The Sky Sports debate / chat thing last night...

[MacTavish]

My thoughts - David Haye was surprisingly quiet. Agogo (sp?) seems like a good egg and switched on, Amir was blinged up but came across ok. Really like the cut of Carl Froch's jib - came across as bright, articulate and passionate - and funny.

Was a good 1hrs viewing - catch it on repeats if you can.

[banjo]

I thought it was quite good, bit pretentious at times("you'll never get other sportsmen doing this" fornicate off! yes you would) but overall I enjoyed it.

[Chambers2]

I thought it was excellent, got a lot of respect for them all, but especially Froch. He's a proper bloke who doesn't seem to have let his fame, success and money go to his head.

They made a good point about most fans only seeing the boxers for a few minutes before the fight, during the fight and for a passion-fuelled post fight interview. It's good for them/us to see the man behind the boxer IMO, with shows such as last nights and the 24/7 & 360 shows. I hope they make a regular thing of getting them all (and others) round the table again.

[youngrell]

I was also surprised how quiet David Haye was, considering before hand you would say he'd be the most vocal of the 5 guys there and almost like a senior figure, Johnny Nelson aside.

I thought Froch was a bit annoying to begin with as he kept killing the conversation dead with little quips that nobody found funny or quite understood, and it really reiterated to me why the general public haven't really taken to him. But then he grew into it towards the end and it was almost just like a one on one chat with him and Nelson and he carried it the full hour really.

Khan give little insight at all and just spurned out cliche after cliche. I think the guy has had way too much media training and finds it hard to be himself in front of the camera. Nice enough guy but just talks for the sake of talking.

Agogo I thought doesn't seem the brightest but seems very down to earth and has a good attitude, he could cross over very well.

Overall I found the programme a little boring. They constantly interrupted each other when it seemed like a decent story was starting and we never got the end of those stories. These were (at least 3 of them) currently the best fighters from the UK, but that didn't equate to the best boxing conversation. They'd have been better off with some fighters who can talk a little better without too many cliches but also have the respect of fans as very good fighters. Like a Jamie Moore, even a Tony Bellew.

[banjo]

One thing that did annoy me was how the subject changed so quickly.

[JLP]

I was also surprised how quiet David Haye was...

Haye's last fight was against a journeyman, the one before that he got picked apart, and the one before that was against a bum. Of course he's going to be quiet when the guy next to him has fought Mikkel Kessler, Arthur Abraham, Glen Johnson, Andre Ward, Lucien Bute, and Yusaf Mack in pretty much the same time span.

[youngrell]

I was also surprised how quiet David Haye was...

Haye's last fight was against a journeyman, the one before that he got picked apart, and the one before that was against a bum. Of course he's going to be quiet when the guy next to him has fought Mikkel Kessler, Arthur Abraham, Glen Johnson, Andre Ward, Lucien Bute, and Yusaf Mack in pretty much the same time span.

Wow, you're impartial aren't you?

[JLP]

I was also surprised how quiet David Haye was...

Haye's last fight was against a journeyman, the one before that he got picked apart, and the one before that was against a bum. Of course he's going to be quiet when the guy next to him has fought Mikkel Kessler, Arthur Abraham, Glen Johnson, Andre Ward, Lucien Bute, and Yusaf Mack in pretty much the same time span.

Wow, you're impartial aren't you?

What've I written that's incorrect?

[youngrell]

Well for a start I don't think you can call Chisora a journeyman, he's a former British champ who has challenged for the European and World title in his last few fights. And losing to Klitchsko is hardly poor form.

As for Froch, you could easily put your Haye spin on it and say he lost to Kessler, got 'picked apart' by Ward, fought 2 journeymen in Johnson and Mack and Abraham wasn't all that anyway.

It's easy to discredit someone, both these guys have achieved a lot, just because you dislike David Haye it's not fair to look at his achievements with different eyes to Froch's.

[dondada]

Well for a start I don't think you can call Chisora a journeyman, he's a former British champ who has challenged for the European and World title in his last few fights. And losing to Klitchsko is hardly poor form.

As for Froch, you could easily put your Haye spin on it and say he lost to Kessler, got 'picked apart' by Ward, fought 2 journeymen in Johnson and Mack and Abraham wasn't all that anyway.

It's easy to discredit someone, both these guys have achieved a lot, just because you dislike David Haye it's not fair to look at his achievements with different eyes to Froch's.

Look at their respective achievements with the same eyes...surely Froch's far outweighs Haye's? The only shame is the reverse is true of their bank balances, one suspects.

[Chambers2]

Haye's last fight was against a journeyman, the one before that he got picked apart, and the one before that was against a bum. Of course he's going to be quiet when the guy next to him has fought Mikkel Kessler, Arthur Abraham, Glen Johnson, Andre Ward, Lucien Bute, and Yusaf Mack in pretty much the same time span.

Wow, you're impartial aren't you?

What've I written that's incorrect?

Chisora's not a journeyman for starters. You fail to mention "he got picked apart" by the #1 in the division who hasn't been beat since 2004

.... and why is that the reason Haye was quieter than we'd expect? Maybe you know him a lot better than myself, but maybe he's just not as loud as we'd expect away from boxing or he may have just had a quiet night

[youngrell]

Well for a start I don't think you can call Chisora a journeyman, he's a former British champ who has challenged for the European and World title in his last few fights. And losing to Klitchsko is hardly poor form.

As for Froch, you could easily put your Haye spin on it and say he lost to Kessler, got 'picked apart' by Ward, fought 2 journeymen in Johnson and Mack and Abraham wasn't all that anyway.

It's easy to discredit someone, both these guys have achieved a lot, just because you dislike David Haye it's not fair to look at his achievements with different eyes to Froch's.

Look at their respective achievements with the same eyes...surely Froch's far outweighs Haye's? The only shame is the reverse is true of their bank balances, one suspects.

I didn't say Haye outweighs Froch, I just pointed out that if you're looking at one guy negatively it is just as easy to do so toward the other guy. Both have achieved a lot.

[JLP]

Well for a start I don't think you can call Chisora a journeyman, he's a former British champ who has challenged for the European and World title in his last few fights. And losing to Klitchsko is hardly poor form.

As for Froch, you could easily put your Haye spin on it and say he lost to Kessler, got 'picked apart' by Ward, fought 2 journeymen in Johnson and Mack and Abraham wasn't all that anyway.

It's easy to discredit someone, both these guys have achieved a lot, just because you dislike David Haye it's not fair to look at his achievements with different eyes to Froch's.

I don't dislike David Haye. Quite the opposite. His career has frustrated me but that's by the by.

Chisora hasn't ever beaten a fighter who would be regarded as anything above a clubfighter or a hasbeen in the States and he's lost numerous times. He's a journeyman.

[youngrell]

Well for a start I don't think you can call Chisora a journeyman, he's a former British champ who has challenged for the European and World title in his last few fights. And losing to Klitchsko is hardly poor form.

As for Froch, you could easily put your Haye spin on it and say he lost to Kessler, got 'picked apart' by Ward, fought 2 journeymen in Johnson and Mack and Abraham wasn't all that anyway.

It's easy to discredit someone, both these guys have achieved a lot, just because you dislike David Haye it's not fair to look at his achievements with different eyes to Froch's.

I don't dislike David Haye. Quite the opposite. His career has frustrated me but that's by the by.

Chisora hasn't ever beaten a fighter who would be regarded as anything above a clubfighter or a hasbeen in the States and he's lost numerous times. He's a journeyman.

Well it came across like you had a dislike for him, so my bad.

I guess we'll just disagree on the term journeyman. I would say anyone who is a former champion and is challenging for higher accolades as recent as 2/3 fights ago is a contender. Chisora would easily beat anyone I would consider a journeyman, which he has done so of course.

[Jack B]

My thoughts:

Although it seems I'm going against the grain, I didn't like the way Froch came across (and I'm a big fan of his). He was consistently chipping in when other people were being asked questions, and I just generally felt he was trying to dominate conversations unnecessarily. Whilst I like his no-nonsense, forthright style in one-to-one interviews, on this I found him quite domineering and irritating. He got on my nerves more and more as the hour went on.

I quite liked Khan - for somebody who has essentially been a big star since 17, he is a decent, humble guy. To be honest I always think he comes across fairly well (maybe the exception being post-fight interviews, but the reasons behind that were explained quite well last night) and find it hard to understand why he gets so much stick with hardcore fans. Also, Nelson seemed to be insinuating that Khan had gone to the US because he wasn't famous or popular in the UK - can't agree with that. Average man on the street would know Amir Khan ahead of Carl Froch every day of the week.

Didn't think Haye added a great deal - just seems a laid back, decent fella. Clearly just has an alter-ego that he brings out to try and hype fights and make as much dough as possible.

Ogogo came across well but clearly is just the baby of the group and couldn't add much when talking about pro boxing etc.

Overall, I quite liked it, nice mix up from Ringside, although I must admit the lack of structure was telling. Random subject changes etc interrupted the flow of it. Not sure whether that could be put down to a poor presenter or poor production/planning.

I think a nice idea in the future would be a similar style programme but with boxers who have a greater rivalry (either past or present). For example, I think having Cleverly and Froch together would be good, or Brook and Khan. You could do a legends version with Benn, Eubank, Collins et al. What would be important with that would be to get fighters calm enough to not lose it with each other, leading to the programme just denigrating into an inarticulate slanging match (i.e. Groves/DeGale on Ringside a few years ago).

[Chambers2]

Well for a start I don't think you can call Chisora a journeyman, he's a former British champ who has challenged for the European and World title in his last few fights. And losing to Klitchsko is hardly poor form.

As for Froch, you could easily put your Haye spin on it and say he lost to Kessler, got 'picked apart' by Ward, fought 2 journeymen in Johnson and Mack and Abraham wasn't all that anyway.

It's easy to discredit someone, both these guys have achieved a lot, just because you dislike David Haye it's not fair to look at his achievements with different eyes to Froch's.

I don't dislike David Haye. Quite the opposite. His career has frustrated me but that's by the by.

Chisora hasn't ever beaten a fighter who would be regarded as anything above a clubfighter or a hasbeen in the States and he's lost numerous times. He's a journeyman.

That journeyman clearly beat Helenius (who was being heavily touted) and he pushed Vitali closer than anybody else has done since Lennox Lewis beat him. He's been British, Commonwealth and Europena champion and he's challenged for World titles

It's nothing short of idiocy calling Chisora a journeyman!!!! .....look up Ernie Smith, Peter Buckley, Barrie Jones, Peter McDonagh, Willaim Warburton etc. to see what a journeyman looks like

[JLP]

Well for a start I don't think you can call Chisora a journeyman, he's a former British champ who has challenged for the European and World title in his last few fights. And losing to Klitchsko is hardly poor form.

As for Froch, you could easily put your Haye spin on it and say he lost to Kessler, got 'picked apart' by Ward, fought 2 journeymen in Johnson and Mack and Abraham wasn't all that anyway.

It's easy to discredit someone, both these guys have achieved a lot, just because you dislike David Haye it's not fair to look at his achievements with different eyes to Froch's.

I don't dislike David Haye. Quite the opposite. His career has frustrated me but that's by the by.

Chisora hasn't ever beaten a fighter who would be regarded as anything above a clubfighter or a hasbeen in the States and he's lost numerous times. He's a journeyman.

That journeyman clearly beat Helenius (who was being heavily touted) and he pushed Vitali closer than anybody else has done since Lennox Lewis beat him. He's been British, Commonwealth and Europena champion and he's challenged for World titles

It's nothing short of idiocy calling Chisora a journeyman!!!! .....look up Ernie Smith, Peter Buckley, Barrie Jones, Peter McDonagh, Willaim Warburton etc. to see what a journeyman looks like

He also clearly lost to Tyson Fury. Helenius is not very good. Vitali is long passed it and should retire before he's picked off by a guy who wouldn't have touched him a few years back. At a push Chisora could be called a "gatekeeper" but I'm content to use "journeyman" until he actually beats someone who isn't another journeyman.

[Chambers2]

I don't dislike David Haye. Quite the opposite. His career has frustrated me but that's by the by.

Chisora hasn't ever beaten a fighter who would be regarded as anything above a clubfighter or a hasbeen in the States and he's lost numerous times. He's a journeyman.

That journeyman clearly beat Helenius (who was being heavily touted) and he pushed Vitali closer than anybody else has done since Lennox Lewis beat him. He's been British, Commonwealth and Europena champion and he's challenged for World titles

It's nothing short of idiocy calling Chisora a journeyman!!!! .....look up Ernie Smith, Peter Buckley, Barrie Jones, Peter McDonagh, Willaim Warburton etc. to see what a journeyman looks like

He also clearly lost to Tyson Fury. Helenius is not very good. Vitali is long passed it and should retire before he's picked off by a guy who wouldn't have touched him a few years back. At a push Chisora could be called a "gatekeeper" but I'm content to use "journeyman" until he actually beats someone who isn't another journeyman.

OK you can call a Hippo a Giraffe if you want

[JLP]

OK you can call a Hippo a Giraffe if you want

You've always been good at that, mate. For how many years were you chief flag waver of the Audley Harrison for Heavyweight Great Society?

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

OK you can call a Hippo a Giraffe if you want

You've always been good at that, mate. For how many years were you chief flag waver of the Audley Harrison for Heavyweight Great Society?

He wasn't on his own.

[macaca]

OK you can call a Hippo a Giraffe if you want

You've always been good at that, mate. For how many years were you chief flag waver of the Audley Harrison for Heavyweight Great Society?

He wasn't on his own.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda ........................ mosdef coulda .......... shame

Hippo and a Giraffe fornicate we have a baby Tyson ......... cross bread Ghipo

[Chambers2]

OK you can call a Hippo a Giraffe if you want

You've always been good at that, mate. For how many years were you chief flag waver of the Audley Harrison for Heavyweight Great Society?

It was for a fair few years (in my early days) about 5 or 6 I reckon ("He still can"), I was also flag waving for Froch and Haye at the same time.

Is Haye a journeyman as well? what about Cotto?

[stujones]

Can they save the money on debate and show some boxing please.

[Andypittcov]

My thoughts:

Although it seems I'm going against the grain, I didn't like the way Froch came across (and I'm a big fan of his). He was consistently chipping in when other people were being asked questions, and I just generally felt he was trying to dominate conversations unnecessarily. Whilst I like his no-nonsense, forthright style in one-to-one interviews, on this I found him quite domineering and irritating. He got on my nerves more and more as the hour went on.

I quite liked Khan - for somebody who has essentially been a big star since 17, he is a decent, humble guy. To be honest I always think he comes across fairly well (maybe the exception being post-fight interviews, but the reasons behind that were explained quite well last night) and find it hard to understand why he gets so much stick with hardcore fans. Also, Nelson seemed to be insinuating that Khan had gone to the US because he wasn't famous or popular in the UK - can't agree with that. Average man on the street would know Amir Khan ahead of Carl Froch every day of the week.

Didn't think Haye added a great deal - just seems a laid back, decent fella. Clearly just has an alter-ego that he brings out to try and hype fights and make as much dough as possible.

Ogogo came across well but clearly is just the baby of the group and couldn't add much when talking about pro boxing etc.

Overall, I quite liked it, nice mix up from Ringside, although I must admit the lack of structure was telling. Random subject changes etc interrupted the flow of it. Not sure whether that could be put down to a poor presenter or poor production/planning.

I think a nice idea in the future would be a similar style programme but with boxers who have a greater rivalry (either past or present). For example, I think having Cleverly and Froch together would be good, or Brook and Khan. You could do a legends version with Benn, Eubank, Collins et al. What would be important with that would be to get fighters calm enough to not lose it with each other, leading to the programme just denigrating into an inarticulate slanging match (i.e. Groves/DeGale on Ringside a few years ago).

I was going to comment myself but you've summed it up perfectly IMO.

[stujones]

My thoughts:

Although it seems I'm going against the grain, I didn't like the way Froch came across (and I'm a big fan of his). He was consistently chipping in when other people were being asked questions, and I just generally felt he was trying to dominate conversations unnecessarily. Whilst I like his no-nonsense, forthright style in one-to-one interviews, on this I found him quite domineering and irritating. He got on my nerves more and more as the hour went on.

I quite liked Khan - for somebody who has essentially been a big star since 17, he is a decent, humble guy. To be honest I always think he comes across fairly well (maybe the exception being post-fight interviews, but the reasons behind that were explained quite well last night) and find it hard to understand why he gets so much stick with hardcore fans. Also, Nelson seemed to be insinuating that Khan had gone to the US because he wasn't famous or popular in the UK - can't agree with that. Average man on the street would know Amir Khan ahead of Carl Froch every day of the week.

Didn't think Haye added a great deal - just seems a laid back, decent fella. Clearly just has an alter-ego that he brings out to try and hype fights and make as much dough as possible.

Ogogo came across well but clearly is just the baby of the group and couldn't add much when talking about pro boxing etc.

Overall, I quite liked it, nice mix up from Ringside, although I must admit the lack of structure was telling. Random subject changes etc interrupted the flow of it. Not sure whether that could be put down to a poor presenter or poor production/planning.

I think a nice idea in the future would be a similar style programme but with boxers who have a greater rivalry (either past or present). For example, I think having Cleverly and Froch together would be good, or Brook and Khan. You could do a legends version with Benn, Eubank, Collins et al. What would be important with that would be to get fighters calm enough to not lose it with each other, leading to the programme just denigrating into an inarticulate slanging match (i.e. Groves/DeGale on Ringside a few years ago).

I didn't see the debate but although I like Froch and think he such a credit, I cannot help but wonder if his techniques infront of the camera are a part of a reason why his popularity isn't up there (still). No-one can say Eddie aint promoting him right, but I still feel the public haven't engaged with him.

While he is often articulate, insightful and intelligent when being interviewed I do find sometimes with Froch it seems to be a case of "why say 50 words when 5,000 will do". Like when explaining Kessler 2 on Sky sports he had to explain how he lost to Ward, but beat Bute to win the IBF belt and Kessler has had a long lay off but just beat the defending champion Brian Magee to win the WBA belt, so hopefully the WBA and IBF belts will be at stake.... all he needed to say was "its a unification fight".