Blimey, Stu - unlike you pal 8)stujones wrote:
Glyn, I am playing Devil's advocate...
Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
-
Glyn Leach
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2135
- Joined: 25 Dec 2007, 14:08
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Apologies gents, letting off steam there. Thing really makes me angry, maybe more than it should.
Stu, of course I wouldn't worry as much if it was AN Other. The whole issue is Flintoff's celebrity. Nobody cares about AN Other, he doesn't attract media attention. That's why I mentioned how disinterested the media would be if he got hurt. That would not be the case if it were a celeb.
FR, any punch can do the damage, doesn't need to be landed by Tyson in a battle of the bangers. Not going down the any heavyweight can KO any heavyweight road here, no need. Absolutely any punch could do it, from anyone. And it could be the first or the 50th landed, it doesn't matter. If it's going to happen it happens. Flintoff is not used to taking punches, but that isn't the issue either. The issue is that boxing is dangerous full stop. People get hurt. Why risk letting a celebrity dabbler get hurt and damaging the sport? What does the sport stand to gain from it? Irresponsible licensing IMO, very disappointing.
Stu/FR, you're right about my assuming FF is doing this on a whim. Possibly he will be a heavyweight staple for years to come and in 10 years time we will be looking back on this thread and laughing. But if I were to bet...
Anyways, apologies again, just read and heard so much bollocks about this over the last few days that I finally cracked.
Stu, of course I wouldn't worry as much if it was AN Other. The whole issue is Flintoff's celebrity. Nobody cares about AN Other, he doesn't attract media attention. That's why I mentioned how disinterested the media would be if he got hurt. That would not be the case if it were a celeb.
FR, any punch can do the damage, doesn't need to be landed by Tyson in a battle of the bangers. Not going down the any heavyweight can KO any heavyweight road here, no need. Absolutely any punch could do it, from anyone. And it could be the first or the 50th landed, it doesn't matter. If it's going to happen it happens. Flintoff is not used to taking punches, but that isn't the issue either. The issue is that boxing is dangerous full stop. People get hurt. Why risk letting a celebrity dabbler get hurt and damaging the sport? What does the sport stand to gain from it? Irresponsible licensing IMO, very disappointing.
Stu/FR, you're right about my assuming FF is doing this on a whim. Possibly he will be a heavyweight staple for years to come and in 10 years time we will be looking back on this thread and laughing. But if I were to bet...
Anyways, apologies again, just read and heard so much bollocks about this over the last few days that I finally cracked.
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
The way I see it, if the bloke wants to box, who is anyone to tell him he can't. No one has to watch it.
By all accounts the guy is putting in the work, and I'm pretty sure he's fully aware that boxing involves being punched in the face.
If he meets all the BBBofC criteria, then I don't see the argument against giving him the licence.
I hope he gets the respect he deserves after his fight, whatever the outcome. It takes balls to step through the ropes.
By all accounts the guy is putting in the work, and I'm pretty sure he's fully aware that boxing involves being punched in the face.
If he meets all the BBBofC criteria, then I don't see the argument against giving him the licence.
I hope he gets the respect he deserves after his fight, whatever the outcome. It takes balls to step through the ropes.
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Cracking post glyn. I really hope flintoff loses handily without getting hurt to stop this absurd idea that our sport is something you can pock up in a few months. As for "it only being one pro fight" it was bloody lucky bart gun didnt get badly hurt in that wwe are you touh enough debacle a few years ago - granted flintoff wont be in with a butterbean, but heavyweights can dig.Glyn Leach wrote:I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.
Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really effing imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus effing Christ, get out more.
Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.
Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.
I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.
I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.
Will I watch it? Of course I effing will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.
Any news on opponent?
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
I wonder if he'd meet the criteria without his celeb status - i dont know how tough it is to get a liscence.greenyox3 wrote:The way I see it, if the bloke wants to box, who is anyone to tell him he can't. No one has to watch it.
By all accounts the guy is putting in the work, and I'm pretty sure he's fully aware that boxing involves being punched in the face.
If he meets all the BBBofC criteria, then I don't see the argument against giving him the licence.
I hope he gets the respect he deserves after his fight, whatever the outcome. It takes balls to step through the ropes.
-
Final round
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 4911
- Joined: 20 Oct 2010, 17:02
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Fair nuff Glyn ,
i hope it doesn't end badly too for his sake as i do for all boxers as you say any punch can do serious damage. I'm not up on the licensing patterns so it would be interesting to know if many other 34 year old geezers with decent fitness and no combat experience manage to turn pro after a gym fight. I suspect Freddie likes the idea of being a boxer but others around him know what's going on.
que sera sera
que sera sera
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Completely agree with one punch being all it could be and it doesn't matter who the opponent is - it could happen to anyone at any given time in a boxing ring.Glyn Leach wrote:Apologies gents, letting off steam there. Thing really makes me angry, maybe more than it should.
Stu, of course I wouldn't worry as much if it was AN Other. The whole issue is Flintoff's celebrity. Nobody cares about AN Other, he doesn't attract media attention. That's why I mentioned how disinterested the media would be if he got hurt. That would not be the case if it were a celeb.
FR, any punch can do the damage, doesn't need to be landed by Tyson in a battle of the bangers. Not going down the any heavyweight can KO any heavyweight road here, no need. Absolutely any punch could do it, from anyone. And it could be the first or the 50th landed, it doesn't matter. If it's going to happen it happens. Flintoff is not used to taking punches, but that isn't the issue either. The issue is that boxing is dangerous full stop. People get hurt. Why risk letting a celebrity dabbler get hurt and damaging the sport? What does the sport stand to gain from it? Irresponsible licensing IMO, very disappointing.
Stu/FR, you're right about my assuming FF is doing this on a whim. Possibly he will be a heavyweight staple for years to come and in 10 years time we will be looking back on this thread and laughing. But if I were to bet...
Anyways, apologies again, just read and heard so much bollocks about this over the last few days that I finally cracked.
While of course I can see your point about Flintoff's celebrity status being the huge issue. I don't agree that this should be the reason for not granting him licence. Yes, if a 34 year old non celebrity fancied to "play" about with boxing - ends up getting hurt... Yes, it won't make the headlines - but it shouldn't mean that he has more of a right than Flintoff to have a go.
There have been a few books, cannot remember the author/s in which the author has dabbled at various sports in one off scenarios so they can write their chapters - now that is what I call dabbling, there was no two ways about it such authors have played at boxing so it can be a chapter in a book. These guys have been applauded for being a good sport and giving it ago..... that could potentially be similar to the Flintoff situation.
Another scenario - say Flintoff didn't get given a licence but decided not to give up the "dream" so fought on an unlicenced show what then. For sure, it would have got the attention maybe more attention than currently as the BBBoC didn't licence him. Say he got seriously hurt in one of these white collar style shows (which would probably be televised live given the hype) - what then?
I think irrespective of if it was licenced or not, it would still be marquess of queensbury rules and BOXING would have got a lot of negative press. Indeed, maybe the BBBoC would have got some stick for not licencing him and Flintoff seeked other ways to persue his dreams, those without quite the same medical doctors on hand etc.
I think the Haye Chisora thing has demonstrated that if the BBBoC says no - you can still box in the UK. So maybe by having him licenced and fighting under the BBBoC, Flintoff is health is more protective and, as a consequence, so is Boxing.
Just a thought, sorry I don't mean the post to sound disrespectful to non-licenced promoters who I am sure have excellent medical facilities on hand. What I mean though is that I am sure some blame would be given in the general press, if not the boxing press, to the BBBoC if Flintoff got hurt boxing which he was clearly going to do with or without a BBBoC licence.
-
Glyn Leach
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2135
- Joined: 25 Dec 2007, 14:08
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Agree on all counts... Generally speaking, who would care if it wasn't a famous sporting hero. Trouble is he is one and that brings a whole heap of baggage with it. There are many considerations that would not apply to the man in in the street. But whatever, if Flintoff's getting in there then we have to applaud him for it, under any circumstance. Nice round of applause then a hearty wave bye bye, that sounds good to megreenyox3 wrote:The way I see it, if the bloke wants to box, who is anyone to tell him he can't. No one has to watch it.
By all accounts the guy is putting in the work, and I'm pretty sure he's fully aware that boxing involves being punched in the face.
If he meets all the BBBofC criteria, then I don't see the argument against giving him the licence.
I hope he gets the respect he deserves after his fight, whatever the outcome. It takes balls to step through the ropes.
-
sharpei_louis
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 644
- Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 08:30
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
I can totally see where a lot of the anti-Flintoff stuff is coming from, and do agree to a certain extent, but ultimately I'm not sure we can be precious and decide who to include or exclude from the sport. The BBBoC have their criteria for being granted a licence, and if you're a licence holder then you should be allowed to box. I suppose it comes down to whether you think the BBBoC is prejudiced in their issuing of a licence by the money/hype the fight will generate?
If they've considered the potentially damaging consequences of a serious injury mentioned above and still feel that they can grant Flintoff a licence with minimal risk of that on the basis of his skill, then fair enough I have no problem with him doing it.
The Cracknell example is a bit puzzling cause isn't the other guy a cricketer who can obviously box a bit? I personally haven't seen anything concrete to say that Flintoff couldn't be that guy rather than the Cracknell of the piece?
If they've considered the potentially damaging consequences of a serious injury mentioned above and still feel that they can grant Flintoff a licence with minimal risk of that on the basis of his skill, then fair enough I have no problem with him doing it.
The Cracknell example is a bit puzzling cause isn't the other guy a cricketer who can obviously box a bit? I personally haven't seen anything concrete to say that Flintoff couldn't be that guy rather than the Cracknell of the piece?
-
Hagler2002
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 3512
- Joined: 28 Dec 2005, 07:04
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Some of the people on the roads today shouldn't be given driving licenses but they are.
In my opinion a far more dangerous topic to get your knickers in a twist about than Flintoff boxing.
In my opinion a far more dangerous topic to get your knickers in a twist about than Flintoff boxing.
-
Glyn Leach
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2135
- Joined: 25 Dec 2007, 14:08
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Start a thread then Marv ;)Hagler2002 wrote:Some of the people on the roads today shouldn't be given driving licenses but they are.
In my opinion a far more dangerous topic to get your knickers in a twist about than Flintoff boxing.
Look, this'll probably all work out fine. Old Fred will get hugged to hell and back on pts and we'll never see him again - unless we're big fat blokes, in which case we might take an interest in his clothing range. I just don't like people pissing about with this sport. I've been there when fighters have been 'badly hurt', it isn't a game, it's horrific. There is a huge element of risk any time anyone enters the ring. We don't sit there watching with that thought in mind, but that's the reality of the situation every time the first bell rings. If, God forbid, one of those 'bad nights' involved a celeb who isn't even a fighter... The backlash doesn't even bear thinking about. Boxing will get panned to hell. And for what? For some dabbler's CV, to go alongside Celebrity Big Brother and I'm a C*nt in the Jungle, Get a Life? Nah. Not happy.
Last edited by Glyn Leach on 09 Nov 2012, 04:21, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
I'm being a bit cheeky and jumping in on page 5 without reading the preceding pages, but the guy Cracknell was in with had definitely boxed before. Cracknell was outclassed from the opening bell and it was a good example of bad match-making.sharpei_louis wrote:The Cracknell example is a bit puzzling cause isn't the other guy a cricketer who can obviously box a bit?
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Stu, this isn't in any way a contradiction to anything you've said, but just thought you and others on this thread may find it interesting that my mate may have been responsible! He took part in white collar boxing here in Dubai and happens to be a cricket nut who got friendly with Flintoff when he was living here (would have been around three years ago at a guess). Flintoff expressed an interest in the boxing sessions so my friend took him down to the 'KO Gym' in Dubai Marina, which is run by a Kiwi guy called Zack. Apparently Flintoff was absolutely blowing out of his arse in the first couple of sessions, but my mate said you could then start to recognise the signs of a pro sportsman in terms of the competitive instinct kicking in etc. I might be seeing him tonight so will ask for more detail, but I always got the impression that his interest tailed off and that he didn't actually spar down there, but it could have been that it was simply close to the time he moved back to the UK and that those initial sessions actually lit the spark... will elaborate more if I get any info, but thought it was a nice little anecdote to share!stujones wrote:However, I think its wrong to claim Flintoff is doing this for very different reasons without assessing it....we can look at Curtis' career in hindsight now and say how well he has done. When he first turned pro though, before his first bout people must have, and possibly should have, been questioning his motives and motivations.
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Flintoff was doing the odd session at Ricky Hattons's gym four or five years back, too, and I'm fairly sure he didn't spar then either. I think that was his first exposure to boxing training and, like in your example, it was more of a dabble than anything else. He didn't do any boxing/martial arts as a kid.Deserter wrote:Stu, this isn't in any way a contradiction to anything you've said, but just thought you and others on this thread may find it interesting that my mate may have been responsible! He took part in white collar boxing here in Dubai and happens to be a cricket nut who got friendly with Flintoff when he was living here (would have been around three years ago at a guess). Flintoff expressed an interest in the boxing sessions so my friend took him down to the 'KO Gym' in Dubai Marina, which is run by a Kiwi guy called Zack. Apparently Flintoff was absolutely blowing out of his arse in the first couple of sessions, but my mate said you could then start to recognise the signs of a pro sportsman in terms of the competitive instinct kicking in etc. I might be seeing him tonight so will ask for more detail, but I always got the impression that his interest tailed off and that he didn't actually spar down there, but it could have been that it was simply close to the time he moved back to the UK and that those initial sessions actually lit the spark... will elaborate more if I get any info, but thought it was a nice little anecdote to share!stujones wrote:However, I think its wrong to claim Flintoff is doing this for very different reasons without assessing it....we can look at Curtis' career in hindsight now and say how well he has done. When he first turned pro though, before his first bout people must have, and possibly should have, been questioning his motives and motivations.
-
keithmoonhangover
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 17124
- Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Glyn,
What make Freddie any more or less likely to get 'McClellan'd' than any other fighters?
McClellan, Watson, Deuk-Koo Kim and a lot of others were involved in long brutal fights. I can't remember a 4 rounder having the same effect.
What make Freddie any more or less likely to get 'McClellan'd' than any other fighters?
McClellan, Watson, Deuk-Koo Kim and a lot of others were involved in long brutal fights. I can't remember a 4 rounder having the same effect.
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Interesting... all of this, coupled with a thread I've literally just read on ESB, suggests he really shouldn't be getting in there and would be better off doing something like a white collar for charityJLP wrote:Flintoff was doing the odd session at Ricky Hattons's gym four or five years back, too, and I'm fairly sure he didn't spar then either. I think that was his first exposure to boxing training and, like in your example, it was more of a dabble than anything else. He didn't do any boxing/martial arts as a kid.Deserter wrote:Stu, this isn't in any way a contradiction to anything you've said, but just thought you and others on this thread may find it interesting that my mate may have been responsible! He took part in white collar boxing here in Dubai and happens to be a cricket nut who got friendly with Flintoff when he was living here (would have been around three years ago at a guess). Flintoff expressed an interest in the boxing sessions so my friend took him down to the 'KO Gym' in Dubai Marina, which is run by a Kiwi guy called Zack. Apparently Flintoff was absolutely blowing out of his arse in the first couple of sessions, but my mate said you could then start to recognise the signs of a pro sportsman in terms of the competitive instinct kicking in etc. I might be seeing him tonight so will ask for more detail, but I always got the impression that his interest tailed off and that he didn't actually spar down there, but it could have been that it was simply close to the time he moved back to the UK and that those initial sessions actually lit the spark... will elaborate more if I get any info, but thought it was a nice little anecdote to share!stujones wrote:However, I think its wrong to claim Flintoff is doing this for very different reasons without assessing it....we can look at Curtis' career in hindsight now and say how well he has done. When he first turned pro though, before his first bout people must have, and possibly should have, been questioning his motives and motivations.
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
You're such a drama queen Glyn!! What an over reaction to someone wanting a pro fight that isGlyn Leach wrote:I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.
Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really effing imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus effing Christ, get out more.
Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.
Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.
I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.
I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.
Will I watch it? Of course I effing will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.
You say he "Can't fight a lick", seen him spar much Glyn?
He's obviously gonna be matched carefully (1st fight especially), if the BBBC have seen him in action and say he's fit to fight as a pro, then he's fit to fight.
Obviously if Flintoff gets "McClellan'd" then it'll be bad for boxing, but lets face it it's a 1 in a million chance. The McGuigans and the referee will surely be over-cautious if anything, no way they're gonna let him go into a live and death battle in his first fight
COME ON FREDDIE!!!
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Freddie has been putting in a lot of sparring to be fair. In fact I was hoping to give him a few rounds when he was down at the gym I train at recently but I was ill that week. I know he sparred several times with a guy I have sparred with and I was told that Freddie came worse off. That guy is not a pro and has had a hand ful of amateur fights. Personally I don't think Freddie should be doing this until he has had a good few white collar or amateur fights first but that's his choice.
I guess it depends on whether the journeyman he fights is told to just go out there to make him look good.
I guess it depends on whether the journeyman he fights is told to just go out there to make him look good.
-
Glyn Leach
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2135
- Joined: 25 Dec 2007, 14:08
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
He's no more or less likely. The point is he isn't a boxer, he's a celeb having a dabble. If it happens to a man whose livelihood depends on it, fine - so to speak. But he's someone who appears to be doing it for other reasons and who could drop the sport in a shitload of trouble if he gets hurt. That's my point; potential damage to the sport. Why risk it for reality TV culture?keithmoonhangover wrote:Glyn,
What make Freddie any more or less likely to get 'McClellan'd' than any other fighters?
McClellan, Watson, Deuk-Koo Kim and a lot of others were involved in long brutal fights. I can't remember a 4 rounder having the same effect.
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
Because Freddie has the same right to box as anyone elseGlyn Leach wrote:He's no more or less likely. The point is he isn't a boxer, he's a celeb having a dabble. If it happens to a man whose livelihood depends on it, fine - so to speak. But he's someone who appears to be doing it for other reasons and who could drop the sport in a shitload of trouble if he gets hurt. That's my point; potential damage to the sport. Why risk it for reality TV culture?keithmoonhangover wrote:Glyn,
What make Freddie any more or less likely to get 'McClellan'd' than any other fighters?
McClellan, Watson, Deuk-Koo Kim and a lot of others were involved in long brutal fights. I can't remember a 4 rounder having the same effect.
Should the BBBC have one set of rules for celebs and one for the man on the street?
-
Glyn Leach
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2135
- Joined: 25 Dec 2007, 14:08
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
If sparring was a guideline Sweet D would have been world champion. I'm genuinely baffled - and disappointed - by the inability to understand quite how dangerous this sport is that I'm seeing from some in this thread. All it takes is one punch. People in the street die from one punch all the time. Unless matey the opponent throws no punches at all, there is an element of danger.Chambers2 wrote:You're such a drama queen Glyn!! What an over reaction to someone wanting a pro fight that isGlyn Leach wrote:I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.
Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really effing imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus effing Christ, get out more.
Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.
Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.
I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.
I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.
Will I watch it? Of course I effing will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.
You say he "Can't fight a lick", seen him spar much Glyn?
He's obviously gonna be matched carefully (1st fight especially), if the BBBC have seen him in action and say he's fit to fight as a pro, then he's fit to fight.
Obviously if Flintoff gets "McClellan'd" then it'll be bad for boxing, but lets face it it's a 1 in a million chance. The McGuigans and the referee will surely be over-cautious if anything, no way they're gonna let him go into a live and death battle in his first fight
COME ON FREDDIE!!!
But as I keep having to say, the issue is why risk it? Why risk a high profile disaster? Likelihood percentages don't matter at all. It CAN happen, that's the bottom line. Boxing doesn't benefit from Freddie having a fight, it only stands to lose, so why risk the standing of the sport for one celebrity's desire to expand his CV? I really don't get it.
-
Glyn Leach
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2135
- Joined: 25 Dec 2007, 14:08
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
100% YES. Joe Public can do the sport no harm but a celeb can do massive damage.Chambers2 wrote:Should the BBBC have one set of rules for celebs and one for the man on the street?
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
can i just ask what where your thoughts on the Gervais Vs Bovey fight (i know it was an am fight and they both had limited experience so its not the same scenario) but it was on ITV prime time and 2 middle aged men could of hurt each otherGlyn Leach wrote:100% YES. Joe Public can do the sport no harm but a celeb can do massive damage.Chambers2 wrote:Should the BBBC have one set of rules for celebs and one for the man on the street?
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
While I support his right to get a license I think the way he's going about things is really daft. If I was in his position and was wanting to try my hand at a new sport then I'd be keeping as low profile as I could rather than being a headliner at the largest indoor arena in the UK and on TV.
-
keithmoonhangover
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 17124
- Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42
Re: Frank Maloney says sack BBBofC chairman for Flintoff license
I have a lot of respect for you Glyn, but you avoided my McClellan, Watson, Deuk-Koo Kim.Glyn Leach wrote:He's no more or less likely. The point is he isn't a boxer, he's a celeb having a dabble. If it happens to a man whose livelihood depends on it, fine - so to speak. But he's someone who appears to be doing it for other reasons and who could drop the sport in a shitload of trouble if he gets hurt. That's my point; potential damage to the sport. Why risk it for reality TV culture?keithmoonhangover wrote:Glyn,
What make Freddie any more or less likely to get 'McClellan'd' than any other fighters?
McClellan, Watson, Deuk-Koo Kim and a lot of others were involved in long brutal fights. I can't remember a 4 rounder having the same effect.
I would counter your reality TV point, with it potentially bringing more fans to the sport.