Harren Vs Hatton

lvlarc · Post by **lvlarc** » 03 Oct 2005, 16:57

Warren's a money guzzling twat. I can't believe he's trying to stop Hatton unifying the titles, he should be scorned upon.

nas7232 · Post by **nas7232** » 03 Oct 2005, 17:52

It's the right thing to do for Warren, not for the the fans though.

Foggy · Post by **Foggy** » 04 Oct 2005, 04:55

Still think that Warren is bluffing, its only natural that he would want to keep hold of Hatton, from a business point of view he would be stupid to let Hatton without a fight.

BunglesFingers · Post by **BunglesFingers** » 04 Oct 2005, 05:39

Many boxing propmoters seem to want everything their own way and are prepared to get the lawyers involved whenever anyone tries to leave them. It's been like this for a long time.

If Hatton has such a good case, the only reason to bring these legal proceedings is to try and get to him and mess up his preparations for the fight.

Hatton will always have the legal issues in the back of his mind until it's all sorted. By delaying the hearings ticket sales may also be affected.

It seems as though some people would rather see him lose his title just because he wants to do his own thing.

Pretty pathetic really.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 04 Oct 2005, 05:55

allegedly has done a fantastic job of promoting and moving Hatton, I honestly don't think any other promoter in the UK could have moved him to the title with so little risk for so much money.

This appears to me to come down to a grudge between Ray Hatton and Warren, judging by what I've read, obviously that's not the whole picture, as I can only judge from second hand reports, but it appears not to be about money, nor about opportunities.

Warren wanted the Maussa fight, now Hatton is going to get the Maussa fight but will not be appearing on ITV, nor to a 22,000 crowd as he would have done. I personally wonder whether or not he stands to make any more money or neccesarily get any fights he wouldn't have got.

Hobson and Waterman have done a great job for Clinton Woods, but all their fights have been in the UK, do they have the experience to take Hatton abroad as this is what a lot of this is supposed to be about?

This isn't a white hat-black hat situation. Warren isn't the devil and Ricky Hatton isn't an angel and vice versa, this is a business dispute.

Ricky is a millionnaire off the back of a career built on fighting mostly absolute pigeons, he's made a mint out of what's been a relatively easy ride in boxing terms. Fair play to him, people have enjoyed the ride, but he didn't get to do so by chance.

Ricky and his father have a right to employ whoseover they wish to promote him, and Frank is just protecting his interests, after all he has a contractual obligation to fulfill with ITV. Turning this into some sort of victorian melodrama might be entertaining for some people, but it's a little ridiculous.

BunglesFingers · Post by **BunglesFingers** » 04 Oct 2005, 06:08

Well said JM, both camps have done extremely well out of Hatton's career but why do promoters always kick up such a fuss when a fighter wants to ditch them? How many times have we heard a promoter wish a fighter well and just let him go?
The Maloney/Lewis case was another example. It all comes down to greed in the end.

Friendship and money.......

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 04 Oct 2005, 06:34

Good post JM. However, would Arsenal just let Theirry Henry go to Chelsea would Liverpool let Gerrard walk...No, Why? Because they have binding contracts and are thereofre a vital part/asset of the clubs who hold their contracts and have invested in their careers. Sport is the same in all walks, you sign to a club, Promoter, organisation whatever that is how it works. Contracts work both ways and I feel sure that had Hatton got smashed by Kostya he would have not tried to jump ship and expected FW to honour more purses for the rebuilding project.

As for wishing luck... that happens at the end of a contract when both parties have fulfilled their obligations. FW recently said that Ricky can go his own way at the end of the three fights, did he not?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 04 Oct 2005, 08:31

boxingchat wrote:Good post JM. However, would Arsenal just let Theirry Henry go to Chelsea would Liverpool let Gerrard walk...No, Why? Because they have binding contracts and are thereofre a vital part/asset of the clubs who hold their contracts and have invested in their careers. Sport is the same in all walks, you sign to a club, Promoter, organisation whatever that is how it works. Contracts work both ways and I feel sure that had Hatton got smashed by Kostya he would have not tried to jump ship and expected FW to honour more purses for the rebuilding project.

As for wishing luck... that happens at the end of a contract when both parties have fulfilled their obligations. FW recently said that Ricky can go his own way at the end of the three fights, did he not?

Well I'm sure that if the contract is binding the courts will uphold it. I've seen no evidence to suggest that there's anything so clear cut going on to date though.

One difference though, is that a promoter who has a fighter under contract, can easily not bother their arse to find any decent offers for their fighter. This often happens to fighters who fall out of favour with their promoter. It would be unlikely to happen to Hatton though, as I doubt a loss to Tszyu would have done much to kill off his fan base.