jim watt, why oh why oh why

[banjo]

I hate it when a scouser is right, but he's right

Why, thank you although I'm not a scouser I'm from near there

What?

Yes you read it right

Jim Watt is an excellent commentator, probably the best of all time.

[TheCobra]

I hate Jim Watt commentating on fights. Consistently does my head in and I find myself shouting at the screen rather a lot.

[charlieb]

Watt was biased towards Haye and still gave it to Valuev ! And I agree !
Since when did landing on the arms count as scoring punches?
Terrible fight ! Valuev throwing and missing, Haye throwing less , landing less and running more !
Unless you watch Sky highlights of the same punch with different angles to make it look like more punches landed ! (they still only found 3!)
Watt gave it to Valuev by 2 rounds, I gave it by 4 and thats being kind to Haye !
The money men strike again as Haye will sell better in the USA.
Golden Bitch Promotions are very happy right now.

Who's a bitter boy then?

[charlieb]

Can't really be too angry with Watt, he was just playing devil's advocate in expressing worries that I'm sure we were all sharing at the time.

It might not've seemed as much of a lucky decision if he hadn't been so negative, especially being British and with most of the americans watching streams which used our feed... it didn't help Haye's case. Then again, maybe 2 obviously pro-Haye commentators might've just added insult to injury.

Either way, I'd take Watt, negative or otherwise over most others, wouldn't be the same without him.

[SnoopyLoopy]

Glen and Ian were a much better combo.

Watt is good but can ramble on and on and will refuse to see a fight differently to how he initially laid it out. Darke is the best of all times though.

Adam Smith is an absolute disgrace to sky sports and hopefully rawlings has come in to replace him. Rawlings himself is absolutely dreadful but 1000000000x better than Smith, which tells you how much I rate Smith. The chap doesn't deserve the job he has and it's an insult to the fans to have him on there. If he died, I would celebrate.

[chesh]

That's a sick thing to say, although when Lirva "died" (at least as far as this forum was concerned), many on here celebrated. Sadly, though, you appear to be one of his many reincarnations.

[Roco]

Glen and Ian were a much better combo.

Watt is good but can ramble on and on and will refuse to see a fight differently to how he initially laid it out. Darke is the best of all times though.

Adam Smith is an absolute disgrace to sky sports and hopefully rawlings has come in to replace him. Rawlings himself is absolutely dreadful but 1000000000x better than Smith, which tells you how much I rate Smith. The chap doesn't deserve the job he has and it's an insult to the fans to have him on there. If he died, I would celebrate.

Glenn and Darkie never worked in my opinion. They are both yes men. You need someone like what in there to spice things up and give an honest account.

[stujones]

Watt was exceptional. Amazing to think some of the people on here criticising him for being negative to Haye and his scoring... scored the Froch vs Dirrell fight to FROCH!! Thats some inconsistenty if I have ever seen it.

Yes, Watt was a tad repetitive but guess what, it was a repetitive and boring fight. Valuev stalking and missing, Haye running.

Watt, could also probably sense that Haye had the power to hurt Valuev but he didn't go for it enough. Hand injury was well disguised by Haye (even though its legit in my book) - so there is a reason for that.

[Chambers2]

Jim Watt was terrible from start to finish, how the fcuk he had Valuev winning that fight without landing a punch is unreal. He pissed me off from start to finish by being constantly negative from start to finish......... it was nearly as BAD as McGuigans commentary of Froch-Taylor (but not quite)

[stujones]

Jim Watt was terrible from start to finish, how the fcuk he had Valuev winning that fight without landing a punch is unreal. He pissed me off from start to finish by being constantly negative from start to finish......... it was nearly as BAD as McGuigans commentary of Froch-Taylor (but not quite)

How did Bunce have Froch winning by 3!

[banjo]

Darke is irritating.

Why not just have one "blow by blow" commentator who only talks when he has to? Now we just have this Americanised cliche nonsense.

[stujones]

Darke's commentary annoyed me. I have the feeling he had a sneeky look at the cards.

He literally changed his stance half way through, when the fight hadn't actually changed direction.

One minute Haye was being way to negative - not throwing enough, taking the odd jab and held the stance better to throw and miss than not throw anything.

THEN it seemed like out of the blue - he changed to Valuev is awful, there are things called effective agression (etc)... that was before the fight did actually change and Haye did start to do more.

[rob h]

I agree about Darke being disrespectful about Valuev but usually he is very neutral and doesn't hide the facts unlike other bias commentators.

Jim Watt just picks somebody he likes and sticks with them whether he's right or wrong. And yes it it irritating.

[stujones]

I agree about Darke being disrespectful about Valuev but usually he is very neutral and doesn't hide the facts unlike other bias commentators.

Jim Watt just picks somebody he likes and sticks with them whether he's right or wrong. And yes it it irritating.

No he doesn't, but yes he will stick to a "style" of boxing he likes. If the boxer adapts during the fight, then Watt will adapt.

As he did for the Branco vs Lynes fight (a fight I disagreed with his view and score card). At first when Lynes was using his jab as part of combinations he loved it. When Lynes just stuck out the jab, still winning on my eyes - Watt said he was scoring these to Branco.

I didn't agree, but shows he does watch the fight - something you seem to imply he doesn't.

Fact was in this fight. Haye DIDN'T change significantly.

[Chambers2]

Jim Watt was terrible from start to finish, how the fcuk he had Valuev winning that fight without landing a punch is unreal. He pissed me off from start to finish by being constantly negative from start to finish......... it was nearly as BAD as McGuigans commentary of Froch-Taylor (but not quite)

How did Bunce have Froch winning by 3!

Haye landed more clean shots than Dirrell, Froch landed more shots than Valuev. Personally I didn't have Froch winning by that much, I thought the fight was extremely close and could have been a draw, but I thought Haye won his fight clearly without controversly. I had Haye winning 8-4

[black panther]

Watt was exceptional. Amazing to think some of the people on here criticising him for being negative to Haye and his scoring... scored the Froch vs Dirrell fight to FROCH!! Thats some inconsistenty if I have ever seen it.

Yes, Watt was a tad repetitive but guess what, it was a repetitive and boring fight. Valuev stalking and missing, Haye running.

Watt, could also probably sense that Haye had the power to hurt Valuev but he didn't go for it enough. Hand injury was well disguised by Haye (even though its legit in my book) - so there is a reason for that.

[stujones]

Froch might have landed more than Valuev, but there is no way Haye landed more than Dirrell.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Jim Watt prdicted before the fight that Valuev would win. he would rather be proved right than have a British boxer crowned HW Champ, that is why he was so negative and bitter with his commentary.

I don't think Watt was unfair to Haye. Watt's scorecard was a valid interpretation of the fight.

Watt called it as he sees it. I really don't see why he should have to play cheerleader and 'get behind' the British fighter. That is not a commentators job, they are meant to provide an insightful counterpoint to the action.

Whether you agree with his scoring or not, Watt was doing his job correctly. I'd rather listen to him any day than other commentators who only comment on what the home fighter does positively.

Haye was lucky to have gotten the decision away from home fighting those tactics. I scored it narrowly for Valuev, but don't argue with it going the other way at all - however, Haye took an almightly risk by throwing and landing very few shots.

[thepocketrocket]

Exactly, what James said

[stujones]

Good post James, completely agree.

I'm not in no way calling the fight a robbery and no way criticising any cards on this fight. Rounds this time were open to interpretation. However, I agree with the view points in which Dirrell, Witter and Nelson have been condemmed for fighting such a way - Haye gets applauded is slightly hypocritical.

[thepocketrocket]

I think because it shows that Britain is becoming the new Germany with awful decisions!!!!!!

Plus I find it hilarious that people were saying Froch won because Direll(who landed loads) was negative, but now think Haye was 'intelligent'!

[Chambers2]

but there is no way Haye landed more than Dirrell.

Possibly so (I'd have t rewatch Dirrell-Froch to confirm) Haye at least landed the better more meaningful shots than Dirrell did

[thepocketrocket]

I had it to Valuev by one round, my anger was at the scorecards, totally lopsided and it felt like the 'busimess decision' was always going to be made!!!

Sadly for haye he has garnered no interest, he has bored everyone to death, he may have the title, but his crown as 'worlds most exciting Heavy' has been ripped away!!

Sad but true

[stujones]

Froch might have landed more than Valuev, but there is no way Haye landed more than Dirrell.

See above, first para. This has got nothing to do with Dirrell-Froch, Lewis-Holyfield or any number of fights, this was 12 rounds between Haye and Valuev, why not talk about the fight in relation to what went on, rather than throwing up any fight in which you felt the other guy won?

The reference is in relation to the myth that the Brits cannot win abroad, and fights will be fairer in the UK than abroad. I would have never thought Haye could "nick" a decision fighting like he did. Thats what Watt was saying, and he was perfectly correct in saying that.

Irrespective of who was the champion, size difference, where the fight was held, who was the perceived star. Valuev wasn't effective in his agression, but was aggresive for 3 minutes of each round (accept for the last minute of the final round) and Haye didn't do alot. Enough to win, possibly, possibly not, close fight - I thought Valuev just nicked it but I am not calling it the biggest robbery of the year.

My point is alot of attention is now, not only be drawn up about the size difference, but also the score cards and the location of the fight. Given that Haye won by 116-112 in GERMANY against the German based fighter, means that the masses that we hope have looked into this result feel Haye won by a complete and utter schooling..... Well, one report has said 11-1 Haye (I do seriously wonder if he just saw the scorecards and not the fight).

THat fight, was a close fight, no matter what was at stake and who was the champion. This was shown by 4 of the 5 British "experts" on Sky scoring the fight to Valuev - and I think only Watt was basing it on "in Germany). Just remembering alot of people feeling Byron Mitchell beat Sven Ottke based solely on it being a split decision in Germany, without actually seeing the fight!!!! Its time to re-consider the views that Brits cannot win abroad, thats all.

My point holds relevance also based on Bunce's reasoning to why he thought Froch should have retained "Did Dirrell do enough to come to the UK to take the title from Froch" - No was his conclusion, Did Haye vs Valuev?

I have no complaints if you scored it to Haye, but for me he did less than Dirrell did and was not throwing enough punches from the back foot to win the fight. But absolutely no complaints if you went close to Haye. 11-1 is the most ludicrous card I think I have ever seen.

[DIRT SUGAR]

Kind of agreed with Watt going on about Haye's tactics being dangerous in Germany against, basically, the hometown fighter, but at end of day how could you have given it to Valuev, who fought a worse fight going forward than Haye did on the backfoot.

The words 'effective aggression' spring to mind.

Couple of times Watt said 'good jab' or 'there's a right hand' when the punches either missed or Haye blocked them.

Also, you have to remember, Watt sees the fight from where he's sat, whereas on TV we get to see the fight from various angles. Alot of people forget that. Many a fight I've watched ringside only to have someone the other side of the ring from me or watching on TV totally disagree with my view of who won.