allegedly is brilliant? (merged)

Camcas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 881
Joined: 12 Sep 2010, 14:18

Re: whose signing up to Allegedly channel?whats skys boxing plan

Post by Camcas »

I was fully intending to sign up, but the schedule looks frankly awful, yes they have the Cotto bill but that is the only bill that will be nearly worth paying for. I had high hopes for Allegedly, but he is certainly dissapointing at the moment
Jon Saxon
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1657
Joined: 22 Feb 2009, 16:16

Re: whose signing up to Allegedly channel?whats skys boxing plan

Post by Jon Saxon »

No.
Tommy Gunn13
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3290
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 13:11

Re: whose signing up to Allegedly channel?whats skys boxing plan

Post by Tommy Gunn13 »

Maybe if i can pay on a month to month bases
Dioufy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7351
Joined: 16 Sep 2006, 23:09

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by Dioufy »

Ah, one of Frankie's tricks done already. Make something seem like something it isn't. I was under the impression that if you registered you got a free month after it went to subscription. The offer didn't make it seem like you get a free month after you have given your card details.

Nah.
NazNaci1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4454
Joined: 26 Mar 2009, 00:58

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by NazNaci1 »

No. I do not trust 'Allegedly' at all. His careful match-making (fighting non punchers or guys coming up in weight or faded name fighters) constantly compells me to avoid it.....LIKE THE PLAGE.

I will watch it when there is anything worth watching, via other means.
jessi
Cruiserweight
Posts: 3008
Joined: 11 Jul 2010, 11:59

Re: whose signing up to Allegedly channel?whats skys boxing plan

Post by jessi »

JDC wrote:
pyenest77 wrote:The missus has already said that she will pay for it so that is me sorted, hopefully more Saturday bills from now on as I can do with out all this singing, skating, Ant & Dec, Hole in the wall Saturday evening stuff!!!
Do you mean ''fly on the wall?''

Hole in the wall is something entirely different (and alot more fun) :wink:

Some would even call it glorious :lol:
Ha ha :OhYes: :DDD :D
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11172
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by Ezzard »

I think some of this is way too harsh.

We all want boxing to flourish and so does Mr W a r r e n. I dream of the glory days of huge audiences for McGuigan but, just like 15 round world title fights, they are never coming back.

Back in the 1980s, when I was buying The Ring, KO, Boxing News, etc… if I’d have been told there’s a boxing channel for £10 a month I’d have turned somersaults. That was 30 years ago so £10 now seems okay. I’d rather not pay but this is the world in which we live.

I don’t like mismatches. I was critical of fighters like Roy Jones and Joe Calzaghe for not always fighting credible opposition BUT bl00dy he11 anyone who watches the Premier League, or the early stages of the Champions League, will see mismatch after mismatch week after week. Let’s be honest here Manchester United have won the title so many times in the last couple of decades that it must be the least competitive sport in the world.

As for Buncey – he’s enthusiastic, knowledgeable, has the common touch and knows how to sell the sport. What’s wrong with any of that?

Jim Watt – negative? So what? I much prefer that to American style cheerleading or the WWF style commentary that some American commentators bring to boxing. I don’t want everything sugar coated.
Gazmac81
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2103
Joined: 04 Oct 2008, 10:06

Re: whose signing up to Allegedly channel?whats skys boxing plan

Post by Gazmac81 »

think there is sat night programme called Hole in the wall - that that clown Anton De Beauke

Dale winton used to do it ( shit maybe that is something seedier )

"BRING ON THE WALL"
:oops:
jessi wrote:
JDC wrote:
pyenest77 wrote:The missus has already said that she will pay for it so that is me sorted, hopefully more Saturday bills from now on as I can do with out all this singing, skating, Ant & Dec, Hole in the wall Saturday evening stuff!!!
Do you mean ''fly on the wall?''

Hole in the wall is something entirely different (and alot more fun) :wink:

Some would even call it glorious :lol:
Ha ha :OhYes: :DDD :D
danfoster
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 651
Joined: 02 Feb 2009, 05:07

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by danfoster »

There is absolutely no way i am going to subscribe to this channel until i have had a long look at the quality of fights over an extended period of time. Sky is currently very good value for the sports fan, IMHO, and have proved their pedigree over the years.

I shall watch with interest what Mr Wa rren serves up to his paying customers. If it's as good as his lavish promises then I he can have my DD with pleasure!
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27451
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by stujones »

Is there live boxing scheduled for Saturday Night / Sunday Morning. It says so on the Sky EPG - but doesn't state what is the bout, no info on the website.
Dioufy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7351
Joined: 16 Sep 2006, 23:09

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by Dioufy »

Sky Sports - £20 a month
allegedly - £10 a month

That is silly. allegedly should be around £5 a month.
MightyWarrior
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13249
Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 14:01

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by MightyWarrior »

I'd like to sign up, but getting a weekly newsletter from W a r r e n is enough to put most people off. They'd be better off threatening a weekly new letter if you don't sign up.

The website is a bit evasive too - no mention if you can just sign up for a month, instead of comitting to 6 months - which makes me think it's a 6 month deal ?

And all that "championship fight to be added" malarky doesn't mean much, considering (edited by mod) give any old fight three letters and label it a "championship."
Gazmac81
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2103
Joined: 04 Oct 2008, 10:06

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by Gazmac81 »

accroding tot he Scottish sun allegedly are looking to put on some scottish shows

Alex Morrison saying Frank will supply a "Title fight of some sorts" and he will suplly the undercard

good for a scottish intrest but these will be the Fillers in between the Big fights every so often

the undercards in scottish boxing are generally dire , although could probably say that about most British undercards,

Also Expect to see Scott Harrison on this channel some time soon which will be off intrest
broomy7s
Cruiserweight
Posts: 971
Joined: 19 May 2011, 07:53

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by broomy7s »

stujones wrote:Is there live boxing scheduled for Saturday Night / Sunday Morning. It says so on the Sky EPG - but doesn't state what is the bout, no info on the website.
Chavez vs Manfredo
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant

Post by oliverfennell »

bfchunk wrote:I'd pay £10 a month for this and another £10 on top if this meant they would sack Burdis.
Dullest MC in the business.
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant

Post by oliverfennell »

Flump wrote:you have to worry about editorial content, will Buncey and the boys have someone's hand up their back forcing them to try and convince everyone that the usual domestic level WBO title fight is actually the real deal?
Enzo was telling us at the start that Cleverly-Bellew was a "genuine 50-50 fight". Now it turned out to be very good and competitive, of course, but before the fight nobody would have said it was 50-50 on paper.
allahsnackbar
Cruiserweight
Posts: 302
Joined: 18 May 2011, 13:36

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant

Post by allahsnackbar »

oliverfennell wrote:
bfchunk wrote:I'd pay £10 a month for this and another £10 on top if this meant they would sack Burdis.
Dullest MC in the business.
If you look at the likes of Buffer/Lennon Jr. or any decent MC, you see them looking to the crowd as they speak. They look at their cards occasionally. Burdis reads exactly from the cards and keeps his eyes on the cards and head down at all times. He really is poor in his delivery also.
Glyn Leach
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2135
Joined: 25 Dec 2007, 14:08

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by Glyn Leach »

King Geedorah wrote:
broomy7s wrote:
stujones wrote:Is there live boxing scheduled for Saturday Night / Sunday Morning. It says so on the Sky EPG - but doesn't state what is the bout, no info on the website.
Chavez vs Manfredo
So we're using 'boxing' in the loosest possible sense of the word for that one?
Manfredo is claiming it will be just like Gatti-Ward - that's Audley-level delusional
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by leforge »

Glyn Leach wrote:
King Geedorah wrote:
broomy7s wrote: Chavez vs Manfredo
So we're using 'boxing' in the loosest possible sense of the word for that one?
Manfredo is claiming it will be just like Gatti-Ward - that's Audley-level delusional
Think very few people will watch it. Poor fight really think Barker could be Chavez!
Boxingnut
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 463
Joined: 15 Feb 2004, 17:00

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by Boxingnut »

Noticed the Virgin logo is no longer on the allegedly site. Is it not coming to Virgin now?
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by leforge »

Boxingnut wrote:Noticed the Virgin logo is no longer on the Allegedly channel site. Is it not coming to Virgin now?
Soon they say but that been on there site for month now. But its meant to be subcription from 30 November I not seen it being advertised anywhere! Looking at there schedule apart from Cotto fight which might not happen does not look worth subcribing too!
JimJim2009
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3125
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 09:48

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant

Post by JimJim2009 »

oliverfennell wrote:
Flump wrote:you have to worry about editorial content, will Buncey and the boys have someone's hand up their back forcing them to try and convince everyone that the usual domestic level WBO title fight is actually the real deal?
I wouldn't worry about editorial content.... simply assume that there will be the same bias as you'd get on Sky Sports (eg, ignoring non-Sky boxers and fights), after all allegedly doesn't really claim to be the sport's dedicated media outlet, its the dedicated media outlet of a certain promoter. If Matchroom had got their first, you'd be naive if you didn't expect them to push their fighters.

The example quoted, of presenters trying to convince viewers that a domestic WBO title fight is the real deal, hasn't that been going on for donkeys years ?? When Eubank fought Benn, you didn't get ITV pundits saying "all very exciting but lets put this into context because there's guys in America called Toney, Nunn and McCallum who are....".

I would rate Bunce as more pragmatic and honest than any other presenter, and he's probably covered more non-Warren fighters in his few weeks of the new Bunce Boxing Hour than Sky Sports have managed in the last 20 years.

I can't see a conspiracy unfolding, whereby this promoter is going to change his standard operating mode of business - he has a method of promoting that brings success to him and his fighters, he ain't gonna change it now; if you zoom out of all this "what's the main event in two weeks time" focus, and look at a 12 month picture (ie, 2012), then we're going to get, on average, 3-4 main events with DeGale, Cleverley, Groves, Gavin, the Walsh lads, Bellew, Mitchell, Saunders, plus the emergence of prospects like Heffron and Selkirk, and guys like Chisora (assuming he doesn't win next month), Enzo, Smith, Hall, Olubamwino continuing their careers. It would be quite shortsighted of the promoter to suddenly decide his fighters stop facing the kind of opponents he usually brings in, and to start staging shit fights.

All that said, I don't want to come across as a closet Warren supporter. And for what its worth, if they really do need anything like 100,000 subscribers, they'll crash and burn badly.
smcb80
Cruiserweight
Posts: 195
Joined: 18 May 2011, 08:27

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant? (merged)

Post by smcb80 »

Sky report on all fights going on, even ones on boxfight, and primetime
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant

Post by leforge »

JimJim2009 wrote:
oliverfennell wrote:
Flump wrote:you have to worry about editorial content, will Buncey and the boys have someone's hand up their back forcing them to try and convince everyone that the usual domestic level WBO title fight is actually the real deal?
I wouldn't worry about editorial content.... simply assume that there will be the same bias as you'd get on Sky Sports (eg, ignoring non-Sky boxers and fights), after all Allegedly Channel doesn't really claim to be the sport's dedicated media outlet, its the dedicated media outlet of a certain promoter. If Matchroom had got their first, you'd be naive if you didn't expect them to push their fighters.

The example quoted, of presenters trying to convince viewers that a domestic WBO title fight is the real deal, hasn't that been going on for donkeys years ?? When Eubank fought Benn, you didn't get ITV pundits saying "all very exciting but lets put this into context because there's guys in America called Toney, Nunn and McCallum who are....".

I would rate Bunce as more pragmatic and honest than any other presenter, and he's probably covered more non-Warren fighters in his few weeks of the new Bunce Boxing Hour than Sky Sports have managed in the last 20 years.

I can't see a conspiracy unfolding, whereby this promoter is going to change his standard operating mode of business - he has a method of promoting that brings success to him and his fighters, he ain't gonna change it now; if you zoom out of all this "what's the main event in two weeks time" focus, and look at a 12 month picture (ie, 2012), then we're going to get, on average, 3-4 main events with DeGale, Cleverley, Groves, Gavin, the Walsh lads, Bellew, Mitchell, Saunders, plus the emergence of prospects like Heffron and Selkirk, and guys like Chisora (assuming he doesn't win next month), Enzo, Smith, Hall, Olubamwino continuing their careers. It would be quite shortsighted of the promoter to suddenly decide his fighters stop facing the kind of opponents he usually brings in, and to start staging shit fights.

All that said, I don't want to come across as a closet Warren supporter. And for what its worth, if they really do need anything like 100,000 subscribers, they'll crash and burn badly.
They will struggle to get 20000 subsrcibers. Quantity of fights over quality seems to the policy. Success so why he losing loads of money on his shows!
Kilburn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6573
Joined: 25 Jul 2002, 07:27

Re: Allegedly channel is brilliant

Post by Kilburn »

If I can subscribe to ESPN for the UFC then I'm sure I can find another tenner for allegedly, given the amount that is happening on that channel. I'll keep Prem Sports for the time being too.

I know it's costing a bit of wedge but I'm not enticed by internet streaming, and these days it seems I can see pretty much any fight I want on these channels. Wind back a decade and we were feeling oh so privileged that SKY allowed us to see unbeaten stars Trinidad and Vargas unifying their titles on a 12 hour delay. How dark those days were.
Post Reply