Factual error (Colin Hart) in boxing column in Sun online

[Srebmun]

Good post....

Someone like Flexen or one of the internet writers maybe, someone under the age of 70 with a pulse would be good, someone who could write about the little-known domestic fighters and give them some much-deserved publicity, rather than the same drivel and purely focusing on the past or Pacquiao...

Buncey maybe?

[Srebmun]

eerrrrrmmm, think this is may be getting a little out of hand now.

Not at all, it's the nature of forums as you know. Come on and act like a lemon then expect to get squeezed.

[Scottrf]

Good post....

Someone like Flexen or one of the internet writers maybe, someone under the age of 70 with a pulse would be good, someone who could write about the little-known domestic fighters and give them some much-deserved publicity, rather than the same drivel and purely focusing on the past or Pacquiao...

Buncey maybe?

He would be perfect. So...what were we talking about?

[lurkyshaka]

Good post....

Someone like Flexen or one of the internet writers maybe, someone under the age of 70 with a pulse would be good, someone who could write about the little-known domestic fighters and give them some much-deserved publicity, rather than the same drivel and purely focusing on the past or Pacquiao...

Well i actually think i'd be a perfect replacement....not that keen on moving down south but for a job spouting my opinions in the SUN i'd be willing to make the sacrafice

You're right though.....Hart's column inches could be better used hyping up and putting some spotlight onto genuine prospects like Scott Quigg. Little interviews, training talk, information about someone up an coming and relevant in the here and now.

A nod to the past is fine every now and then, but to attract a new fans we need new blood recognised and spoken about enthusiastically. If casual sports fans see a piece on a guy like Quigg in the SUN, they just might take time to check out some of his footage.

There are plenty of good up and comers with interesting stories, they just need a bit of coverage. What Hart does is idle journalism. Doesn't bother to take a look at the prospects of today, just bores with constant tales of the past in his cynical way. If Hart hasn't got the drive to go see the prospects of today and put together some interesting stuff, then its time he was put out to pasture.

[Scottrf]

You're right though.....Hart's column inches could be better used hyping up and putting some spotlight onto genuine prospects like Scott Quigg. Little interviews, training talk, information about someone up an coming and relevant in the here and now.

A nod to the past is fine every now and then, but to attract a new fans we need new blood recognised and spoken about enthusiastically. If casual sports fans see a piece on a guy like Quigg in the SUN, they just might take time to check out some of his footage.

You think? I think the majority of readers would say "Who's Quigg and where's the piece on Pacquiao?". Which sells more papers?

[lurkyshaka]

You're right though.....Hart's column inches could be better used hyping up and putting some spotlight onto genuine prospects like Scott Quigg. Little interviews, training talk, information about someone up an coming and relevant in the here and now.

A nod to the past is fine every now and then, but to attract a new fans we need new blood recognised and spoken about enthusiastically. If casual sports fans see a piece on a guy like Quigg in the SUN, they just might take time to check out some of his footage.

You think? I think the majority of readers would say "Who's Quigg and where's the piece on Pacquiao?". Which sells more papers?

You mix it up, you provide variety. You have some info on the name fighters and then you introduce the up and comers. Its ust about getting the balance right. You also use links between fighters and gyms/trainers to create interest. In a piece on Quigg for example you could reference work he's put in at some of the gyms in America, and provide some opinions of him from the better known trainers who've see him in action. And Quigg is just one of loads of exciting prospects we have coming through.

[Scottrf]

I'd love to see that, I know enough about Pacquiao. Just trying to see it from their perspective.

[Scottrf]

They should uncover Chris Arreola. Boxer, tits, named after a part of a tit.

Sports section or Page 3?

[chinny]

They should uncover Chris Arreola. Boxer, tits, named after a part of a tit.

Yeah, and constantly dropping f-bombs on live TV. What's not for the Sun to profile?

[Glyn Leach]

ATTENTION!!! I AM THE MAN (apparently) AND I AM ABOUT TO GIVE MY MIGHTY OPINION!!! (Cue Old Spice advert music.)

Er, I like Harty actually. When he's on a TV panel, he has a total 'don't give a shit' attitude. He isn't interested in selling the fight, bigging up the event to pander to his TV paymaster — after so many years as the top-earning British boxing writer, he doesn't need to worry about the scraps from TV's table. He doesn't give a toss and he calls it as he sees it — and he's seen an awful lot more than most of us, which I respect, because that gives him a greater perspective. And perspective is something that is missing from most TV panels, that normally are stacked with 30-something company yes men with half his experience — which I think he is letting them know all about through his admittedly offhand manner, but I have no problem with it because I think he has earned the right.

Is he as sharp on the current scene as many writers? Probably not. But I don't think he's that bad, either, and we all make cock ups in our copy, it comes with the territory. Maybe it's my age (50), but I quite enjoy seeing a grumpy old bugger going against the company line and watching those with a vested interest in the broadcast squirm. Harty is old establishment and frankly I enjoy watching him show his total disregard for the yuppie new establishment.

I AM NOW GOING BACK TO THE TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN TO ENGRAVE MORE WORDS OF WISDOM ON TABLETS OF STONE (Cue Elvis singing the end segment of American Trilogy as I disappear into the clouds.)

[orbtastic]

He was awful on the last SKY broadcast - he veered between toeing the party line and talking up the fight and saying Margarito was big so had a chance without actually making a prediction.

[Glyn Leach]

Can't really defend him against that Orb, you're probably right. I just find the cultural style clash amusing I suppose.

[Final round]

Can't really defend him against that Orb, you're probably right. I just find the cultural style clash amusing I suppose.

Steve Bunce?

[orbtastic]

I've no real issue with either Hart or Bunce. I defy anyone to go on TV/radio regularly and be quoted verbatim in the press and not have something held against them; whether it be some inherant bias, dodgy prediction, overegging the pudding or whatever.

Neither are statisticians, predictors or trainers, so why do people keep expecting them to be?

Claude Abrahams (hope I've spelt his name right) was a good writer, not in Mullen's league but few are. He got tremendous stick whenever he was on TV because he did the opposite of Bunce and was calm, measured and made his point without wildly gesticulating or raising his voice...people said he was boring. Maybe, but he's not a TV presenter, he's a boxing writer/expert.

I don't want my pundits to be able to recount the IBF minimumweight lineage but I'd expect them to know who the other guys are at the weight [of the fight they're talking about].

As with most things, there's a balance. Guys like Bunce and Hart HAVE been around a long time, they do remember things that a lot of people have never even seen, and more important the context of it - rather than just looking at the result on boxrec, like a lot of internet forum posters can do. Doesn't mean they're infallible, however.

I've been reading BM for decades (or at least as long as it's been going?), same as I have BN. I honestly don't get Bunce's writing in there, I usually have to read it a couple of times to see what the point being made is, maybe it's just the idiosyncratic way it's written but I just don't find it entertaining in any way. The piece about Audley & Haye for example, it had the chance to have some sort of context given the fight but it could have been summed up in 6 or 7 words "they used to be mates, y'know". I enjoy his articles in the paper.

Bottom line is, I don't think anyone (particularly on here) could do a better job. I would actually find it pretty funny to have a rotating panel on SKY of boxrec/forum mouthpieces and see how poor a job they do.

[Counter-puncher]

^^^ top post mate

[JamesH]

Good post....

Someone like Flexen or one of the internet writers maybe, someone under the age of 70 with a pulse would be good, someone who could write about the little-known domestic fighters and give them some much-deserved publicity, rather than the same drivel and purely focusing on the past or Pacquiao...

Buncey maybe?

I understand he is busy with the latest edition of 'How To Win Friends and Influence People'

[Glyn Leach]

Can't really defend him against that Orb, you're probably right. I just find the cultural style clash amusing I suppose.

Steve Bunce?

Bunce is one of my very few real mates in the business and I'm glad he's out there. Another cultural style clasher — but to an extent where the new establishment seem unwilling to touch him with a barge pole at the moment, sadly. IMO Bunce's strongest position has always been on the outside and I've told him that — square peg, round hole stuff. He's always done things his way, which can rub people up the wrong way, but he doesn't care. He's got his beliefs, which are strong and not necessarily to everyone's liking, but that's not going to stop him giving them, never has, and I have always liked and respected him for that. I don't always agree with him, but then who always agrees with anyone?

[Captain Hook]

Some good points Orb, we couldn't all do what they do that's true....

...but I guarantee 25% of the posters on here could and would take full advantage of having a platform like BM or BN to have their say in. They'd do their homework, expect and deal with constructive criticism, and try and shed light on the careers and upcoming fights of both domestic fighters and the sport's elite.

Not think they're above the fans and dismiss alternative arguments without even sinking their teeth into them.

Most wouldn't, I agree....but several would.

[Counter-puncher]

Some good points Orb, we couldn't all do what they do that's true....

...but I guarantee 25% of the posters on here could and would take full advantage of having a platform like BM or BN to have their say in. They'd do their homework, expect and deal with constructive criticism, and try and shed light on the careers and upcoming fights of both domestic fighters and the sport's elite.
.

i think 'they/we' would also end up spouting a load of shite

[Dioufy]

Don't get me wrong, I do like Bunce, and would prefer him to be in the business than not, but he does rub people up the wrong way with his hard-arsed/arrogant ways of putting his points across. I don't think he's overly consitant as well, what with him moaning extensible about some fighters then being incapable of critiquing certain others - Haye/Froch, ect, ect.

[orbtastic]

Some good points Orb, we couldn't all do what they do that's true....

...but I guarantee 25% of the posters on here could and would take full advantage of having a platform like BM or BN to have their say in. They'd do their homework, expect and deal with constructive criticism, and try and shed light on the careers and upcoming fights of both domestic fighters and the sport's elite.
.

i think 'they/we' would also end up spouting a load of shite

without question.

The point is, as with most things in life, particularly jobs - As soon as you try and diversify and expand beyond your own area of "expertise" (or experty as the Jamaican guy I work with continually calls it), you become too generalised and diluted.

There's a balance between being some autistic stat anorak and an articulate, enthusiastic pundit. You can't have it both ways.

The same way say, the BN writers are spread - The guys that cover the small hall shows in rotherham and doncaster rarely will cover a European title fight in Birmingham and those that cover all the big domestic fights in the UK rarely cover the world title fights overseas...you literally cannot spread yourself thin enough without having gaping holes.

[Captain Hook]

Some good points Orb, we couldn't all do what they do that's true....

...but I guarantee 25% of the posters on here could and would take full advantage of having a platform like BM or BN to have their say in. They'd do their homework, expect and deal with constructive criticism, and try and shed light on the careers and upcoming fights of both domestic fighters and the sport's elite.
.

i think 'they/we' would also end up spouting a load of shite

Yes, I'm sure some of 'us' would CP :)

[Lenny]

I read through this whole thread. Reminds me of some things. ABA title, York Hall 1976. Isn't one of them. People repeating themselves. People being disrespectful. Could have been so different. Boxing has changed some. It has stayed some. Neville Meade v Paul Sykes 1970 something. Casinos. It's like Don King once told me. Big boy.

Adios

[Counter-puncher]

the pundits need to step up

[stujones]

I cannot see an editor of a tabloid being fussed about an article on Scott Quigg, unless Scott Quigg has a particularly unusually selling point (apart from being good). All the editors will want is stories on Hatton, Khan, Haye, Mayweather, Pacquiao and a few retired folk. FW's article is somewhat different, because he can add that "personal perspective" to it... e.g. "My guy Ricky Burns is ready to unify".

Having said this, and I might be wrong, the impression I get is that Hart doesn't necessarily bombared editors with "lets talk about Scott Quigg or Jamie McDonnell".

If I can bring it to my job, if I could talk about Sport Psychology or Health Psychology Only for all year in my lectures I would be a happy chappy, its my comfort zone. Biological stuff, which I am doing now, isn't... but I've got to adapt. But if I was told at the just do Sport and Health stuff.... well I would be laughing and certainly wouldn't be going "no, I want to Biological".