The Mitchell Haters

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 23 Sep 2004, 12:36

glittermonkey wrote:Britain needs talented, marketable fighters, but (and this is just me) i'd hate to see success for our boxers come on the back of fouls, and poor sportsmanship.

There's no doubt there is a very unsporting nature about Kevin Mitchell's contests from start to finish. I wanted that Hungarian lad to really stick one on him last time.

But there's definitely room for a bully in British boxing IMO, especially one that could potentially progress beyond domestic level.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 23 Sep 2004, 12:46

Mitchell is just a con on the public.... look for him to pick up some WBFUCK title and defend it against a long line of smaller and older guys in the good ole Ricky Hatton tradition.

lirva33 · Post by **lirva33** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:06

REAL_DEAL wrote:Sky have been screwing fans for years and costs us some of the biggest matches out there in this day and age of boxing. Video sellers would have hatton - witter 2 in their collection if it wasnt for SKY.

lol...

I think read deal has said that line about 100 times now. "Sky have been screwing the fans for years".

And of course Hattons cowardice dowsn't have anything to do with the Witter fight...

Mitchell's arrogance and being-a-knob behaviour would be tolerable if he was beating up on top even top 10 british rated fighters or maybe top 5, but at the level he's at, he looks like a complete and utter prize 1 tit. I look forward to seeing him KTFO. I hope it happens by one of the bums he fights and he gets pummeled on the canvas while he is down... but thats just me.

kevin · Post by **kevin** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:15

lirva33 wrote:
REAL_DEAL wrote:Sky have been screwing fans for years and costs us some of the biggest matches out there in this day and age of boxing. Video sellers would have hatton - witter 2 in their collection if it wasnt for SKY.

lol...

I think read deal has said that line about 100 times now. "Sky have been screwing the fans for years".

Yes Real Deal this personal crusade against Sky sports is becoming a bit boring now!

lirva33 · Post by **lirva33** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:34

Kevin wrote:
lirva33 wrote:
REAL_DEAL wrote:Sky have been screwing fans for years and costs us some of the biggest matches out there in this day and age of boxing. Video sellers would have hatton - witter 2 in their collection if it wasnt for SKY.

lol...

I think read deal has said that line about 100 times now. "Sky have been screwing the fans for years".
Yes Real Deal this personal crusade against Sky sports is becoming a bit boring now!

The BBC can also do no wrong, according to Mr. Deal

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:44

Kevin wrote:
lirva33 wrote:
REAL_DEAL wrote:Sky have been screwing fans for years and costs us some of the biggest matches out there in this day and age of boxing. Video sellers would have hatton - witter 2 in their collection if it wasnt for SKY.

lol...

I think read deal has said that line about 100 times now. "Sky have been screwing the fans for years".
Yes Real Deal this personal crusade against Sky sports is becoming a bit boring now!

so are their boxing cards

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:45

I'm with REAL DEAL on his anti-Sky mission (even though he does want hunting with dogs to be banned

). All TV should be free. The broadcasters should charge more for advertising slots.

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:45

lirva33 wrote:
Kevin wrote:
lirva33 wrote:
lol...

I think read deal has said that line about 100 times now. "Sky have been screwing the fans for years".
Yes Real Deal this personal crusade against Sky sports is becoming a bit boring now!
BBC have a few things wrong with them, but tomorrow card is another good one.
The BBC can also do no wrong, according to Mr. Deal

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:50

FlawedGenius wrote:I'm with REAL DEAL on his anti-Sky mission (even though he does want hunting with dogs to be banned ). All TV should be free. The broadcasters should charge more for advertising slots.

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 23 Sep 2004, 14:55

Sky just need to demand more bigger fights. i dont remember seein mismatches everyweek on ITV.

wisdomtooth · Post by **wisdomtooth** » 23 Sep 2004, 17:11

Mitchell and Arthur, separated at birth. Both cannot keep a coach , cause they know better. Who would want to work with a couple of prima donnas like them. Mitchell will soon look for coach no.3 as Arthur moves on to 103.
Mitchell will end up taking a doing and blaming it on a dodgy virus, as they
really think they are superstars.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 23 Sep 2004, 17:18

I posted what I thought of Kevin Mitchell a while ago and haven't changed those views. He is part of a marketing strategy who is going nowhere in genuine world terms. The way he is 'developing' he'll be lucky to go past the British title. He is a dead cert for a WBU title, however that is a bogus belt/organization which really means fornicate all to anyone apart from UK chav fans.

About his attitude: yes, he comes across as a right pudendum, but that isn't the real problem. The young Benitez also appeared quite thick* to me in interviews, yet watch the maturity he boxes Antonio Cervantes with at only 17... that is how a real young prospect should be - you don't have to be educated and scholarly, boxing maturity is most important. Mitchell lacks this.

*I'll hold full judgement till I know Spanish and can understand interviews in his native tongue.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 24 Sep 2004, 06:41

Abolish all hunting!!!.... what gives humans the right to hunt animals for pleasure???........ or to inflict any pain or discomfort upon any animal?.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 24 Sep 2004, 06:44

wisdomtooth wrote:Mitchell and Arthur, separated at birth. Both cannot keep a coach , cause they know better. Who would want to work with a couple of prima donnas like them. Mitchell will soon look for coach no.3 as Arthur moves on to 103.
Mitchell will end up taking a doing and blaming it on a dodgy virus, as they
really think they are superstars.

Yeah, and in reality they are both bully boys who will never reach the higher level. Arthur has been exposed and so will Mitchell if he is ever allowed to fight someone with a heartbeat!.

Raff The Frenchman · Post by **Raff The Frenchman** » 24 Sep 2004, 07:30

well, he didnt look so talented against the humble N'dou...i would like to see him against Gatti, that would be a great matchup !

J · Post by J » 24 Sep 2004, 07:37

Raff The Frenchman wrote:well, he didnt look so talented against the humble N'dou...i would like to see him against Gatti, that would be a great matchup !

what are you on about?

right with you there silkov on the animal front its disgusting.

Raff The Frenchman · Post by **Raff The Frenchman** » 24 Sep 2004, 07:41

err im not quite sure to understand what you are saying...

J · Post by J » 24 Sep 2004, 07:42

sorry Raff that was a bit rude I apologise I think you are getitng Kevin and Sharmba mitchell confused, sorry mate should be more forthecoming.

Raff The Frenchman · Post by **Raff The Frenchman** » 24 Sep 2004, 07:49

err yes indeed sorry i thought it was a Sharmba Mitchell topic here...my bad

DIRT SUGAR · Post by **DIRT SUGAR** » 24 Sep 2004, 08:04

silkov wrote:Abolish all hunting!!!.... what gives humans the right to hunt animals for pleasure???........ or to inflict any pain or discomfort upon any animal?.

Yeah... damn right.... uuuhhh... but boxing's okay isn't it?

J · Post by J » 24 Sep 2004, 08:10

DIRT SUGAR wrote:
silkov wrote:Abolish all hunting!!!.... what gives humans the right to hunt animals for pleasure???........ or to inflict any pain or discomfort upon any animal?.
Yeah... damn right.... uuuhhh... but boxing's okay isn't it?

difference being people can choose wheter they want to box or not, and if they dont want to they dont have to, animals dont choose whether they wish to be chased for 14 fuckin miles and torn apart by a pack of dogs in the name of so called fornicating sport.

If it means that much to em I say one of the toffs should volunteer to be smeared in bacon and fornicating hunted accorss the landscape and torn to peices, world would be a better place.

As for these pricks who keep causing trouble half of em dont care anyway, its just afront so they can go and have a ruck. Spray the fuckers with iodine see what they gotta say when they go into work the next day and their boss asks em where theyve been and why the look the way they do.

See how many protesters turn up then looking for a fight.

back t boxing no worries raff thought you were ! happens mate. in fact I was waffling on about froch i/o mitchell on this very same thread!!!!

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 24 Sep 2004, 09:02

J wrote:
DIRT SUGAR wrote:
silkov wrote:Abolish all hunting!!!.... what gives humans the right to hunt animals for pleasure???........ or to inflict any pain or discomfort upon any animal?.
Yeah... damn right.... uuuhhh... but boxing's okay isn't it?
difference being people can choose wheter they want to box or not, and if they dont want to they dont have to, animals dont choose whether they wish to be chased for 14 fuckin miles and torn apart by a pack of dogs in the name of so called fornicating sport.

If it means that much to em I say one of the toffs should volunteer to be smeared in bacon and fornicating hunted accorss the landscape and torn to peices, world would be a better place.

As for these pricks who keep causing trouble half of em dont care anyway, its just afront so they can go and have a ruck. Spray the fuckers with iodine see what they gotta say when they go into work the next day and their boss asks em where theyve been and why the look the way they do.

See how many protesters turn up then looking for a fight.

I'm no private school toff, don't own a horse or a silly bugle. But I bet my dogs kill more animals each year than most of those hooray Henry hunts put together.

There is a genuine need to keep the fox population under control. I put my dogs down a hole and they kill, if the fox bolts, I shoot it. Unlike the horsey brigade I have a pretty high hunt:kill ratio. I don't believe I'm doing anything wrong.

There is a genuine need to keep the fox population under control. Whilst I readily admit I enjoy terriering, I do perform a neccesary role. The fact it's a hobby is irrelevant.

My other pursuit, hare coursing, is another thing that will be lost. On the face of it I can see how this sport may appear cruel. The truth is though, a healthy hare can always out manouvere a dog. The only hares that get caught are ones that for a number of reasons are not 100%. Coursing helps ensure a healthy hare population by killing off the weak. I hope you can understand that.

The people you all seem to hate (the posh people) hardly ever catch anything, although they won't admit that. It's people like me and other people with a working class or traveller background who have been terriering/coursing all our lives that do most of the killing. We like the sports and aren't doing any harm other than getting rid of a few things that need getting rid of.

Interestingly, hardly any of us working class people were at the march the other day. Why? Because truth be known, whilst a ban would be a bit of an inconvenience we'll not be stopping anyway.

Silkov, you should get a bit of perspective into your life. These are mangy old foxes who kill for pleasure themselves (foxes "in a hen house" always kill far more birds than they need). There's a myriad of more important things to worry about.

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 24 Sep 2004, 10:24

There is no genuine need to keep the Fox population under control. Sorry mate but that's rubbish. Who do you think regulated the animal populations before us humans turned up?

Population levels of top predators are always governed by the amount of available prey. The amount of foxes will certainly rise in the short term if everybody suddenly gave hunting up. But eventually there would be a balance, and numbers of foxes would level out.

Foxes have only attained this menace status because people have made it easy for them. With chickens as an example, if they're looked after properly, then a fox has no chance of taking one of them. You don't look after them, foxes will keep coming back, and will become a problem. They're scavengers, like all canines, if you're going to give them an easy meal they'll take it.

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 24 Sep 2004, 10:52

glittermonkey wrote:There is no genuine need to keep the Fox population under control. Sorry mate but that's rubbish. Who do you think regulated the animal populations before us humans turned up?

Population levels of top predators are always governed by the amount of available prey. The amount of foxes will certainly rise in the short term if everybody suddenly gave hunting up. But eventually there would be a balance, and numbers of foxes would level out.

Foxes have only attained this menace status because people have made it easy for them. With chickens as an example, if they're looked after properly, then a fox has no chance of taking one of them. You don't look after them, foxes will keep coming back, and will become a problem. They're scavengers, like all canines, if you're going to give them an easy meal they'll take it.

No offence, mate, but you're being a bit naive.

Before us humans "turned up" the amount of available prey (as you say) is what regulated the fox population. This is still the case now.

What you seemingly fail to realise is that "available prey" does not just constitute living things. Like rats, foxes will eat almost anything available - although their preferance is meat.

These days, mainly because of household and commercial food waste - aswell as farmed fur and feather - there are an infinate number of the easy meals you mention available to foxes.

Saying that the fox population should not be controlled is exactly the same as saying the rat population should not be controlled.

J · Post by J » 24 Sep 2004, 11:43

Then do it in a decent way, theres no need to keep the fox population undercontrol unles they become a nuisance. I agree with GM.

being torn to bits by dogs is no way for any creature to die, persnonally I think your a total pudendum for doing that but thats your choice shame the poor animal you slaughter doesnt have one. I suppose badgers are fornicating nuisance as well.

the problem is people we are fornicating up this planet as undoubtedly we will find out one day, I only pray its outside your life,span my life, and out offrsprings, offsprings life. One day the earth will just fornicate us off.

Im no ecoewarrior and fully uinderstand we have to live our lives but deliberately bringing pain and suffering to foxes and deer (you dont metion those but they are hunted also) is no way to go about anything.

be humane, dont use it as sport and do not take pleasure in killing other living things you ignorant pratt.

I dont think Im gonna bother going into this any further as this a boxing website not a forum for this debate.