What about this for a charmless feckker?

DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by DavidPayne »

http://www.metro.us/us/article/2009/07/ ... /index.xml

I'm not sure whether to write to him or not.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Autobarn »

thank you for showing me this contribution to the literature of boxing
Chambers2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6499
Joined: 24 Feb 2004, 07:24

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Chambers2 »

DavidPayne wrote:http://www.metro.us/us/article/2009/07/ ... /index.xml

I'm not sure whether to write to him or not.
He somehow tries to prove boxings demise by the reaction of the media to Gattis death, basically the journo is a bell end
Adamj1987
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5400
Joined: 14 Oct 2008, 16:16

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Adamj1987 »

If Mike Tyson’s not involved, boxing stories have no pulse — even when death is in the room. The biggest boxing story this year might just be Iron Mike’s cameo in “The Hangover.”
fool, its this kind of thing that makes people think "no-one cares about boxing then why should i"
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by DavidPayne »

here we go.

can we have boxrec.com/qualifiers - where a panel of judges, in a Dragons Den format, can approve topic titles before they're posted.

The judges can select and appoint themselves as the protectors of the boxrec community at large.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Autobarn »

"boxing has no pulse, even when there is death in the room"

where the eff did they get this buffoon?
Asterix
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7128
Joined: 02 Nov 2007, 10:42

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Asterix »

Chris Baldwin is obviously a bit stupid. Let's just leave him alone in the corner nibbling on Boxing Magazine.
Poncey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7525
Joined: 21 May 2007, 07:48

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Poncey »

DavidPayne wrote:here we go.

can we have boxrec.com/qualifiers - where a panel of judges, in a Dragons Den format, can approve topic titles before they're posted.

The judges can select and appoint themselves as the protectors of the boxrec community at large.
I don't like it. I'm out.
Spud
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Spud »

What a stupid ****!!!
Punchy Joe
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 319
Joined: 25 Feb 2007, 10:17

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Punchy Joe »

And that's journalism...............F*ck me
Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Finn »

The guy who wrote that is an idiot. Gatti is legend to boxing fans, but not the the mass public thats why it didnt make big news. That fools trying to say boxing is nothing compared to golf because if tiger woods had been murdered it would have been front page news.
Spud
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Spud »

If nothing else the journalist should hang his head in shame to mock a sport on the back of someones death - it really is a disgusting report - and entices me to dislike journalists even more than usual!!!
banjo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 26448
Joined: 20 Nov 2007, 03:17

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by banjo »

He must have gone to the Kelvin Mckenzie school of journalism, chat a load of bollocks to get your name known.
bennie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15244
Joined: 15 Nov 2002, 09:53

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by bennie »

Well, he's right in a horribly blunt way. Boxing is a minority sport and barely draws a line in the quality papers. Gatti's death, Arguello's death - not a line. Did Walter Dipley shoot Ketchel in the back? Oh yes.
McCannW14
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 501
Joined: 05 Dec 2007, 17:57

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by McCannW14 »

DavidPayne wrote:http://www.metro.us/us/article/2009/07/ ... /index.xml

I'm not sure whether to write to him or not.
Why bother? He is the one who is irrelevant.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by DavidPayne »

bennie wrote:Well, he's right in a horribly blunt way. Boxing is a minority sport and barely draws a line in the quality papers. Gatti's death, Arguello's death - not a line. Did Walter Dipley shoot Ketchel in the back? Oh yes.
Didn't Arguello make the obituaries in broadsheets?
bennie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15244
Joined: 15 Nov 2002, 09:53

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by bennie »

DavidPayne wrote:
bennie wrote:Well, he's right in a horribly blunt way. Boxing is a minority sport and barely draws a line in the quality papers. Gatti's death, Arguello's death - not a line. Did Walter Dipley shoot Ketchel in the back? Oh yes.
Didn't Arguello make the obituaries in broadsheets?
One sincerely hopes so, but Gatti is the one. Man, a famous fighter, one of the bravest, strongest, wildest, craziest, most exciting fighters the game has ever seen, strangled to death (allegedly) by his wife's bloody purse straps, a sexy former stripper! This is a big story (to the red top newspapers).
Instead, we hear about Flintoff's dicky knee.
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by oliverfennell »

bennie wrote:
DavidPayne wrote:
bennie wrote:Well, he's right in a horribly blunt way. Boxing is a minority sport and barely draws a line in the quality papers. Gatti's death, Arguello's death - not a line. Did Walter Dipley shoot Ketchel in the back? Oh yes.
Didn't Arguello make the obituaries in broadsheets?
One sincerely hopes so, but Gatti is the one. Man, a famous fighter, one of the bravest, strongest, wildest, craziest, most exciting fighters the game has ever seen, strangled to death (allegedly) by his wife's bloody purse straps, a sexy former stripper! This is a big story (to the red top newspapers).
Instead, we hear about Flintoff's dicky knee.
Bennie, please. This is non-boxing. Since when has murder and strippers had a place on this forum?
bennie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15244
Joined: 15 Nov 2002, 09:53

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by bennie »

I DID mention red tops, son. You a proofreader, an' all.
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by oliverfennell »

Yes, but THIS is a boxing forum.
ERIC GUY
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1656
Joined: 30 Jan 2009, 21:13

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by ERIC GUY »

gatti was a boxer, so its boxing related!!!
Khaosai-Galaxy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Khaosai-Galaxy »

bennie wrote:
DavidPayne wrote:
bennie wrote:Well, he's right in a horribly blunt way. Boxing is a minority sport and barely draws a line in the quality papers. Gatti's death, Arguello's death - not a line. Did Walter Dipley shoot Ketchel in the back? Oh yes
Didn't Arguello make the obituaries in broadsheets?
One sincerely hopes so, but Gatti is the one. Man, a famous fighter, one of the bravest, strongest, wildest, craziest, most exciting fighters the game has ever seen, strangled to death (allegedly) by his wife's bloody purse straps, a sexy former stripper! This is a big story (to the red top newspapers).
Instead, we hear about Flintoff's dicky knee.
Bennie, please. This is non-boxing. Since when has murder and strippers had a place on this forum?
Since i started posting?
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by oliverfennell »

ERIC GUY wrote:gatti was a boxer, so its boxing related!!!
As is Kevin Mitchell. The point is Bennie complained that there was a thread about Mitchell being done for drink-driving, saying it was "non-boxing".
Wake up call
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1178
Joined: 10 Feb 2008, 11:10

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Wake up call »

Did any one else notice the disclaimer?

Metro does not endorse the views of its authors or opinions expressed on its pages

What a cop out.
Captain Hook
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4730
Joined: 07 May 2007, 09:40

Re: What about this for a charmless feckker?

Post by Captain Hook »

DavidPayne wrote:http://www.metro.us/us/article/2009/07/ ... /index.xml

I'm not sure whether to write to him or not.
I'm going to write to the pompus pudendum, I hate these type of 'journalists'

No style, no substance.......bloated waffle and misdirected attitude
Post Reply