Warren hits back

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:18

Sports Network's response to 'Open Letter to Ricky Hatton':

http://www.britishboxing.net/?page=news&id=890

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:26

i think he did well in the reply, if he had american tv money every fight insttead of british money there would be more big fights.

maybe i should write a letter. and speak to him on the phone

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:27

Interesting response, why does he always have to mention Audley Harrison every time he gets some press space? Harrison has nothing to do with this whatsoever.

He says people have backtracked on Calzaghe fights or made ridiculous demands, WELL WHAT ABOUT HIM DEMANDING 4 OPTIONS ON MUNDINE TO FIGHT CALZAGHE JESUS CHRIST. He conveniently left that one out....

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:30

Yep, hard to argue with the logic of his replies, and it has to be said that there is always a lot more to this business than meets the eye.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:31

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Yep, hard to argue with the logic of his replies, and it has to be said that there is always a lot more to this business than meets the eye.

Agreed. 8)

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:32

Fair enough but I am pretty sure the agreement was Hopkins to come and fight over here which is why he wanted more money.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:36

Your letter paid off there Ian - that's an excellent interview you've ended up with. Interesting to hear what Frank has to say..

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:39

Edited.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:40

I've spoken with Frank once on the phone, and found him quite happy to speak and give his side of the story, but it's something he seems to do rarely.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:41

This doesn't make everything alright. He makes some good points, but he still had many chances to match hatton tougher before he was backed into a corner. What about the time he pulled out of the WBA ratings to avoid Viv Harris? And that stuff about 'the fighter being more important than the belts' is skirting the issue, he also uses the convenient example of Cotto and Maussa but he fails to recognise that the fights ian mentioned often involved the top fighters. he says it's not the belts - its the fights. Correct. So how can he justify all his mismatches?

I still remain sceptical that frank wants to put hatton in a megafight because he didn't mention it.

states · Post by **states** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:42

A far more reasonable response than I was expecting, to be honest. Credit where it's due, I have to say.

J · Post by J » 24 Aug 2005, 07:43

yip a good reply From FW, credit where it is due, he fronted up when fronted, got no problem with that, dont agree with all he says but its good to see good journalism being rewared in sensible manner by those involved in the game.

credit all round then I say.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:50

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Nick, you seem like a good lad. Go and edit your last post before you - or more than likely John Shep - get a phone call. Unless, of course, you can support your point with irrefutable evidence. Be careful, pal.

Done.

I think press releases form the time of negotiations would be evidence enough. I recall reading Hopkins say he wanted more money to fight in Britain. I dont remember that fight ever being talked about as happening in the US.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:51

He mentioned Harrison only as an Example of why the BBC stopped showing Boxing though.

I remember vividly that agreement of $3m for Hopkins to fight Calzaghe was not in the US that is absolute bullshit, the agreement was Hopkins to come and fight over here which is why he wanted more money.

At the time when Hopkins wasn't making as much as that wouldn't that have been more than well enough for Hopkins to come over?

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:53

Probably, but I dont really think Hopkins ever wanted to fight in Calzaghe's front room. ;)

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:53

Max Molyneux wrote:He mentioned Harrison only as an Example of why the BBC stopped showing Boxing though.

Any excuse for a dig more like, he can't help himself.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 24 Aug 2005, 07:57

It's a fair point though, the BBC made a fornicating pig's ear of it. Allowing Harrison to top the bill, select his opponents etc without any input....and agree to show all 10 fights, what a ridiculous proposition, I've never seen any olypic champ in history get away with that.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:06

The bottom line is, people can understand the problems and limitations frank has in making the big fights/megafights. But that isn't hatton's problem.

If Hatton wants the big fights, he has to move on. And as a boxing fan, I want him to.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:08

Good response from Warren, as expected.

The bloke does the best with the fighters he's got. Okay there's a valid suggestion Hatton has outgrown him but I don't believe we'll get one iffy fight after another if he resigns.

I also don't believe Amir Khan will be going anywhere near a WBU title.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:10

jamesmcdonnell wrote:It's a fair point though, the BBC made a fornicating pig's ear of it. Allowing Harrison to top the bill, select his opponents etc without any input....and agree to show all 10 fights, what a ridiculous proposition, I've never seen any olypic champ in history get away with that.

Of course, but fail to see why he has to have a dig at Harrison every time he speaks. We all know he's been sour since Harrison turned him down when he went pro.

Slapsie Maxie · Post by **Slapsie Maxie** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:12

I remain to be convinced, but must say thanks to Ian for bringing about an excellent exchange of opinions and. to be fair to FW, he makes a strong case

Slapsie

Slapsie Maxie · Post by **Slapsie Maxie** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:15

nickd wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:It's a fair point though, the BBC made a fornicating pig's ear of it. Allowing Harrison to top the bill, select his opponents etc without any input....and agree to show all 10 fights, what a ridiculous proposition, I've never seen any olypic champ in history get away with that.
Of course, but fail to see why he has to have a dig at Harrison every time he speaks. We all know he's been sour since Harrison turned him down when he went pro.

True, but with hindsight, would FW have made worse matches for AH than he has had to date? I doubt it. I also suspect he would have made more money with FW. Whatever our views of the fights he is able to make no one would doubt that SN is the place to be if you are marketable and want to make money. I think that is AH's prime motivation and I sneakingly suspect they may work together at some point

Slapsie

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:17

Kilburn wrote:Good response from Warren, as expected.

The bloke does the best with the fighters he's got. Okay there's a valid suggestion Hatton has outgrown him but I don't believe we'll get one iffy fight after another if he resigns.

I also don't believe Amir Khan will be going anywhere near a WBU title.

I doubt that Hatton will resign unless the contract is laid out in such a way that he is guaranteed the fights he wants.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:17

I think the same as you Riddick in regards to Hatton but i can't help but feel that Warren's response is fair enough for the moment, the one thing i would take issue with is:

Look at recent events when Tarver and Johnson fought – the IBO was on the line for that one.

The way i saw it was Johnson and Tarver dropped there belts to fight one another and the IBO saw an opportunity and muscled in on the whole event.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 24 Aug 2005, 08:21

Yes, but the point is a fair one, the belts were a total irrelevance, even if there was no belt at all on the line, the fight was recognised as being between the two best available men in division, just as Tszyu was recognised as being the best man in the division despite not having all the belts.