Ricky Hatton signed with Hobson ?

states · Post by **states** » 01 Sep 2005, 10:49

My sympathy for allegedly is balanced against the crap we've suffered over the years. I admit that he's done a fine job with Ricky, but at the end of the day it's Hatton that does the training and the fights, takes the punches and the risks that come with it. I think he's fully entitled to do what's best for him. If Frank had the clout to deliver the superfights (and the super money that comes with them) on a regular basis, I doubt all this would be happening.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 01 Sep 2005, 10:49

jimmy from the green wrote:Cant beleive im stickin up for frank and generally i hate all promoters - but frank has bent over backward to please the Hamed...whoops! Hatton family and now they want to £cash£ in. Prince...whoops sorry! Punch Promotions smacks of greed as much as warren has been greedy.....

I truly doubt the Hatton's will be anywhere near as arrogant as the Hamed's were. Riath Hamed was a jumped up wanker who had no fornicating idea what he was doing.

The Hatton's are not trying to go it alone here, I think they'll do it on a fight by fight basis.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 01 Sep 2005, 10:51

Now when are they going to make the announcement official, I've got a party to organise!!

john2345 · Post by **john2345** » 01 Sep 2005, 10:52

There's such a thing as loyalty and while there may be more to this story than we yet know I think the Hatton family has shafted Warren. I seem to remember that Naz's family also thought they could do better than the promo team that took him to the title....

For all those who post against Warren, remember that (1) he's entitled to look out for himself as No 1 and (2) he took on the established Duff-Barrett-Astaire trio that virtually ran British boxing in the 80s - and who for example fed Frank Bruno and the British boxing public a string of non-fights.

Warren is a tough operator who can look after himself, he doesn't need me to help him in that regard, and good luck to him. But he did get Hatton the title shot at the right time (for Hatton!) and it appears his reward is to be thrown aside. Hobson is hardly a big name on the international stage yet....interesting to see how Ricky's career progresses from here.
And even more interesting to read about this in a few years time when we can look back with the benefit of hindsight.

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 01 Sep 2005, 10:57

allegedly will survive without ricky.

he's like the cockroaches that guy.

he'll be still going strong in his 70's and guiding amir khan to his 45th wbu world title defence.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:04

This whole scenario Is I suspect to do with more than just money. I think there must be a personal element to this. I've heard it remarked that Warren and Ray Hatton don't exactly see eye to eye many many times, which leads me to suspect it is true.

I do think Warren has been shafted, he's delivered the goods, but it's so hard to know what or why without being in full possession of the facts.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:06

Whatever has gone on, Warren has made the relationship unworkable. Threatening legal action and then signing an exclusive deal with the MEN so Hatton cant fight there. There's no way back from that sort of behaviour.

J · Post by J » 01 Sep 2005, 11:14

nickd wrote:Now when are they going to make the announcement official, I've got a party to organise!!

ship it in

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:30

john2345 wrote:(2) he took on the established Duff-Barrett-Astaire trio that virtually ran British boxing in the 80s - and who for example fed Frank Bruno and the British boxing public a string of non-fights.

Don't you see any irony in this statement, John, correct though you are?

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:37

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
john2345 wrote:(2) he took on the established Duff-Barrett-Astaire trio that virtually ran British boxing in the 80s - and who for example fed Frank Bruno and the British boxing public a string of non-fights.
Don't you see any irony in this statement, John, correct though you are?

aren't u cruel.

Coconut · Post by **Coconut** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:44

nickd wrote:Boo fornicating hoo and how many people has he shafted over the years? What goes around comes around.

I have to say, yes.

It's a constantly moving business. Everyone has to appreciate that.

Neri · Post by **Neri** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:50

chris s wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:No of course not, but it's a pretty fornicating major story all the same.
In our small world of professionalboxing it is big, but look in the 4 papers that featured it today, double columns and one paragarph in an other. it means nothing to joe public.

It means alot to boxing fans though. Who promotes him will decide whether u will be seeing Hatton fight the best fighters in his division or seeing him defend against low key opposition on SN cards

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:58

In fairness, Warren was the one who wanted the Maussa fight for Hatton in the first place.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 01 Sep 2005, 11:59

Has anyone else noticed a load of people with under 100posts complaining about Hatton leaving Allegedly? Allegedly has made a mint of Ricky so can't have complaints.

Allegedlys screwed over his fair share of fighters so get what he deserves - Vanzie and Witter to name 2.

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:02

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Has anyone else noticed a load of people with under 100posts complaining about Hatton leaving Allegedly?

I fail to see the relevance?

J · Post by J » 01 Sep 2005, 12:03

POOR OLD WAYNE ALEXADER IS ANOTHER.

bloke hasnt got that much time and he is still to have a decent fight post his demolition of Takaloo.

just plain wrong that is.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:08

EddieShredder wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Has anyone else noticed a load of people with under 100posts complaining about Hatton leaving Allegedly?
I fail to see the relevance?

That's because you are new here - no offence intended, all genuine posters very welcome. 8)

People from promotional companies - more than one - set up accounts on here occasionally, publicly toe the party line, tell the rest of us we know fornicate all, are usually exposed, then leave...until next time.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:09

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
EddieShredder wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Has anyone else noticed a load of people with under 100posts complaining about Hatton leaving Allegedly?
I fail to see the relevance?
That's because you are new here - no offence intended, all genuine posters very welcome. 8)

People from promotional companies - more than one - set up accounts on here occasionally, publicly toe the party line, tell the rest of us we know fornicate all, are usually exposed, then leave...until next time.

We love them.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:27

I've no sympathy for Alleged fw, but at the same time I'm not convinced that Hattons team has done the right thing for him in the long run. If you look back at the history of champions who have broken from their promoters and attempted to go it alone or under tha backing of their families it has invaribly all ended in tears.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:32

silkov wrote:I've no sympathy for Alleged fw, but at the same time I'm not convinced that Hattons team has done the right thing for him in the long run. If you look back at the history of champions who have broken from their promoters and attempted to go it alone or under tha backing of their families it has invaribly all ended in tears.

Such as Delahoya?

john2345 · Post by **john2345** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:34

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
john2345 wrote:(2) he took on the established Duff-Barrett-Astaire trio that virtually ran British boxing in the 80s - and who for example fed Frank Bruno and the British boxing public a string of non-fights.
Don't you see any irony in this statement, John, correct though you are?

I assume that the "irony" is the imputation that Warren has the same level of stranglehold over boxing today as the Duff/Barrett/Astaire trio had in the 80s, and has fed the public a series of non-fights. Also later posts make some hint about "people with less than 100 posts"....which if I were pananoid I might imagine implied in some way that anyone who felt some sympathy for FW was part of Warren's organisation.

Let me take this point by point:

- In any era there's generally a dominant promoter - Solomons. Levene, Barrett, Warren - who stays as top dog till the next one comes along. My recollection of the Barrett era was that it was damn hard for anyone to break into the London promotional circle in a big way, but Warren managed to do it. Does FW have the same grip over the game today? He's big - but he's not the only promoter on the scene - and all credit to him for starting with relatively little, getting to be big, losing a fortune to Don King, and having the balls to go make another one!

- Non fights? They all have their share of non-fights, so don't single out Warren. Whilst I think Hennessy puts on good shows I do think he overmatches his fighters at times - look at some of Walker's wars, and where exactly is he taking Thirlwall and the Class of whatever year it was!?

- Less than 100 posts.... well, give me time and I'll probably get to 1000 or more. But don't assume that the volume of posts equates to integrity, or knowledge of the game. If I didn't have to go out to work (and NOT for Warren!) then I'm sure I could get to 1000 by the end of the year!

By the way, as a boxing fan I think Warren should have packed out Villa park over a year ago and matched Witter and Hatton. But he played the promoter game, got Hatton the fight with Kosta at the right time, and got him the title. To me - and maybe I'm bering naive here - I would have thought Hatton would have re-paid that with at least a few defences on his shows. But then again, maybe FW is one step ahead, and is now focused on Amir Khan...

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:34

silkov wrote:I've no sympathy for Alleged fw, but at the same time I'm not convinced that Hattons team has done the right thing for him in the long run. If you look back at the history of champions who have broken from their promoters and attempted to go it alone or under tha backing of their families it has invaribly all ended in tears.

Who's to say they will go it alone? This could be a one off as Hatton needs to be fighting and so they need to get something going for a fight this year. They may be just weighing up options. Who knows what they are planning.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:35

Might even get to see Hatton/Witter next year. FW obviously had an axe to grind there, and it was never gonna happen if he stayed at SN

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:38

MightyWarrior wrote:Might even get to see Hatton/Witter next year. FW obviously had an axe to grind there, and it was never gonna happen if he stayed at SN

True. And it's a fight I would love to see, if Mayweather moves up and Witter could get the WBC title it could be for all 3 belts.

All British Undisputed title fight - now that really would be something!

shakermaker · Post by **shakermaker** » 01 Sep 2005, 12:39

I think it's good for boxing if Hatton goes on his own. Let him earn his money because nobody else could sell out the MEN arena every 3 months against C grade opposition.