Man SN sound bitter.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 08 Apr 2006, 13:53

On a totally unrelated matter where is Boxingchat these days?

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 08 Apr 2006, 19:56

steve689 wrote:on a totally unrelated matter where is Boxingchat these days?

He's got his old chap stuck in the back of a bloke who was tried for rape at the old bailey. The same bloke was a member of the NF, years ago.

Mick Sturbs · Post by **Mick Sturbs** » 09 Apr 2006, 20:19

Tell us more, strong statements you must have facts?

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 10 Apr 2006, 05:11

Mick Sturbs wrote:Tell us more, strong statements you must have facts?

Yes. Statement one has been public knowledge for 30 years. Statement two relates to the same period and is well known within government intelligence departments.

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 10 Apr 2006, 05:42

Just going by boxrec records max the fight was at 147 and Cassiani has mostly fought at around that weight. Looks a big puncher and at 6ft 1 is obviously big for the weight.

Collazo looked quite good til he got caught, boxing in and out very well although didn't look to have much power at all. If the fight goes ahead is going to be easily the slickest guy Hatton has ever fought and should cause Hatton a few problems if Ricky is not up for this.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 10 Apr 2006, 08:07

Lenny Albert wrote:Just going by boxrec records max the fight was at 147 and Cassiani has mostly fought at around that weight. Looks a big puncher and at 6ft 1 is obviously big for the weight.

Collazo looked quite good til he got caught, boxing in and out very well although didn't look to have much power at all. If the fight goes ahead is going to be easily the slickest guy Hatton has ever fought and should cause Hatton a few problems if Ricky is not up for this.

Checking the schedule though it said Light Middle.

147½ Collazo Edwin Cassiani 147½

Yeah it's light middle as their half a pound over.

Mick Sturbs · Post by **Mick Sturbs** » 10 Apr 2006, 19:08

KO Artist wrote:
Mick Sturbs wrote:Tell us more, strong statements you must have facts?

Yes. Statement one has been public knowledge for 30 years. Statement two relates to the same period and is well known within government intelligence departments.

What is, cut the cryptic stuff and say who and what you are talking about. If you have facts it is okay to spill the beans is it not?

Either shit or get of the toilet.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 11 Apr 2006, 06:43

Mick Sturbs wrote:
KO Artist wrote:
Mick Sturbs wrote:Tell us more, strong statements you must have facts?

Yes. Statement one has been public knowledge for 30 years. Statement two relates to the same period and is well known within government intelligence departments.
What is, cut the cryptic stuff and say who and what you are talking about. If you have facts it is okay to spill the beans is it not?

Either shit or get of the toilet.

The facts will not be published by me. They may however be published by a sunday newspaper.

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 11 Apr 2006, 09:32

KO Artist wrote:
Mick Sturbs wrote:
KO Artist wrote:
Yes. Statement one has been public knowledge for 30 years. Statement two relates to the same period and is well known within government intelligence departments.
What is, cut the cryptic stuff and say who and what you are talking about. If you have facts it is okay to spill the beans is it not?

Either shit or get of the toilet.
The facts will not be published by me. They may however be published by a sunday newspaper.

Yawn, Yawn, Yawn....Another one who lacks the minerals to state what they are hinting at. You cannot be sued for facts so go ahead and say what you are getting at or crawl back into your grubby little hole.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 11 Apr 2006, 09:34

And who the hell is going to sue anyone on here without revealing their true identity? Huh?