i kindof agree with Ben.diggler wrote:its about styles smiths doesnt seem to gel with gallaghersBen Carey wrote:I can't understand why some have decided to round on Gallagher. His stable was on a tremendous run, I don't see what's wrong with them basking in their collective success - they all work hard and if you can't acknowledge and celebrate the good times what's the point? I would hope that Lee Selby's team similarly bask in the glory of Lee's superb win at the weekend.
Gallagher's a very good and knowledgeable trainer. I don't see why he should take the bulk of criticism for Stephen Smith's performance on Saturday night. I was disappointed with Smith in both of his fights with John Simpson and even then he looked a long way short of the supposed world class force some argued he was. The signs were there that Smith either a) wasn't as good as some suspected or b) needed to work on several aspects of his game long before Selby got to him.
For every Stephen Smith there's also an Anthony Crolla, who few would argue that Gallagher hasn't done an excellent job with him.
Crolla is a good example of someone who has taken the good bits of the 'Gallagher style' but has kept some decent foot movement/head movement with it, as opposed to say John Murray
it *could* be argued that Smith seems to have taken on board the forward-moving high--guard aggression, but 'lost' some of the things he did well as an amateur.
