Where are you seeing this?? If that's the case that boy needs to give up.. He didn't hit Ronnie to trouble him..mickey1975 wrote:Tris Dixon was worried at one point Ronnie was going to get stopped! Team Clarks version is the complete opposite to everyone else who was there!
Clark v Evans
Re: Clark v Evans
-
mickey1975
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 23181
- Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54
Re: Clark v Evans
Boxing News, in print, by the editors ringside report!daviddee wrote:Where are you seeing this?? If that's the case that boy needs to give up.. He didn't hit Ronnie to trouble him..mickey1975 wrote:Tris Dixon was worried at one point Ronnie was going to get stopped! Team Clarks version is the complete opposite to everyone else who was there!
-
semtexreilly
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 215
- Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 13:26
Re: Clark v Evans
Hopefully a video of the whole fight gets posted soon to clear up a few facts, as for the boxing news report,the only way clark was gonna get stopped would have been if the ref disqualified him for taking the piss laying across the top ropes, when evans claimed he got hit in the balls
Re: Clark v Evans
Wow honestly , telling you right now craig evans wouldn't stop ronnie in 150 rounds, these
Prospects are talked up and they don't care who they piss on to do it, telling lies, my neice has marked ronnie more than craig Evans done in 10 rounds, ronnie marks itching his eye normally,
Prospects are talked up and they don't care who they piss on to do it, telling lies, my neice has marked ronnie more than craig Evans done in 10 rounds, ronnie marks itching his eye normally,
Re: Clark v Evans
so far, Lillis, Kugan, Tris Dixon all say Clark lost.....his brother and his team say he won...weird that
Seriously, I need to see this fight now!!!! please anyone post it online and let me know where to find it!!!
Really am interested in seeing it purely down to this forum!
Seriously, I need to see this fight now!!!! please anyone post it online and let me know where to find it!!!
Really am interested in seeing it purely down to this forum!
Re: Clark v Evans
Guys listen, ronnie fought Ryan walsh, every single journalist said he lost! One journelest in james Hernandez stood up like a man and said partisan crowd swayed it, ronnie won the fight, what happened next??? He was banned for attending local shows in norwich, same
Goes to all aspects in life, you keep whoever is getting you work happy, they all having working relationship with allegedly, that's boxing, nobody cares craig got decision as
People who matter know the truth, but don't talk crap and say craig hurt ronnie as I'm truth ronnie has fought about 10 fighters who hit harder than craig(including journeymen) it is what it is, same as troy for me troy won a close fight in which wasn't great to watch, troy ducked low and fought to a plan, ronnie stood in front too much and wanted to trade, They will show best of craig on allegedly as that was boxing is about, cheating , lies and arse licking,
Goes to all aspects in life, you keep whoever is getting you work happy, they all having working relationship with allegedly, that's boxing, nobody cares craig got decision as
People who matter know the truth, but don't talk crap and say craig hurt ronnie as I'm truth ronnie has fought about 10 fighters who hit harder than craig(including journeymen) it is what it is, same as troy for me troy won a close fight in which wasn't great to watch, troy ducked low and fought to a plan, ronnie stood in front too much and wanted to trade, They will show best of craig on allegedly as that was boxing is about, cheating , lies and arse licking,
Re: Clark v Evans
Rather than beat around the bush, can you at least say it how it is!JamieM wrote:Guys listen, ronnie fought Ryan walsh, every single journalist said he lost! One journelest in james Hernandez stood up like a man and said partisan crowd swayed it, ronnie won the fight, what happened next??? He was banned for attending local shows in norwich, same
Goes to all aspects in life, you keep whoever is getting you work happy, they all having working relationship with allegedly, that's boxing, nobody cares craig got decision as
People who matter know the truth, but don't talk crap and say craig hurt ronnie as I'm truth ronnie has fought about 10 fighters who hit harder than craig(including journeymen) it is what it is, same as troy for me troy won a close fight in which wasn't great to watch, troy ducked low and fought to a plan, ronnie stood in front too much and wanted to trade, They will show best of craig on allegedly as that was boxing is about, cheating , lies and arse licking,
I wasn't having a go in my post, I genuinely want to see this fight based on your reaction to it, it must have been a shocking decision (no sarcasm) so I'd love to have a go at scoring it myself.
-
mickey1975
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 23181
- Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54
Re: Clark v Evans
The people who matter? Dixon is in charge of the trade paper, Lillis is a regular on the only dedicated boxing channel in the world and Kugan is constantly online! Who's opinion do you want? Oscar De La Hoya's and Al Haymons!
Re: Clark v Evans
Someone that doesn't have a buisness relationship with allegedly, that hard to believe? In those who know I refer too, ronnie knows, craig
Knows, Craig's trainer knows and Davie Mcallister knows what happened in that fight, ronnie and Davie Havnt sAid a word but 88-83 is hilarious, a referee who is pushing
Him about the ring and taking a point off for no reason, while waiting 20
Seconds to let him recover from a "low blow" all of the above people Lillis , kugan and Dixon work for FW in a round about wY
Knows, Craig's trainer knows and Davie Mcallister knows what happened in that fight, ronnie and Davie Havnt sAid a word but 88-83 is hilarious, a referee who is pushing
Him about the ring and taking a point off for no reason, while waiting 20
Seconds to let him recover from a "low blow" all of the above people Lillis , kugan and Dixon work for FW in a round about wY
-
DazDiCanio
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 506
- Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 04:49
Re: Clark v Evans
I'm with Jamie here, too many people just take the word of popular 'boxing' people as gospel. Do a bit of research, get clued up and make your own mind up, that goes for anything.
Far too many media people with agendas that prevent them from ever giving an unbiased view.
Far too many media people with agendas that prevent them from ever giving an unbiased view.
-
mickey1975
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 23181
- Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54
Re: Clark v Evans
Kugan and Dixon work for FW in no way whatsoever.JamieM wrote:Someone that doesn't have a buisness relationship with allegedly, that hard to believe? In those who know I refer too, ronnie knows, craig
Knows, Craig's trainer knows and Davie Mcallister knows what happened in that fight, ronnie and Davie Havnt sAid a word but 88-83 is hilarious, a referee who is pushing
Him about the ring and taking a point off for no reason, while waiting 20
Seconds to let him recover from a "low blow" all of the above people Lillis , kugan and Dixon work for FW in a round about wY
-
freddydoesdallas
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 9436
- Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48
Re: Clark v Evans
The majority of people in this thread have done that. They have listened to the views of the camp from in here, looked at reports elsewhere and then most have said they want to see the fight to score it for themselves. There isn't much more that can be done with regards to this fight except take the word of one corner or the opposite view.DazDiCanio wrote:I'm with Jamie here, too many people just take the word of popular 'boxing' people as gospel. Do a bit of research, get clued up and make your own mind up, that goes for anything.
Far too many media people with agendas that prevent them from ever giving an unbiased view.
Re: Clark v Evans
Well Kugan has a show on allegedly so i suppose he does. However i'm not sure that's the reason he said Evans won the fight. I havent seen it so i cant comment.mickey1975 wrote:Kugan and Dixon work for FW in no way whatsoever.JamieM wrote:Someone that doesn't have a buisness relationship with allegedly, that hard to believe? In those who know I refer too, ronnie knows, craig
Knows, Craig's trainer knows and Davie Mcallister knows what happened in that fight, ronnie and Davie Havnt sAid a word but 88-83 is hilarious, a referee who is pushing
Him about the ring and taking a point off for no reason, while waiting 20
Seconds to let him recover from a "low blow" all of the above people Lillis , kugan and Dixon work for FW in a round about wY
-
DazDiCanio
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 506
- Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 04:49
Re: Clark v Evans
Arguing the fact when they haven't even seen the fight! What part of that don't you find fornicating stupid?freddydoesdallas wrote:The majority of people in this thread have done that. They have listened to the views of the camp from in here, looked at reports elsewhere and then most have said they want to see the fight to score it for themselves. There isn't much more that can be done with regards to this fight except take the word of one corner or the opposite view.DazDiCanio wrote:I'm with Jamie here, too many people just take the word of popular 'boxing' people as gospel. Do a bit of research, get clued up and make your own mind up, that goes for anything.
Far too many media people with agendas that prevent them from ever giving an unbiased view.
Re: Clark v Evans
while I'm on the fence I agree with that....were you there Daz? what's your view on the fight?DazDiCanio wrote:Arguing the fact when they haven't even seen the fight! What part of that don't you find effing stupid?freddydoesdallas wrote:The majority of people in this thread have done that. They have listened to the views of the camp from in here, looked at reports elsewhere and then most have said they want to see the fight to score it for themselves. There isn't much more that can be done with regards to this fight except take the word of one corner or the opposite view.DazDiCanio wrote:I'm with Jamie here, too many people just take the word of popular 'boxing' people as gospel. Do a bit of research, get clued up and make your own mind up, that goes for anything.
Far too many media people with agendas that prevent them from ever giving an unbiased view.
I really want to see this fight now as I've said before
-
DazDiCanio
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 506
- Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 04:49
Re: Clark v Evans
while I'm on the fence I agree with that....were you there Daz? what's your view on the fight?Crazyboy wrote:
Arguing the fact when they haven't even seen the fight! What part of that don't you find effing stupid?
I really want to see this fight now as I've said before[/quote]
No and no, mate. I haven't said anything on the fight tbf. Without looking back i might have said unlucky or something.
I was merely backing up Jamie who was making complete sense with regards to media 'personalities'.
I'll hopefully see Ronnie soon so i'll get the gist from him. Rather than fkin Kugan Cassius ffs!
-
mickey1975
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 23181
- Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54
Re: Clark v Evans
Daz is hardly one to go on about bias. He had his name on the back of Ronnies T-Shirt!
-
DazDiCanio
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 506
- Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 04:49
Re: Clark v Evans
On the sleeve. What's that to do with bias anyway? That's a pointless post just being a dick towards me.mickey1975 wrote:Daz is hardly one to go on about bias. He had his name on the back of Ronnies T-Shirt!
Re: Clark v Evans
So of everyone on here, only David and David, Ronnie's brother and his trainer, have seen the fight, Daviddee had Ronnie winning, David McCallister had it close and admitted he wouldn't have argued if Evans had got it by a point or two. On the other side we have Evans and his team, Kugan, Steve Lillis, Tris Dixon and the fighter that Maley mentioned in his post, who all had Evans winning. And it was a charity dinner show, so no real chance of the crowd influencing the decision.
Re: Clark v Evans
You complain that others have vested interests that may cause them to be biased in favour of one fighter, but you fall into that category as well, as do David and Jamie, bit hypocritical if you ask me.DazDiCanio wrote:On the sleeve. What's that to do with bias anyway? That's a pointless post just being a dick towards me.mickey1975 wrote:Daz is hardly one to go on about bias. He had his name on the back of Ronnies T-Shirt!
Re: Clark v Evans
not completely pointless because you obviously have a connection with the shark so that 'may' sway your way of thinking. possibly not definitely of course.DazDiCanio wrote:On the sleeve. What's that to do with bias anyway? That's a pointless post just being a dick towards me.mickey1975 wrote:Daz is hardly one to go on about bias. He had his name on the back of Ronnies T-Shirt!
Anyway back on topic, all we can go on (until I see it) is the views of respected boxing people, so as it stands....its the clark team against everyone else, which of course is understandable.
PLEASE don't think I am in anyway undermining you, you guys are in the scene and probably know a lot more than I do, however I honestly don't think that Dixon, lillis, kugan etc would be that far off. Think about it, would they jeopardise their credibility etc based on a fight between Ronnie Clark and Evans?? (no offence to either fighter by the way) I think they'd just be honest.
If i'm wrong then i'm naïve and I accept that...just find it strange that these people wouldn't tell the truth....not sure how many other times they have done that maybe you can enlighten me
-
DazDiCanio
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 506
- Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 04:49
Re: Clark v Evans
My point being I haven't said he should have won/was robbed etc so where's my bias?
I have only said that going by their faces you wouldn't think Ronnie lost by such a big points margin, that's fair surely?
I have only said that going by their faces you wouldn't think Ronnie lost by such a big points margin, that's fair surely?
Re: Clark v Evans
Since when was the look of the fighters faces after the fight the way to judge it?DazDiCanio wrote:My point being I haven't said he should have won/was robbed etc so where's my bias?
I have only said that going by their faces you wouldn't think Ronnie lost by such a big points margin, that's fair surely?
Re: Clark v Evans
Ronnie fights you judge by his face, he marks even talking of being
Punched, he marks up badly for fights, he has black eyes his whole camp, which suggests evans was not landing shots, daz ronnie will be himself and say nothing, he knows what boxing is all about now, all of the above mentioned work for warren so you clearly
Know nothing, all on the payroll,
Punched, he marks up badly for fights, he has black eyes his whole camp, which suggests evans was not landing shots, daz ronnie will be himself and say nothing, he knows what boxing is all about now, all of the above mentioned work for warren so you clearly
Know nothing, all on the payroll,
Re: Clark v Evans
Lillis works for allegedly, Kugan is self employed, but has a show on allegedly, Tris Dixon is the editor of the independent trade paper, the unnamed fighter mentioned by Maley is presumably independent of all of them. If Fwank were to fall out with Kugan, the allegedly show would be over and they'd lose all iFL coverage, so I doubt he'd be kicking up a fuss if Kugan thought Ronnie won.JamieM wrote:Ronnie fights you judge by his face, he marks even talking of being
Punched, he marks up badly for fights, he has black eyes his whole camp, which suggests evans was not landing shots, daz ronnie will be himself and say nothing, he knows what boxing is all about now, all of the above mentioned work for warren so you clearly
Know nothing, all on the payroll,
What's most telling for me is that Kugan thought Evans won and Lillis and Dixon thought he was a clear winner, even if they didn't want to upset Fwank, at the very least they would say the card was a too wide and it was a close fight.
And lets be honest, this isn't Saunders, Butler, Gavin, Chisora or anyone like that we're talking about, the allegedly lads are usually pretty fair when it comes to calling fights anyway, no one's going to be losing their job if they say Evans was lucky to get the decision, he's not a big name or considered a top prospect.