I just wanted to take this oppertunity to thank Paul Dempsey and SKY for broadcasting the result of the David Haye fight BEFORE anyone had had a chance to watch it.
That was no need for that at all, and not a nice thing to do to their loyal paying Boxing fans. I felt is was a bit spitefull, or at best a bad mistake.
However they did seem to mention Haye alot last night so I assume they may be interesting in showing his fights when Haye's contract ends with the BBC in March.
KOJOE90 wrote:I just wanted to take this oppertunity to thank Paul Dempsey and SKY for broadcasting the result of the David Haye fight BEFORE anyone had had a chance to watch it.
That was no need for that at all, and not a nice thing to do to their loyal paying Boxing fans. I felt is was a bit spitefull, or at best a bad mistake.
However they did seem to mention Haye alot last night so I assume they may be interesting in showing his fights when Haye's contract ends with the BBC in March.
Typical, petty spoiling tactics. I remember the Beeb used to do it for football - flash up the scores of matches which were to be broadcast elsewhere delayed, without any warning. The only ones losing out are the fans, again.
Really petty and sad. If you have any doubt about their motives, just look what they showed after they ruined the result: a preview of how awesome Sky boxing is with all it's SN superstars.
Manos de Oro wrote:Really petty and sad. If you have any doubt about their motives, just look what they showed after they ruined the result: a preview of how awesome Sky boxing is with all it's SN superstars.
stujones wrote:Only consolation is that by expressing this desire about David Haye, maybe they will sign him up when his BBC contract expires.
Interesting comment, I might be way off line here but I feel Sky not renewing their contracts with promoters might just give them the freedom to screen who ever they like. So that could mean better quality boxing required. Which doesn't necessarily mean they are cutting back on boxing..............does it???
stujones wrote:Only consolation is that by expressing this desire about David Haye, maybe they will sign him up when his BBC contract expires.
Interesting comment, I might be way off line here but I feel Sky not renewing their contracts with promoters might just give them the freedom to screen who ever they like. So that could mean better quality boxing required. Which doesn't necessarily mean they are cutting back on boxing..............does it???
Always had the feeling the Sky are interested in Haye - remember that Johnny Nelson segment were they showed footage of Thompson, Maccrinelli, Hobson and Haye.
They did the same when Haye was stopped by Thompson..typical spolier tactics which shows no class at all. The BBC on the other hand take the opposite approach, even interviewing Ricky Hatton on one there shows.
What Sky should be looking at doing is not having a show every friday night. I know some people like their weekly fix but I think less broadcasts and better quality would be better. 3 hours of a bill every 2 or 3 weeks would be better. Some of their friday/saturday night fights/mismatches have been pretty crap to say the least. If they are intent on making cutbacks that would be the way to go I think.
The BBC are treating boxing like I treat my girlfriend, like shit. The should have put the fight live. Sky did the right thing there. The BBC deserved it. If they don't want it to happen, stop putting fights on at 1am.
Don't agree, at the moment we are being starved of fights on all networks, even 1am Boxing is better than nothing and nothing is exactly what we will be getting soon with all the "cutbacks" we keep hearing about all the time. SKY were out of order spoiling the result IMO.
