Sky cut boxing coverage

Post Reply
Ade L
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 600
Joined: 21 Aug 2009, 11:18

Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by Ade L »

Gutted :-(
ashedward
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 420
Joined: 19 Apr 2009, 16:17

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by ashedward »

ade the grenade wrote:Gutted :-(
Old news mate :zzz:
ILikeBeer
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 10941
Joined: 25 Dec 2004, 07:23

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by ILikeBeer »

But him being gutted is new news.
Londonirish
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3064
Joined: 20 Nov 2008, 13:02

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by Londonirish »

ILikeBeer wrote:But him being gutted is new news.

:D :TU:
sweetscience
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2816
Joined: 22 Sep 2004, 09:09

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by sweetscience »

is 20 shows a year a cut ?

dont remember there being 20 shows this year... defo not worthwhile ones
ILikeBeer
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 10941
Joined: 25 Dec 2004, 07:23

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by ILikeBeer »

sweetscience wrote:is 20 shows a year a cut ?

dont remember there being 20 shows this year... defo not worthwhile ones
I don't know what your definition of worthwhile is, but it's certainly a cut, when you consider at one point they were showing domestic fights almost every weekend. With allegedly arriving, and the odd Primetime and Channel Five evening of boxing, I guess cuts in how much boxing Sky could show was somewhat of an inevitability. But still. 20 episodes of Saturday Fight Night a year isn't that much.
fizzjambo
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1283
Joined: 22 Sep 2010, 10:36

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by fizzjambo »

ILikeBeer wrote:
sweetscience wrote:is 20 shows a year a cut ?

dont remember there being 20 shows this year... defo not worthwhile ones
I don't know what your definition of worthwhile is, but it's certainly a cut, when you consider at one point they were showing domestic fights almost every weekend. With Allegedly channel arriving, and the odd Primetime and Channel Five evening of boxing, I guess cuts in how much boxing Sky could show was somewhat of an inevitability. But still. 20 episodes of Saturday Fight Night a year isn't that much.
I'm 99% sure it's actually worse than that. Sky have a contract with Matchroom for 20 Saturday night slots of boxing a year (actually 40 over two years but you get the point) but 6 of those nights are going to be Prizefighters. Outside of Prizefighter your getting just over an average of one domestic card per month.................
jessi
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3008
Joined: 11 Jul 2010, 11:59

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by jessi »

6 prize fighters per year would leave 14 shows over about 40 weeks !
6 prize fighters per 24 months would leave 28 shows over about 86 weeks !
There both awful stats !
What happened to the odd show on a Tuesday/Wednesday a Friday fight night followed by a fight international on a sunday morning from 1am ?
I suppose b o x n a t i o n, ch5 and sky put together there's more than ever !
fizzjambo
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1283
Joined: 22 Sep 2010, 10:36

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by fizzjambo »

jessi wrote:6 prize fighters per year would leave 14 shows over about 40 weeks !
6 prize fighters per 24 months would leave 28 shows over about 86 weeks !
There both awful stats !
What happened to the odd show on a Tuesday/Wednesday a Friday fight night followed by a fight international on a sunday morning from 1am ?
I suppose b o x n a t i o n, ch5 and sky put together there's more than ever !
Sorry, poor post on my part, in regard to it being unclear. Matchroom are contracted to 40 Saturday night slots over 24 months, of which there are six Prizefighters per year leaving 28 non-Prizefighter nights over two years. For that I want the 14 cards a year to be BUMPER. I'm not really seeing BUMPER so far..........
jessi
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3008
Joined: 11 Jul 2010, 11:59

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by jessi »

Ok thanks fizz, it's very poor though, even if froch had 2, brook had 3, frampton had 4 and barker had 4 that only leaves 1 more slot, and I forgot bellew !
They must be sharing bills obviously but what with injurys and that there's not alot of room for error, or is 40 the minimum ?
earsjohn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1691
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 14:34

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by earsjohn »

So this is a 20 card per year deal with Matchroom right? So that would leave room for non-Matchroom international cards? I'm not sure what people have been watching over recent years, but 20 domestic cards, even accounting for 6 Prizefighters, isn't that far off what we're used to. If it means losing the likes of Cox v Sai, Vassell v Colomban, Murray v El Ouazghari (all recent headliners) in favour of competitive, stacked cards, then I'm not going to be too dissatisfied (obviously its a big "if"). This idea that the last two years with the four contracted promoters has delivered a succession of great fight nights is a bit rose tinted. There were far more Stuart Hall v John Donnellys than there were John Murray v Kevin Mitchells.
ashedward
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 420
Joined: 19 Apr 2009, 16:17

Re: Sky cut boxing coverage

Post by ashedward »

It`s a cut,but maby not as big of one as some think.The bills should have 3 live fights and be 3 hours long instead of 2 so that would be 60 hours as year from Matchroom rather then the 80 we have in other years from the other domestic promoters.They will still pick up Khans fights and the ocational international card like Ward-Dawson.
If the quality is good from Matchroom this won`t be too bad at all and who knows mayby better in longterm becuse some of the main events have been crap by some promoters.I hope they don`t have 6 prizfighters a year 3-4 is more then enough.The London card looks a bit thin but the Belfast one looks quality.I am also happy that Hearn has McDonnell on the Brook bill because he is a good fighter who has gone under the radar a bit
Post Reply