Team Haye call for public pressure to make fight happen

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Jan 2007, 06:58

I thought the old Light Middleweight arguement would be brought up. Major differences is 1) Haye is better than those, looks a geniune threat to anyone in the devision, had Roberts, Williams etc fought DLH or even Verno Phillips there would have been one outcome 2) Haye is THERE.... he won his eliminator. How close was the likes of Richard Williams et al from being in the ring with the likes of Oscar De La Hoya (or even Verno Phillips). They weren't even put forward for eliminator.

Why should Haye be on the shelf for the next year. If Booth et al started bombarding the WBC, then a Haye vs Bell/Mormeck fight should be mandated in the Summer - he could even get an interim fight. Why should Haye WBC shot be in the US - why cannot Maloney/Sky really go for it in terms of the PURSE bid. Witter had his shot here (and he isn't a massive ticket seller) as did Michael Hunter.... neither had the sky hype that Haye has had.

How are you so certain that Haye vs Maccarinelli will be on Prime time. It was never scheduled to top the bill - which says alot about Warren's percieved magnitute of this fight.

Haye is not being kept to long for his title shot.... He is currently injured anyway and only recently won a eliminator. Why not a fight in March/April vs someone like Cantatore as a warm up for Bell vs Mormeck?

The British public won't tune into it as things stand - one (or both) need to take some gamble. Enzo probably has a slightly bigger name currently (given his ITV exploits) so maybe the onus is on Haye to "justify" (for the lay boxing fan) his shot. Nothing like a WBC title or a valiant effort losing to do that. I reckon more people have heard of Michael Hunter after his first defeat than because of any of his wins.

That is why I think FW doesn't see it as a main event. A few people in the office might dicuss the fight after - but the majority wouldn't watch it cause they haven't heard of Haye or pre judged Haye on his last high profile showing on terrestial television.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 09 Jan 2007, 07:01

Twinkle Toes wrote:So it wasnt ITV that wanted options, it was SN - Ok, that clears that up (btw it was quoted that ITV wanted options yesterday and not SN, so that was a lie)

Not necessarily, TT. SN "came wanting options" could mean they came under the directive of someone else (ITV).

Can't see it myself though.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 09 Jan 2007, 07:02

Goz wrote:Shall we all we picket ITV HQ this evening stark naked (or optionally painted as boxing gloves or wearing nothing but a David Haye wig) waving banners and placards demanding 'HAYE - MACCA MUST HAPPEN!"?

They won't ignore us then.

Stu can do a one-man picket somewhere else with a 'HAYE-BELL must happen' but whatever the result will be the same because across the nation people will be seen to be taking to the streets to demand that the best most competitive fights are made!

Genius!

Chesney_Chambers · Post by **Chesney_Chambers** » 09 Jan 2007, 07:04

stujones wrote:I thought the old Light Middleweight arguement would be brought up. Major differences is 1) Haye is better than those, looks a geniune threat to anyone in the devision, had Roberts, Williams etc fought DLH or even Verno Phillips there would have been one outcome 2) Haye is THERE.... he won his eliminator. How close was the likes of Richard Williams et al from being in the ring with the likes of Oscar De La Hoya (or even Verno Phillips). They weren't even put forward for eliminator.

Why should Haye be on the shelf for the next year. If Booth et al started bombarding the WBC, then a Haye vs Bell/Mormeck fight should be mandated in the Summer - he could even get an interim fight. Why should Haye WBC shot be in the US - why cannot Maloney/Sky really go for it in terms of the PURSE bid. Witter had his shot here (and he isn't a massive ticket seller) as did Michael Hunter.... neither had the sky hype that Haye has had.

How are you so certain that Haye vs Maccarinelli will be on Prime time. It was never scheduled to top the bill - which says alot about Warren's percieved magnitute of this fight.

Haye is not being kept to long for his title shot.... He is currently injured anyway and only recently won a eliminator. Why not a fight in March/April vs someone like Cantatore as a warm up for Bell vs Mormeck?

The British public won't tune into it as things stand - one (or both) need to take some gamble. Enzo probably has a slightly bigger name currently (given his ITV exploits) so maybe the onus is on Haye to "justify" (for the lay boxing fan) his shot. Nothing like a WBC title or a valiant effort losing to do that. I reckon more people have heard of Michael Hunter after his first defeat than because of any of his wins.

That is why I think FW doesn't see it as a main event. A few people in the office might dicuss the fight after - but the majority wouldn't watch it cause they haven't heard of Haye or pre judged Haye on his last high profile showing on terrestial television.

I really can't understand your stance against Haye-Enzo

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 09 Jan 2007, 07:09

Yes and to say Frank doesn't see Haye/Enzo as worthy of a main event is just bizzare in the extreme - just take a look at the "main events" SN have served up over the years - all those WBU farces and SN boys against obscure Russians and Argies - just endless.

Stu, no matter your argument virtualy every fan in the UK wants to see Enzo/Haye - not wait for the "possibility" of Haye/Bell and all the rest.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Jan 2007, 07:16

My stance is based on the confusing and complex nature of these ranking bodies. If Haye sits on his WBC ranking his shot will come (and soon if the energies are diverted to the WBC instead of Enzo).

If Haye signs to fight Enzo for the WBO title, then his WBC ranking is in jeopardy - win, lose or draw. Long time WBC mandatory, Nicky Cook, is now not in the WBC rankings cause he signed to fight Scott Harrison. The WBO and WBC have had this strained relationship for years.

Now Haye is so close to the shot at the "big" one he can taste it. Why ruin it on a planned "warm up" fight. If Haye vs Maccarinelli was a WBC eliminator - then yes, go for it and do it now. But its not and Haye vs Maccarinelli non-title fight is a non-starter.

I actually think Haye vs Enzo Macc will be a bigger fight whatever the result of Haye's WBC title challenge (unless, Haye is outclassed or stretched in a round). Haye will generate more publicity for that fight than any of his other ones (including the well known domestic fighter Carl Thompson).

Yes, we have had too many fighter who have missed out on the big domestic fights - we have also had too many fighters miss out on geniune mandated World title fights due to silly little errors just prior to these sanctioning bodies board meetings. James Hare, Michael Jennings, Gavin Rees, Nicky Cook - all the #1 contender at one stage or another with one of the big 4. Not one got there shot. Fair enough though, with the exception of Cook the shot wasn't deserved and there was only one outcome - but with Haye there is a geniune chance.

Its not going to generate that much interest beyond the boxing fraternity. It will be overshadowed by Calzaghe vs Manfredo FFS. Why is this? Because neither have quite had the press to warrant a main event on the main terrestial channel.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Jan 2007, 07:18

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes and to say Frank doesn't see Haye/Enzo as worthy of a main event is just bizzare in the extreme - just take a look at the "main events" SN have served up over the years - all those WBU farces and SN boys against obscure Russians and Argies - just endless.

Stu, no matter your argument vitrualy every fan in the UK wants to see Enzo/Haye - not wait for the "possibility" of Haye/Bell and all the rest.

Yes its bizzare, although maybe it has something to do with that he doesn't have so many TV dates as he did with Sky. Fact is though, this was always scheduled to be an undercard fight (Calzaghe vs Manfredo is topping).

Lets not forget that Enzo's fight before last wasn't shown full untill 2 days after the fight took place (and that was late at night on ITV 4).

Aside from Calzaghe - you don't get too much complaint from me about the Sports Network's scheduled main event (although Arthur's last opponent wasn't great).

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 09 Jan 2007, 09:19

stujones wrote:
Aside from Calzaghe - you don't get too much complaint from me about the Sports Network's scheduled main event (although Arthur's last opponent wasn't great).

Do you really want us to go into this, Stu?

J · Post by J » 09 Jan 2007, 09:48

afternoon all, hpoe you all had a fine xmas and new year.

Hmm one point, why is it FW is all over the papers telling everyone Enzo would do Haye no probs or he would jack the game in , then wants a four fight option on Haye win lose or draw?

kind doesnt make sense does it,. doesnt really bode that well for his confidence in Enzo?

Aaah i forgot he talks shit most the time anyway.

Seriously its bullshit like this that is just killing the game, the best dont fight the best in the country let alone in the world.

shame on you FW. Totally unnecessary if your belief is so blind that you owuld wager pulling out of the sport then insisit on 4 fight retainer under your promotional banner.

A fornicating disgrace and the act of a man with no morals and no belief in his boasts.. Allegedly.

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 09 Jan 2007, 09:57

J wrote: Hmm one point, why is it FW is all over the papers telling everyone Enzo would do Haye no probs or he would jack the game in , then wants a four fight option on Haye win lose or draw?

Well exactly. The other reason (or they could both be behind it) is that even if he loses to Enzo, Haye would be a useful money spinner. Maybe he is taking this opportunity to get Haye over to the dark side? He could do with an exciting London-based fighter to cover up some of the turgid fights (ie. heavy) that have gone on recently.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 09 Jan 2007, 10:01

jomothepure wrote:
J wrote: Hmm one point, why is it FW is all over the papers telling everyone Enzo would do Haye no probs or he would jack the game in , then wants a four fight option on Haye win lose or draw?
Well exactly. The other reason (or they could both be behind it) is that even if he loses to Enzo, Haye would be a useful money spinner. Maybe he is taking this opportunity to get Haye over to the dark side? He could do with an exciting London-based fighter to cover up some of the turgid fights (ie. heavy) that have gone on recently.

I agree with your suggestion, I think its more Warren seeing the earning potential of having options on Haye fights rather than a lack of confidence in Maccarinelli.

Chesney_Chambers · Post by **Chesney_Chambers** » 09 Jan 2007, 12:56

Boxing Experiment

Hypothesis
British Boxing is wank, because UK promoters are unable to put on the best fights even when both boxers are calling for the fight

Method
Find the 2 best fighters in the British Cruiserweight division and confirm that they want to fight each other (check). Place representatives from both sides into a room to conduct the negotiations for the fight

Results
The fight is on, the fight is off, the fight is on, the fight is OFF.
The fight doesn't happen and both sides blame the other for the breakdown in negotiations, leaving the fans pissed off

Conclusion
British Boxing is wank, because UK promoters are unable to put on the best fights even when both boxers are calling for the fight.

Further Hypothesis
Boxing as a whole will suffer as it is turning away the existing fans through frustration and it's not attracting new fans by staging the BIG eyecatching clashes

larry cake · Post by **larry cake** » 09 Jan 2007, 15:11

Chesney_Chambers wrote:Boxing Experiment

Hypothesis
British Boxing is wank, because UK promoters are unable to put on the best fights even when both boxers are calling for the fight

Method
Find the 2 best fighters in the British Cruiserweight division and confirm that they want to fight each other (check). Place representatives from both sides into a room to conduct the negotiations for the fight

Results
The fight is on, the fight is off, the fight is on, the fight is OFF.
The fight doesn't happen and both sides blame the other for the breakdown in negotiations, leaving the fans pissed off

Conclusion
British Boxing is wank, because UK promoters are unable to put on the best fights even when both boxers are calling for the fight.

Further Hypothesis
Boxing as a whole will suffer as it is turning away the existing fans through frustration and it's not attracting new fans by staging the BIG eyecatching clashes

i totally agree and think that it is pointless the way that the promoters promote their fighters as being world class but then molly coddle their fighters when a decent domestic fight comes along :

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 09 Jan 2007, 15:15

Well I don't hold out much hope.

Hatton v Witter never happened.

Williams v Alexander never happened.

Both fights I was longing to see but they never did go ahead.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Jan 2007, 15:16

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
stujones wrote:
Aside from Calzaghe - you don't get too much complaint from me about the Sports Network's scheduled main event (although Arthur's last opponent wasn't great).
Do you really want us to go into this, Stu?

Well look at his SCHEDULED main events that were on ITV1 in 2005/2006. Not half bad, even the replacements were not that bad - Calzaghe aside.

We had - December - Harrison vs Skelton, Harrison vs Cook. Both last minute withdrawals. Danny Williams was an acceptable replacement.

Arthur vs Palemo - I give you that one.

Calzaghe vs Bika - Give you that one aswell.

Woods vs Johnson

Williams vs Skelton 1 and 2.

Magee vs Takaloo. Originally scheduled of course to be Harrison vs Guzman

Calzaghe vs Lacy.

Williams vs Harrison 1 (very anticipated).

Calzaghe vs Ashira

Harrison vs Hussein - Decent match up.

Skelton vs Krence (originally Skelton vs Williams).

These have been the ITV 1 main events since the return. I stand by my view that had these matches come off, then with the exceptions of 3 of the main events (Calzaghe vs Ashira, Calzaghe vs Bika, Arthur vs Palemo) these aren't bad.

Even the subs match ups are acceptable.

The ITV 2/ITV 4 match ups have also been decent main events.

Alex Arthur challenge for the EBU title (vs Sinistin).

Ossie Duran vs Colin McNeil

Jennings vs Pryce

Jennings vs Mutley

Athur vs Burns.

Duran vs Pryce

Foster Jnr vs John Simpson

Arthur vs Guiliyavich

Mitchell vs Kirkorov (Okay, thats a bad one).

Hobson vs Keeton

Lockett vs Rhodes

Hobson vs Polakovic (okay, I give you that one).

Mitchell/Earl double header - two excellent contests.

Limond vs Alloptky

Pryce vs Facey

. Now all the ones I haven't bracketed I think are decent match ups - some were a little less inspired than others, but on the hole MUCH better than in his sky days. The smaller hall stuff has been especially good.

Just because some of his main events don't have a traditional belt with them doesn't mean that those that have are "better". Take Femi Fehintola vs Carl Johansson, Martin Power vs Isaac Ward, Jackson Asiku vs Jamie McKeever and many others on Sky the last 2 years. Been some forgone conclusions there too.

Aside from 2 ITV 2/4 bills, which of the lower hall main events can you say are poor.

The Blade · Post by **The Blade** » 09 Jan 2007, 15:22

at last, some sense among the ranters

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Jan 2007, 15:36

Terence wrote:
You should have pre-empted that in your original post, I would have

You seem pretty optimistic or naive about the WBC Stu. David is still second in their rankings, the rematch between Bell and Mormeck is a mandated fight. Depending on who wins David does indeed get bumped up but how can they then force an immediate mandatory fight, the last one before this was years ago. If Mormeck does win the WBC will most probably sanction a rematch some time soon leaving Haye up the proverbial. They have ignored the no instant rematch policy before.

For all the talk David is ranked 2 by the WBC and if the mandatory is taken by Bell Haye can go whistle for his fight.

As for the bid, who is to say that it won't be won by the opposing team? That argument can be flipped right over. However it is a moot point, Haye cannot enforce jack because a mandatory has been recently taken and the prior one for this belt was a few years ago, they do not keep a tight timetable for this.

I hate to split a hair over the hair you yourself split but prime time was the time the last undercard fights were featured. Morris-Simpson II was properly in what you would call a prime slot. Dinner time for some and for others the time they would sit and watch TV or for others the time they would ganj up before heading out to a pub and club.

As for Macca, it is time to smell the coffee, if he is not a big name after the war with Hobson, shown on ITV, then it is not going to happen anytime soon. He is not a big name despite having a few decent fights on ITV, he does not have "it". Audley Harrison and Amir Khan have it.

The time for the fight is now. You want them both to stay on a winning run and both to have titles, Haye the WBC and Macca the WBO. Last time we had two British guys with those titles it precipitated years of debate over who deserved the most money. Even if both did grab the titles the only fight would be a verbal one over who is 'bigger'.

Good post... perhaps I am being naive about the WBC - However, I think I am being asbout as naive as the people who think the WBC are going to be greatful for Haye to fight Maccarinelli and offer him a mandated shot should he win. Look at the difficulties the same organisation is having at requesting Maskaev a unification shot with Klitchsko. All my first post was a question as too why Booth isn't spending his time and energy finding out (requesting) about the situation. They are very petty and make up the rules as they go one - it wouldn't surprise me that even with the negotations off Haye could lose his ranking - as he mearly considered the WBO route. Look what has happend to Nicky Cook's ranking.

I disagree that Maccarinelli is going to be a star on the basis of a after midnight (thats no-where near prime time) showing vs "late sub" Mark Hobson. Good though it was, still people are going to say "who he has beaten".

Amir Khan and Audley Harrison had audiences of around 20 million watching them win Olympic medals - of course they are going to be stars quickly. Look how long it took Calzaghe to become a star and get the respect and recogintion his talent deserves - it still took a Yank hyped as a big hitting monster (any "Bells", pun intended) to get him that respect. Not a late sub domestic level opponent. Plus (and an important point) many lay boxing fan is familar with Robin Reid through his Olympic achievements and also cause of his fight with Calzaghe. It was a natural seller for the casual fan.

Nigel Benn, Chris Eubank, Michael Watson etc are slightly different to Enzo Maccarinelli. Millions saw Benn mature from a KO'ing prospect who was described and hyped as a potential world wide superstar, saw his lows and then saw him win the world title. Chris Eubank needed Nigel Benn or he wouldn't have got the status he achieved. He needed the Benn fight, Benn was now big box office cause of the way ITV (and his promoters) nutured him. Only way Eubank was too achieve similar status if by fighting Benn.

Neither Maccarinelli and Haye have been nutured on domestic TV to attain the status Benn had in 1990. As I said in my previous post, most of Maccarinelli's outings have been on ITV 4 - including his interim title winning fight.

At the moment I see it as the equivalent of Hatton vs Magee when they fought - but even though it was great Hatton and Magee got it one. It still could have been a bigger fight had Hatton been the Superstar he is now. It could very well be the next Benn vs Eubank possibly by the summer.

If Booth made a press release saying "I've phone the WBC and they want Haye to fight in another eliminator before possibly fighting for the title and we cannot wait that long" - Then yep, I'll be begging Warren/Maloney/Donald Duck to sign it. However, it just appears like they no longer want the WBC route - going for the WBC title AFTER the WBO title isn't going to happen.

revporl · Post by **revporl** » 09 Jan 2007, 15:48

Yes, Stu, it is about timing. But I think that (strangely), the fight is a bigger proposition in domestic terms, before Haye gets a shot at Bell. If he loses to Bell, then the status of Haye is reduced, while Enzo's remains the same, if he fights and beats Bell, then the status of Enzo as a challenger is relatively diminished as fans look for Haye to fight big international names, or, more likely, step up to heavyweight (cos the CW division isn't that broad). Either way, I think now is the ideal time for this fight, and if Haye can't get past Enzo, he's no right going after Bell anyway.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Jan 2007, 15:57

revporl wrote:Yes, Stu, it is about timing. But I think that (strangely), the fight is a bigger proposition in domestic terms, before Haye gets a shot at Bell. If he loses to Bell, then the status of Haye is reduced, while Enzo's remains the same, if he fights and beats Bell, then the status of Enzo as a challenger is relatively diminished as fans look for Haye to fight big international names, or, more likely, step up to heavyweight (cos the CW division isn't that broad). Either way, I think now is the ideal time for this fight, and if Haye can't get past Enzo, he's no right going after Bell anyway.

Yes, in an ideal world you are spot on. I would love to see the winner of a March fight between Enzo and Haye fight the winner of Mormeck vs Bell (and maybe the losers square off in the undercard). However, it won't happen because of the WBC's relationship with the WBO. If Haye sparks Enzo, there is NO chance Bell/Mormeck will challenge Haye in a voluntary. As people have said, the bout means nothing in the states. Thats why I think purse bids could be winnable for a UK fight.

A WBO champion has challenged a WBC counterpart on very few occasions and that has involved superstars - Naz, DLH, Barrera. Naz knew that he would have to make a decision within days as to whether it would be the WBO or WBC, and Morales (who beat Barrera) never actually held the WBO title because of some dispute - they actually put the belt IMMEDIATELY back in the possesion of the loser of that bout. Its only DLH vs Hopkins that there has seem to be less tension and indeed Taylor is still a dual champion.

leforge · Post by **leforge** » 09 Jan 2007, 16:04

What are the chance this fight will happen? I think about 25% chance it will go ahead.

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 09 Jan 2007, 16:49

Ive sent my complaint to itv , big time.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 09 Jan 2007, 18:16

Wheres the Legendary Boxing Chat to update us with Info?

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 09 Jan 2007, 18:21

In case you haven't noticed Boxingchat only turns up when there's something for SN to brag about or when a rival promoter/fighter has some bad news/luck.

When SN are the bad news Boxingchat is nowhere to be seen....

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 09 Jan 2007, 18:32

"Aside from 2 ITV 2/4 bills, which of the lower hall main events can you say are poor."

Do you mean from your second list?

Stu - it all depends on how they are sold.

When I see Lockett v Rhodes and Foster v Simpson labelled 'World Championship Boxing', I tend to think that the public is being sold a puppy. YOU might know the difference but most won't. What people actually see is a reasonable DOMESTIC match up (and, have a look, not even usually the best two at the weight in the country) and they might just be under the impression they are watching a world title fight. Silly them.

If you just want some half-decent domestic level scraps, then fine.

Other than Woods-Johnson and Calzaghe-Lacy, out of your extensive list, are there any fights there of global importance? Some of the rest are pretty decent UK match ups.

Answer this one...is this what you think ITV expected? We can only guess, of course.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 09 Jan 2007, 18:48

nickd wrote:In case you haven't noticed Boxingchat only turns up when there's something for SN to brag about or when a rival promoter/fighter has some bad news/luck.

When SN are the bad news Boxingchat is nowhere to be seen....

Think he was around though when SN were having trouble with Hatton leaving though.

His posts are funny though.