Kell Brook convicted of assault.

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 08 Jul 2010, 07:29

twenty six wrote:I've heard CSO about 80 hours I think.
Lucky lad really - could have been much worse.
You know what the rumour mill's like though.

Edited by mod

big lennox · Post by **big lennox** » 08 Jul 2010, 09:41

Boxingchat,

You are some piece of work.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 08 Jul 2010, 10:54

Suprised so many posters have bitten down on this blokes needle.

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » 08 Jul 2010, 11:59

Yes he is best ignored......

danfoster · Post by **danfoster** » 08 Jul 2010, 17:09

Mods -re the above post by Bxingchat suggesting that Twenty Six may be in trouble with police.
Twenty Six is identifiable as he is known to many people on here. Therefore this outgrageous post by we-all-know-who is as libellous as it is nasty. I suggest that you remove it
Ta

Loynesy · Post by **Loynesy** » 08 Jul 2010, 17:24

Captain Hook wrote:The one time I make two grammatical errors and it's in response to this fuckwit....

God bless him :)

Hook

On a point of order, they were not grammatical errors - one was a simple spelling mistake, the other poor syntax.

Good job you don't write for a living...

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » 09 Jul 2010, 05:00

Good job you're not a pedantic, dry fornicator who responds to posts made weeks ago

Oh, hang on......

I save my efforts for the paper pal, if you find spelling mistakes in my articles I'll hold my hands up.

Ta.....

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » 09 Jul 2010, 05:30

PS I love Loynesy really, he's my editor :)

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 09 Jul 2010, 08:20

If it's libellous, sue me. If it's true, it's not libellous is it!!

Bring it on!

Four words you may wish to consider: MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.

mickey1975 · Post by **mickey1975** » 09 Jul 2010, 09:52

boxingchat wrote:
twenty six wrote:I've heard CSO about 80 hours I think.
Lucky lad really - could have been much worse.
You know what the rumour mill's like though.

I heard a rumour that you may be in a spot of bother too. I've sent you a phone card and some soap on a rope just in case the rumours are true.

Might be wrong, but you know what the rumour mills are like!

"Uncle Vitlali didn't go through all that just so people could d*****d insurance companies - Send him down - Simplez!!"[You would be wasting your time sending a phonecard,normal cards dont work in HMP.Anyway,its all pin numbers now.

TheCobra · Post by **TheCobra** » 09 Jul 2010, 16:53

Brook sounds like he's a bit of a 'one' shall we say!

First rule of any boxer is NEVER fight outside the ring, if he had done some damage to someone it will always be looked on terribly by the law for the fact he is basically trained to hurt people and his fists are equivalent to carrying a weapon when he has the pro training behind him.

Sounds like stupidity and antics gone wrong, but who knows, a boxer flashing his fists round is never a good thing.

danfoster · Post by **danfoster** » 09 Jul 2010, 19:30

boxingchat wrote:If it's libellous, sue me. If it's true, it's not libellous is it!!

Bring it on!

Four words you may wish to consider: MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.

it's not for me to sue. if it's a matter of public record to which you refer, have the guts to quote it.

anyway, all sorts of people have criminal records, don't they? all sorts of people are found to be dishonest and unreliable in a court of law.

i know who you are and i think that your behaviour brings absolute shame on yourself and your associates.

Deserter · Post by **Deserter** » 10 Jul 2010, 01:14

danfoster wrote:
boxingchat wrote:If it's libellous, sue me. If it's true, it's not libellous is it!!

Bring it on!

Four words you may wish to consider: MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.
i think that your behaviour brings absolute shame on yourself and your associates.

Well said.

Jeff Thomas · Post by **Jeff Thomas** » 10 Jul 2010, 11:35

Deserter wrote:
danfoster wrote:
boxingchat wrote:If it's libellous, sue me. If it's true, it's not libellous is it!!

Bring it on!

Four words you may wish to consider: MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.
i think that your behaviour brings absolute shame on yourself and your associates.
Well said.

It really says a lot when Frank Maloney uses this forum to research what fans want, and you guys use it to make petty snipes at former fighters of yours and fans. REALLY unprofessional. I don't think we've really shared a conversation but I can't tell you how terrible a lot of the stuff that you post looks.

Ok, occasionally some of your jibes are slightly amusing but the whole persona that you've created on boxrec gives fans a really bad impression of you guys. I'm sure that your not bad guys but you do realise that you are a representation of the company you work for?

Poncey · Post by **Poncey** » 12 Jul 2010, 03:24

Could we please stay on topic Guys. Thanks

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 14 Jul 2010, 05:25

Jeff Thomas wrote:
Deserter wrote:
danfoster wrote: i think that your behaviour brings absolute shame on yourself and your associates.
Well said.
It really says a lot when Frank Maloney uses this forum to research what fans want, and you guys use it to make petty snipes at former fighters of yours and fans. REALLY unprofessional. I don't think we've really shared a conversation but I can't tell you how terrible a lot of the stuff that you post looks.

Ok, occasionally some of your jibes are slightly amusing but the whole persona that you've created on boxrec gives fans a really bad impression of you guys. I'm sure that your not bad guys but you do realise that you are a representation of the company you work for?

I'm in no promoters pocket Jeff and you don't know who I am at all, many think they do but all are wrong. Where's you are in a promoters pocket so your integrity is now somewhat soiled and bias is it not?

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » 14 Jul 2010, 06:20

You were asked to stay on topic....

palooka · Post by **palooka** » 14 Jul 2010, 10:00

I am completely lost as to what has gone on here.

big lennox · Post by **big lennox** » 14 Jul 2010, 10:38

simon fox wrote:I am completely lost as to what has gone on here.

Boxingchat is just being a monumental b*llend, as per.

danfoster · Post by **danfoster** » 15 Jul 2010, 08:40

Boxingchat you are a liar and yes, i do know who you are so do many other people

Roco · Post by **Roco** » 16 Jul 2010, 07:07

Further update:

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Boxer-Kel ... 6423858.jp

Coco · Post by **Coco** » 16 Jul 2010, 07:57

Slap on the wrist then, sounds like a poxy case

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 16 Jul 2010, 08:00

It looks like Brook has a bit of weight to lose. He needs to really knuckle down now because the Jennings showdown is creeping nearer and nearer.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 16 Jul 2010, 08:17

Bennie,

Respect your view on this - what do you make of Brook? Is he as good as everyone here seems to think because I've not seen enough to form a good opinion.

banjo · Post by **banjo** » 16 Jul 2010, 08:21

SHEFFIELD boxing star Kell Brook has been spared community service for a violent assault - after legendary promoter allegedly sent a letter to court saying it would interfere with his training for a fight.

I assume community service would interfere with most peoples careers but I doubt they'd get a free pass?

A load of bollocks the system in this country sometimes, one rule for one and all that.

Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.

Re: Kell Brook convicted of assault.