BBBC - Enza Sellers sanctioned?

Abbo · Post by **Abbo** » 12 Oct 2007, 18:49

Am I wrong, or do the BBBC have the right / duty to refuse to sanction fights that are THIS bad?

They do dont they?

I'm emailing Simon Block.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Oct 2007, 19:24

Yes they do, but I doubt they will.

They did not allow a young Maccarinelli to defend his WBU title against the credible (at that time) Jorge Castro- so they could, but doubt they will.

vargas · Post by **vargas** » 12 Oct 2007, 20:55

They let the fight with Bobby Gunn go ahead. So theres no way they'll not sanction a fight against Sellers, who at one time was a very good fighter.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 12 Oct 2007, 21:54

I don't think the BBBoC want to get in a fight with Warren and although it won't be an entertaining fight the only reson they can say no is if someone risks being perminantly injured which I don't believe is the case.

This is a promotional problem not a sanctioning problem. If there is a sancitoning problem its the WBO you should email they should be only sanctioning competitive fights.

Abbo · Post by **Abbo** » 15 Oct 2007, 04:01

No response from Simon Block

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 15 Oct 2007, 04:21

Abbo wrote:No response from Simon Block

To be fair to the guy, he's probably only been at work for 15mins or so since the weekend, presuming you sent the email on friday afternoon.

As important a matter as this is, it is a monday morning, so for the first hour of the day, he's probably staring blankly out of the window, drinking tea, reading the pages of the nuts or zoo weekly websites, and updating his facebook

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 15 Oct 2007, 06:22

Warren more or less owns the board since he saved them from going bankrupt so dont expect them to start not sanctioning his fights unless the guy is on a drip or something!.... remember Bobby Gunn.... at least Sellers used to be a decent fighter!.... so I suppose there is some improvement in the 'match up'!.... 8)

:x

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 15 Oct 2007, 12:13

silkov wrote:Warren more or less owns the board since he saved them from going bankrupt so dont expect them to start not sanctioning his fights unless the guy is on a drip or something!.... remember Bobby Gunn.... at least Sellers used to be a decent fighter!.... so I suppose there is some improvement in the 'match up'!.... 8) :x

Owns the Board, don't think so.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 15 Oct 2007, 12:22

Whilst of course the board is not owned by anyone, you surely agree BC, that without Warren's intervention, they would probably have gone completely bankrupt, given their position following the Watson case.

This does create something of an unusual situation in boxing does it not? Surely the board must feel they owe Warren a great deal under the circumstances.

I am not suggesting any impropriety on Warren's part, merely suggesting that the board may feel a little handcuffed in their dealings with him, due to a debt of gratitude?

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 15 Oct 2007, 13:17

Lets not beat around the bush he basically owns them in everything except name.... can you imagine someone like Alex Fergusen paying the FA's debts!....
....he didnt do it just out of the kindness of his heart either.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 15 Oct 2007, 13:21

You may say that, but I couldn't possibly comment.....

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 15 Oct 2007, 13:39

Now, now James, watch for those splinters while you sit on the fence!... 8)

.....
...seriously though its pretty obviously a conflict of interests isnt it?... or am I just getting old fashioned in my old age!...

:x

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 15 Oct 2007, 18:07

EddieShredder wrote:
Abbo wrote:No response from Simon Block
To be fair to the guy, he's probably only been at work for 15mins or so since the weekend, presuming you sent the email on friday afternoon.

As important a matter as this is, it is a monday morning, so for the first hour of the day, he's probably staring blankly out of the window, drinking tea, reading the pages of the nuts or zoo weekly websites, and updating his facebook

quality post

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 15 Oct 2007, 18:17

Remind me again why the board refused Castro yet accepted Bobby Gunn esq?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 15 Oct 2007, 18:20

Now come Steve, we couldn't possibly hope to understand the byzantine workings of those geniuses at the board of control. Those egg heads know more about boxing and fighters than we could hope to learn, and then forget, indeed more than we've forgottn, or yet to learn, or perhaps forgot to learn.

Indeed it was only the magnificence of Enzo that rebuffed the truly doughty challenge of Gunn.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 15 Oct 2007, 18:21

As simple as that eh? Please excuse my impetuous interruption

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:11

Yep, we're obviously beyond all help on here!... maybe we should switch to UFC??.... I'm going now to watch my Hulk Hogan videos!.... :x :x :x

8)

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:24

silkov wrote:Yep, we're obviously beyond all help on here!... maybe we should switch to UFC??.... I'm going now to watch my Hulk Hogan videos!.... :x :x :x 8)

UFC Is Immoral, only people who are possessed by the same Serpent who convince Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit watch the UFC.

kevo · Post by **kevo** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:37

Max Molyneux wrote:UFC Is Immoral

Yeah, organized, sanctioned fights are disgusting.

Hang on a minute...... :)

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:45

Boxing Is made equal though both fight with fists, UFC can match a Karate man Vs a Street brawler.

That Is not moral.

*(note) I am not really being serious, I have read too much Moralman posts on ESB and I'm crazy at the moment.

kevo · Post by **kevo** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:47

Moralman? Sounds like a right barrel of laughs!!

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:48

Max Molyneux wrote:
silkov wrote:Yep, we're obviously beyond all help on here!... maybe we should switch to UFC??.... I'm going now to watch my Hulk Hogan videos!.... :x :x :x 8)
UFC Is Immoral, only people who are possessed by the same Serpent who convince Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit watch the UFC.

Yeah!... I bet Fwanks a big fan!... perhaps thats his game!.... turn everyone off boxing and onto UFC!!!!!.... the guys a bloody double agent!!!..... :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:49

Kevo wrote:Moralman? Sounds like a right barrel of laughs!!

He Is.

He makes fantasy threads Involving Adam West Batman Vs Bin Laden.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:51

silkov wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:
silkov wrote:Yep, we're obviously beyond all help on here!... maybe we should switch to UFC??.... I'm going now to watch my Hulk Hogan videos!.... :x :x :x 8)
UFC Is Immoral, only people who are possessed by the same Serpent who convince Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit watch the UFC.
Yeah!... I bet Fwanks a big fan!... perhaps thats his game!.... turn everyone off boxing and onto UFC!!!!!.... the guys a bloody double agent!!!..... :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x

Unless Frank was possessed by the Serpent who convinced Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit then he would never be a fan of UFC.

UFC does not have a Calzaghe In It either so It Is not Moral.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 15 Oct 2007, 19:54

clearly Bin Laden he's 6 ft 5 and has a reach advantage