed later in a boxers career precisely for the reason it is not until a fighter gets to superstar status that he is on very eye catching money and lets face it - the odds are similar to winning the lottery!!!!

Can The Hatton's prove they changed a long standing agreement albeit verbal was changed between Graham and Ricky!!!

[stujones]

Well Warren vs Calzaghe was a very straight forward case made into a mountain on here.

[Spud]

Well Warren vs Calzaghe was a very straight forward case made into a mountain on here.

Open your eyes and re-read the my posts - whilst there are some similarities to W arren/Calzaghe - in this case Hatton and Graham had a long standing arrangement which has suddenly changed - thus the onus of proof may just may fall on the Hatton's.

[stujones]

Well Warren vs Calzaghe was a very straight forward case made into a mountain on here.

Open your eyes and re-read the my posts - whilst there are some similarities to W arren/Calzaghe - in this case Hatton and Graham had a long standing arrangement which has suddenly changed - thus the onus of proof may just may fall on the Hatton's.

Which will still make it a straight forward case. I didn't mean who needs to prove what. It will be all down to the contracts. If its team Hatton who need to show it has been changed - then they will need to show it... if they can't Graham wins.

If they can... Hatton wins. It will really be that straight forward in the courts. The court of law isn't going to care about who has the morale standing, and who has been shafted, treated badly etc. It will all be about contracts and/or binding verbal agreements. It will be solved VERY quickly and straight forward.

Unless of course "team Hatton" go through a name change... supposing they lose.

[Scrap]

Just out of interest, I wonder what the Boards Take is on this. Id be interested to know DD

[twenty six]

Stu,
The law on Contract is a minefield.
Trust me there is no such thing as a straightforward civil action on this subject.
The three major elements of the law on Contract are Offer, Acceptence, and Consideration.
I'm not even going to begin to go into detail - I still have work to do !
You are deluding yourself if you think this particular case will be straighforward.
I invited Spudster to guess the anticipated costs in the event of a hearing.
If it goes that far this case will be listed for 5 days minimum - seriously.

[twenty six]

Scrap,
I find it very sad that the Board simply will not get involved in this issue.
I doubt they will even express an opinion for fear of it being construed as bias pre trial.
I'm no expert on the rules book (but if you dont know the rules book then we're all in the shit !) but I'm sure that it is devoid of specifics on Boxer / Trainer contracts - but goes into great detail on Boxer / Manager / Promotor contracts and regs.
I think I 'm also right in saying that any Board adjudication can be overridden in the Courts anyway.