Are the BBBC becoming more dynamic?

[Chambers2]

According to Ringside last night anybody who wins a future purse bid and can't stage the fight will be fined by the BBBC(10% of the bid I think)

This is a good ruling in my opinion and it looks to be a direct response from the board to Meaty Micks bid for Fury-Chisora and Dave Coldwells (Caldwell?) bid for Degale Groves (which I thought were starting to stretch the rules abit)

Are the BBBC finally becoming more dynamic??? In recent times they've......
1) corrected the ridiculous cuts rule,
2) started hauling judges in front of them for w@nk scorecards
3) started fining promoters in what looks like a direct response to rule bending


I've slated the BBBC for years for doing absolutely fcuk all (quite rightly IMO). Can't remember (or be arsed to look up) the new geeza who's running the BBBC, but he looks to be a MASSIVE improvement on that useless pudendum Simon Block.

Whilst they're on a roll have we got any more improvements to our beloved sport for them?

ALL HAIL THE NEW BBBC!!!

[Coco]

I have always thought a lot of Robert Smith

[Chambers2]

Robert Smith

Ta

[wrimc]

They are doing better but they could do more.

The desperately need to produce rankings for each division every month. Its the easiest way to publicise British fighters!

[earsjohn]

They are doing better but they could do more.

The desperately need to produce rankings for each division every month. Its the easiest way to publicise British fighters!

I'm not so sure about that. I think if the governing body were to develop their own rankings they will open themselves up to accusations of favouritism. Boxing, as a sport, simply doesn't suit a computerised ranking system as there are so many elements that are difficult to score - let the alpha bodies and media outlets run their own. They can adequately promote the interests of UK fighters by keeping the lonsdale belt relevant and by pushing UK fighter claims for EBU title contention.

The BBBC should stick to acting as the guardians of the sport in this country and should continue to do so by:

- demanding better practices of promoters and punishing those bringing the sport into disrepute
- mandating fights between legitimate challengers for belts
- preventing title stagnation (eg UK Cruiserweight title)
- ensuring consistency across judging, refereeing, health and emergency provision, drug testing
- greater contributions / support to boxers post active career

In fact, a monthly guest slot on Ringside to go through the latest announcements would be a good way to promote what they are doing and who they are getting to fight.

[stujones]

I know I've been sticking up for Mick quite a bit recently, but that whole buisness with staging the fight in Spain seemed bizarre. Now, I don't know the ruling so although I will assume everything was clearly above board and the staging rules were breached and Mick should have been more aware of the rules.

My QUESTION is this - did the BBBoC give Mick a chance to come with an alternative venue and declined (for whatever reason) or did the BBBoC just say - "breached rule, not going to happen lets open for bids".

Its quite right, although it must feel like he is being kicked while down quite a lot recently, that the BBBoC should fine promoters who cannot stage the show - in most cases, it results in fighters being delayed a payday. Obviously not in the Degale/Groves fight though.

[DavidPayne]

I have always thought a lot of Robert Smith

He was good in the Blow Monkeys or was it the Cure or was it neither.

[wrimc]

They are doing better but they could do more.

The desperately need to produce rankings for each division every month. Its the easiest way to publicise British fighters!

I'm not so sure about that. I think if the governing body were to develop their own rankings they will open themselves up to accusations of favouritism. Boxing, as a sport, simply doesn't suit a computerised ranking system as there are so many elements that are difficult to score - let the alpha bodies and media outlets run their own. They can adequately promote the interests of UK fighters by keeping the lonsdale belt relevant and by pushing UK fighter claims for EBU title contention.

The BBBC should stick to acting as the guardians of the sport in this country and should continue to do so by:

- demanding better practices of promoters and punishing those bringing the sport into disrepute
- mandating fights between legitimate challengers for belts
- preventing title stagnation (eg UK Cruiserweight title)
- ensuring consistency across judging, refereeing, health and emergency provision, drug testing
- greater contributions / support to boxers post active career

In fact, a monthly guest slot on Ringside to go through the latest announcements would be a good way to promote what they are doing and who they are getting to fight.

Great points and i agree with many of them. the BBBC are guardians of the sport in this country. People bemoan the fact that boxing does not have a worldwide governing body hence multitude of titles disparity in levels of safety etc etc

What the BBBC are, is THAT national governing body. They are able to do in Britain which no other boxing organisation can do in any other country or region of the sport. It is because of this that the British title is held in such esteem and because of their ability to police the sport and introduce national standards they can enforce good matches and standards of safety that are the envy of the world over as well as drug testing and support for retired boxers.

What I would say though is that they could go further they do well mostly in all of the things you have mentioned above. My issue is they can do more to publicise themselves and the sport. I feel that they are taking too much of a backseat at times.

They have the ability to make the fights in this country and enforce them in a way that is impossible everywhere else in boxing. This is why I say they should produce rankings. It does a number of things

- It publicises a top 10 in each division gives a greater awareness of the best fighters in Britain
- It gives a transparent and methodical view as to why fighters are put forward for titles
- It demonstrates how area, english titles are an established route to furthering your ranking and advancing yourself towards the ultimate British a British title shot

Currently the stewards just deliberate behind closed doors and can essentially pull any name out of a hat that they favour or fancy for whatever reason to challenge for British/Commonwealth/English etcetc

If we had a top 10 that was decided by the stewards then it would be easy to see who is in line or contention for a shot rather than it being a surprise. By doing it behind closed doors it opens the board up for accusations of favouritism and this brings much needed transparency to the sport.

[Glyn Leach]

They're doing better, certainly more PR conscious, but 'dynamic'? Please have a look at any one of them and pair him with Batman or Robin. Doesn't work, does it.

[JimJim2009]

Maybe I'm having a cynical day but isn't it a bit obvious that a certain promoter has lobbied for this ? To turn up the heat on his competition and / or kick them while they're down ?

If you don't think the board are having their strings pulled, ask yourself this - (a)who won't be affected by the new rules, and (b) who was outbid by rivals in the two cases in point and (c) who had fighters matched in both cases in point.

If the board are truely in a dynamic mood these days let's have fines for promoters who's big shows turn out to be nothing like they are initially announced to be, compensation for fans who buy a ticket for a certain fight, and can't get a refund when one fighter pulls out and is replaced by a no-hoper, and how about a bit of quality control by the board on what promoters pass off as a "world title" fight ?

[black panther]

Maybe I'm having a cynical day but isn't it a bit obvious that a certain promoter has lobbied for this ? To turn up the heat on his competition and / or kick them while they're down ?

If you don't think the board are having their strings pulled, ask yourself this - (a)who won't be affected by the new rules, and (b) who was outbid by rivals in the two cases in point and (c) who had fighters matched in both cases in point.

If the board are truely in a dynamic mood these days let's have fines for promoters who's big shows turn out to be nothing like they are initially announced to be, compensation for fans who buy a ticket for a certain fight, and can't get a refund when one fighter pulls out and is replaced by a no-hoper, and how about a bit of quality control by the board on what promoters pass off as a "world title" fight ?

Good post. I can't say it's obvious but it's definitely the first thing that crossed my mind as a possibility when I heard what had happened. I like that the board are taking steps to imrpove the game but I'm not a big fan of this new penalisation ruling. There are a myriad of things that can go wrong when organising a boxing bill and I don't think it's fair to fine the promoter a considerable amount of cash each time it happens. If anything, the boxers should get some compensation for a wasted training camp IMO.

[wrimc]

I think this is the same ruling that many of the governing bodies have when purse bids are called for world title fights.

The promoters has to pay certain fees and a deposit of 10% of the amount of the total bid. In the case that they are unable to stage the contest this money is forfeit.