Hatton may be stripped of IBF title this week

The Hawk · Post by **The Hawk** » 30 Jan 2007, 18:04

stujones wrote:Incedintly, anyone knows what happens to the ring belt say if Hatton gets stripped and then Witter unifies with all four belts.... Witter has then carried out the alledged criteria for the ring belt ownership.

The reason why I say alledged is cause they have given it out willy nilly for certain fighters and then others cannot seem to obtain it no matter what they do.

I know what your saying Stu, I would think as Hatton was awarded the Ring Belt for becoming the "True" Champion at 140, thats his status as the Ring Champion is there as long as he's active and winning at 140 pounds. Even if Witter beat the other belt holders and held all four belts, he's still not beat the "True" Champion and holder of the Ring belt. If Witter did win them and Hatton was still winning at the weight, I could not see the Ring taking their belt off their Champion who was never beat in the ring and giving it to Witter, afterall Hatton should be beat inside the Ring first at 140 to lose the title or no longer be active at 140.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 31 Jan 2007, 05:36

The Hawk wrote:
stujones wrote:Incedintly, anyone knows what happens to the ring belt say if Hatton gets stripped and then Witter unifies with all four belts.... Witter has then carried out the alledged criteria for the ring belt ownership.

The reason why I say alledged is cause they have given it out willy nilly for certain fighters and then others cannot seem to obtain it no matter what they do.
I know what your saying Stu, I would think as Hatton was awarded the Ring Belt for becoming the "True" Champion at 140, thats his status as the Ring Champion is there as long as he's active and winning at 140 pounds. Even if Witter beat the other belt holders and held all four belts, he's still not beat the "True" Champion and holder of the Ring belt. If Witter did win them and Hatton was still winning at the weight, I could not see the Ring taking their belt off their Champion who was never beat in the ring and giving it to Witter, afterall Hatton should be beat inside the Ring first at 140 to lose the title or no longer be active at 140.

maybe that would push toward the fight we want -Hatton-Witter. Witter must keep on winning then this will be the Calzaghe-Kessler style of fight that ppl are demanding.

don't call it a comeback · Post by **don't call it a comeback** » 31 Jan 2007, 06:43

boxingchat wrote:Hatton could and should have done a deal before the Urgano fight to secure the title long term. A bit of step a side cash and a promise the winner of him V Castillo would face N'dou or Rabah would have sufficed but when you work with Amatuers making no money and having no foresight this is what happens.

Te WBA are getting sued by M'Baye because of Hatton doing a similar thing and the IBF have previously been messed about by Hatton and have also a strct code of conduct they must follow following their recent troubles so they cannot bend any rules. The rules are the rules so he IBF cannot be blamed for this.

With thr IBF, WBA and the WBC being held by Witter, Hatton looks to
have burnt all his bridges with the so-called big three.

Awful ratings on HBO, poor crowds and no titles the future looks bleak.

Rmout has it Bob Arum has been approached to raise the sinking ship.

Oh do shut up. Frank is like some like big wobbly sobbing girl. If anyone has burnt his bridges at 140 its him. fornicate the IBF. Let them take the sanction fees from Mbaye/Ben Rabah if anyone will pay to watch those two journeyman. Let Frank plays his politics on his own. Barrera showed you don't need belts. Boxing is about fights not belts.

jimb0d · Post by **jimb0d** » 31 Jan 2007, 09:06

Why did Hatton even have to extend his decision beyond yesterday? whats he thinking about?

If he doesnt take the Castillo fight now, he will be a laughing stock - unless of course a Kostya rematch is on the cards down the line!!

The Hawk · Post by **The Hawk** » 31 Jan 2007, 14:35

viciousmaussa wrote:
The Hawk wrote:
stujones wrote:Incedintly, anyone knows what happens to the ring belt say if Hatton gets stripped and then Witter unifies with all four belts.... Witter has then carried out the alledged criteria for the ring belt ownership.

The reason why I say alledged is cause they have given it out willy nilly for certain fighters and then others cannot seem to obtain it no matter what they do.
I know what your saying Stu, I would think as Hatton was awarded the Ring Belt for becoming the "True" Champion at 140, thats his status as the Ring Champion is there as long as he's active and winning at 140 pounds. Even if Witter beat the other belt holders and held all four belts, he's still not beat the "True" Champion and holder of the Ring belt. If Witter did win them and Hatton was still winning at the weight, I could not see the Ring taking their belt off their Champion who was never beat in the ring and giving it to Witter, afterall Hatton should be beat inside the Ring first at 140 to lose the title or no longer be active at 140.
maybe that would push toward the fight we want -Hatton-Witter. Witter must keep on winning then this will be the Calzaghe-Kessler style of fight that ppl are demanding.

I think thats the only way Witter will ever get a fight with Hatton is if he starts to beat other belt holders or starts making some noise with good win's over named top fighters. His WBC belt is not enough yet with his title fights being Corley and Morua.

A win against Harris, Corrales, Lazcano or a solid win even against Ngoudjo who took Castillo to the wire would be good for a start and then try and win another belt. If he done that in style and Hatton was still winning then there would be even more call for them to have a fight. I want to see it happen sometime, but I also think Witter has more to prove to really make it a mega fight on his part.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 31 Jan 2007, 17:02

I suspect Hatton-Witter is a dead duck destined never to happen, Witter would probably be better off aiming for Corrales presuming he even gets past Harris/Lazcano which is no certainty in my book.

When Witter held nothing of note he was told by Hatton to win a serious belt which he did in the form of the WBC. Now we are expecting him to unify and knock off another belt holder for a shot at Hatton. Is Hatton really such a massive star that Witter has to go to these lengths to get the fight? Or is this a case of maximum risk for Hatton without great reward (stateside especially) i suspect this is the case.

Everytime Witter gets closer then the goalposts are moved further away. If Witter won all four "major" belts then what stipulation would he have to fulfill? This fight is being built up way above it's stature IMO, years gone by these two would have already met maybe more than once and probably for a British title to prove who was the best on our shores before they made any ascension to "world" level. But now we need a multitude of titles and a huge setting to see who is better...why the fuss?

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 31 Jan 2007, 17:09

steve689 wrote: Everytime Witter gets closer then the goalposts are moved further away.

You think that the win over Morua was a forward step? He did not look impressive. The goalposts are receding with age as much as anything else

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 31 Jan 2007, 17:12

Witter did a far better job on the night than Hatton.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 31 Jan 2007, 17:17

nickd wrote:Witter did a far better job on the night than Hatton.

aye. but Hatton is in a position where he has to present a big name to HBO in order to justify their involvement.

Witter on the other hand is largely unknown, and does not have much time to rectify that

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 31 Jan 2007, 20:02

don't call it a comeback wrote:
boxingchat wrote:Hatton could and should have done a deal before the Urgano fight to secure the title long term. A bit of step a side cash and a promise the winner of him V Castillo would face N'dou or Rabah would have sufficed but when you work with Amatuers making no money and having no foresight this is what happens.

Te WBA are getting sued by M'Baye because of Hatton doing a similar thing and the IBF have previously been messed about by Hatton and have also a strct code of conduct they must follow following their recent troubles so they cannot bend any rules. The rules are the rules so he IBF cannot be blamed for this.

With thr IBF, WBA and the WBC being held by Witter, Hatton looks to
have burnt all his bridges with the so-called big three.

Awful ratings on HBO, poor crowds and no titles the future looks bleak.

Rmout has it Bob Arum has been approached to raise the sinking ship.
Oh do shut up. Frank is like some like big wobbly sobbing girl. If anyone has burnt his bridges at 140 its him. eff the IBF. Let them take the sanction fees from Mbaye/Ben Rabah if anyone will pay to watch those two journeyman. Let Frank plays his politics on his own. Barrera showed you don't need belts. Boxing is about fights not belts.

No way Is M'baye a journeyman.

I'd like Witter Vs M'Baye,

Can't say I disagree with BC though.

Wern't the IBF investigated by the FBI? So no wonder they strictly enforce their rules.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Feb 2007, 07:37

nickd wrote:Witter did a far better job on the night than Hatton.

Hmm, that doesn't seem to be the consensus. I haven't seen it yet, but from all accounts I've read, despite knocking his opponent out, Witter failed to impress big time. Hatton looked poor also, but at least the early rounds provided some interest.

Roll on Sky, I've missed way too many fights of late.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Feb 2007, 08:30

Witter was slow out of the blocks because he had only EIGHT ROUNDS SPARRING because of the scarcity of work over the Xmas / New Year.

When he got going he was fine.

Hatton was fvcking weird. Maybe he had a bad chest, maybe it was a cynical grab the money & run after blowing up horirbly (look at the state of him at the Moore-Macklin fight).

Witter has kept fit and he must dream of fighting Hatton all the time. If it ever happens I expect him to have a psychological advantage the way that Tarver did over Jones Jr.

Morua's record is no worse than Urango's.

Like Tarver, Witter - if he gets his dream fight - could well have an eroded star in front of him.

There is something in it for hatton. Ricky hasn't impressed America and could have an all British 'unification' grudge match at the Man City stadium.

Maybe the BBC could be tempted into coverage?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Feb 2007, 08:37

Doubt it, the BBC don't have a boxing friendly policy, it's all to do with who is at the helm at the time, and whether or not they like boxing.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Feb 2007, 08:41

there is hope, The showed the Urango fight last weekend. is that misrable sod still head of sports, Sharwoods or whatever his name is?

don't call it a comeback · Post by **don't call it a comeback** » 01 Feb 2007, 09:37

Max Molyneux wrote:
don't call it a comeback wrote:
boxingchat wrote:Hatton could and should have done a deal before the Urgano fight to secure the title long term. A bit of step a side cash and a promise the winner of him V Castillo would face N'dou or Rabah would have sufficed but when you work with Amatuers making no money and having no foresight this is what happens.

Te WBA are getting sued by M'Baye because of Hatton doing a similar thing and the IBF have previously been messed about by Hatton and have also a strct code of conduct they must follow following their recent troubles so they cannot bend any rules. The rules are the rules so he IBF cannot be blamed for this.

With thr IBF, WBA and the WBC being held by Witter, Hatton looks to
have burnt all his bridges with the so-called big three.

Awful ratings on HBO, poor crowds and no titles the future looks bleak.

Rmout has it Bob Arum has been approached to raise the sinking ship.
Oh do shut up. Frank is like some like big wobbly sobbing girl. If anyone has burnt his bridges at 140 its him. eff the IBF. Let them take the sanction fees from Mbaye/Ben Rabah if anyone will pay to watch those two journeyman. Let Frank plays his politics on his own. Barrera showed you don't need belts. Boxing is about fights not belts.
No way Is M'baye a journeyman.

I'd like Witter Vs M'Baye,

Can't say I disagree with BC though.

Wern't the IBF investigated by the FBI? So no wonder they strictly enforce their rules.

I meant N'Dou of course. And journeyman might be unfair but if it comes down to Hatton/Castill or N'dou/Ben Rabah, I'd like the the person who who would rather see the latter put their hand up.

Agreeing with BC is like jumping into a bucket of bile and rubbing it over yourself.

JC · Post by JC » 01 Feb 2007, 09:39

Roger Mosley id BBC director of Sport, he writes on this blog http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/sporteditors/ you could probably add a comment to ask about boxing.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Feb 2007, 09:55

viciousmaussa wrote:there is hope, The showed the Urango fight last weekend. is that misrable sod still head of sports, Sharwoods or whatever his name is?

Did they? I didn't know what. I need to get my sodding internet connection up and running so that I can print schedules off at home.

Mark Sharman I think you mean, he's gone to ITV, I think he was formally at Sky TV if I recall rightly.

Brian Barwick is now chairman of the F.A. and making a pigs ear of it so far as far as I can tell, he was the one who put the Kibosh on boxing on ITV.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Feb 2007, 10:20

Sharman is at ITV? I figured it was just Michael 'Dr Who Nemesis' Grade that defected.

Anyways there's definitely shifts in the plot.

Who was commentating Hatton-Urango on the Beeb? Was it Woodhall and that Guardian guy? Bet they'll have sweaty palms about getting more work.

Will be interesting to see how the Beeb factors in boxing. I remember watching Hopkins v Keith Holmes (IBF/WBC middleweight) on Grandstand! Those were the days...

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Feb 2007, 10:37

Sharman was head of sport at Sky, not BBC, I think?

Well, with Khan going pro and joining Warren, suddenly their policy of only showing amateur boxing only (always fekking stupid), looks bloody ridiculous. Whoever came up with that ridiculous idea needs a kick in the balls.

No offence to the lads around the country who participate in the amateur code, but it's dreadfully boring to watch on the whole. The scoring system sucks, the fights are stopped whenever someone so much as breaks a fingernail, there are virtually no knockdowns, little combination punching (due to the stupid scoring system), and really little or no excitement. There are little or no ratings to be won showing amateur boxing, unless it's at a massive tournament like the Olympics or Commonwealth games, and that only because with events like that, people often leave it on the channel all day long and stare idly at the TV.

There is not enough meat for people to get interested in amateur boxing alone, and if fighters turn pro, then what, they lose any stars that they did have straight away.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 01 Feb 2007, 14:24

Flip me i didn't realise the BBC televised Hatton-Urango. When was this?

states · Post by **states** » 01 Feb 2007, 14:26

steve689 wrote:Flip me i didn't realise the BBC televised Hatton-Urango. When was this?

Last Sunday, in the prime-time 10 past midnight slot.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 01 Feb 2007, 14:29

Didn't even realise the Beeb had re-embraced the noble art! Must look out for more shows in that case.