BoxRec

Best quote of this entire story - " While i dont advocate violence ...." - Joey Barton yeah right .

What if Nikolai Valuev's double had came out to play

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Wales wrote: Had it out with him verbally, maybe? I remember a boxing writer on this site phoning a boxer up and explaining his views in an article to him because the boxer had kicked off regarding it. By the end of the call the journo had explained himself, and the boxer told him why he disagreed. No blood was spilt.

What if it was a kid? Or a girl? Or someone in a wheel chair, or someone with learning difficulties?

What if it was John f*cking Rambo? Maybe Eric Draven or the motherfuckin' T-1000? The possibilities are endless......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjGL-8qzJUA

What is could have ended up like!!! Classic

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Wales wrote: Had it out with him verbally, maybe? I remember a boxing writer on this site phoning a boxer up and explaining his views in an article to him because the boxer had kicked off regarding it. By the end of the call the journo had explained himself, and the boxer told him why he disagreed. No blood was spilt.

What if it was a kid? Or a girl? Or someone in a wheel chair, or someone with learning difficulties? This could have turned out very ugly for Woodhouse, and the press would be twice the size. The threat of physical violence (and it was there whether he would have done it or not) is a ridiculous response to some idiot calling you a knob on twitter.

Classic case of the PC brigade and coming in, saying oooo it wasn't right what he did blah blah blah.

Have a word with yourself........

Some twatneck called him out and Curtis played the game by going round there and making him nervous, he has stated already he had no intention of beating up the guy/girl/thing it was all done as wind up.

Your looking too deep into it, and trying to be a play the morally correct card.

The bloke was a twat and got found out....its as simple as that really.

Looking at some of the stuff he's said at other people I'm surprised nobodies had him for slander

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

banjo wrote:Looking at some of the stuff he's said at other people I'm surprised nobodies had him for slander

Got a link to his page?

https://twitter.com/jimmyob88

I was bored last night and must have gone through a years worth of stuff.

The Dark Destroyer wrote:Is it as simple as that? Really?

That lad, whatever you think of him has every right to say what he wants within the law, and he has that right to do it without threats of physical violence for saying it.

Have a look at the guy on twitter and you tell me. Look at his apologies....he acted big and got found out, now he is apologising saying sorry etc.

So, i'm sorry mate, but yes it is very much as simple as that

Cyberslayer , hillarious awkward scene

thepocketrocket wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjGL-8qzJUA

What is could have ended up like!!! Classic

The Dark Destroyer wrote:Is it as simple as that? Really?

That lad, whatever you think of him has every right to say what he wants within the law, and he has that right to do it without threats of physical violence for saying it.

You think someone has got the right to dish out that sort of abuse to someone else on twitter for no reason whatsoever? What's the effin world coming to

Clearly retarded, judging from his English.

Gazmac81 wrote:Cyberslayer , hillarious awkward scene

thepocketrocket wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjGL-8qzJUA

What is could have ended up like!!! Classic

It was all I could think of last night!! Bloody hilarious

J wrote:

dondada wrote:Curtis performed an important service, IMO. There are far too many people in society who feel they can act however they wish without any consequences.

Unless the chap is a complete retard, this will have done him a great deal of good and he ought to improve as a person as a result.

ILL BE SEEING YOU AT FROCH KESSLER!

Looking forward to it mate!

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Andypittcov wrote:

The Dark Destroyer wrote:Is it as simple as that? Really?

That lad, whatever you think of him has every right to say what he wants within the law, and he has that right to do it without threats of physical violence for saying it.

You think someone has got the right to dish out that sort of abuse to someone else on twitter for no reason whatsoever? What's the effin world coming to

Yes. Any normal person would mark them as a pudendum and ignore them.

You're not one of these people who agrees with these people being arrested for saying nasty things on twitter are you? That's something to question what the world is coming to.

I think because it turned out OK then we are all laughing about it. The guy has learned his lesson and hopefully he will desist, probably not but there is a small chance - a lesson has been learned from at least one party and a message to all trolls that there are people who will come round to your house. I think the message that screams loud and clear to me is keep away from twitter and the arsehole involvment in your personal life drops by 95%.

The Dark Destroyer wrote:Is it as simple as that? Really?

That lad, whatever you think of him has every right to say what he wants within the law, and he has that right to do it without threats of physical violence for saying it.

Curtis Woodhouse, whatever you think of him has every right to say what he wants within the law - which includes going to say it to his face.

Dark Destroyer what goes around comes around mate, if someone puts that drivel out there and ends up getting arrested or battered or whatever else then there responsible for that and there'll probably stop doing it in the future.

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Wales wrote:

The Dark Destroyer wrote:Is it as simple as that? Really?

That lad, whatever you think of him has every right to say what he wants within the law, and he has that right to do it without threats of physical violence for saying it.

Curtis Woodhouse, whatever you think of him has every right to say what he wants within the law - which includes going to say it to his face.

Yes, he does. I don't believe I've implied differently. But he has no right to do that with an implicit threat of violence. Which was there, whatever he says he would or wouldn't have done subsequently. I'm just glad it was some dick head, can you imagine the papers if it had have been a kid or something, it'd just be another stick to beat boxing with.

I dont think there was a threat of violence, was there? wasnt it repeated comments about going for a brew?

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Andypittcov wrote:Dark Destroyer what goes around comes around mate, if someone puts that drivel out there and ends up getting arrested or battered or whatever else then there responsible for that and there'll probably stop doing it in the future.

Oh right, great, so it's okay to batter people if it might teach them a lesson?

Who does the battering?

Who decides who deserves a battering?

I am sure the police and the BBBoC don't take kindly to boxers like Curtis battering people who say nasty things to him on twitter.

Not to mention he'd have a very, very difficult time when it went to court as the intent would be there for everyone to read.

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Andypittcov wrote:Dark Destroyer what goes around comes around mate, if someone puts that drivel out there and ends up getting arrested or battered or whatever else then there responsible for that and there'll probably stop doing it in the future.

Oh right, great, so it's okay to batter people if it might teach them a lesson?

Who does the battering?

Who decides who deserves a battering?

I'm NOT saying he should get battered i'm saying he should be aware that that's possibility and therefore be responsible for whatever happens

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Wales wrote: I dont think there was a threat of violence, he only ever said he was going for a chat. Didnt once say im going to punch your face in etc...

I did say implicit. But come on, if there was no implied violence why is the lad too scared to answer his door to a professional boxer?

Because he's just called him a bellend on twitter, or whatever he said. And because he's a gutless bully. Im not sure Woodhouse ever knocked on his door either, was that tweeted that he actually knocked on his door or just that he was on his road? Lots of things on here seem to be getting made up, or assumed. I remember him asking for his house number, but i dont recall a tweet saying he was banging on his door, or shouting through the letterbox (i may be wrong?).

My gradmother wouldnt walk past a group of hoodies in the street, doesnt make them criminals. Although they probably are <shakes fist>

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Andypittcov wrote:Dark Destroyer what goes around comes around mate, if someone puts that drivel out there and ends up getting arrested or battered or whatever else then there responsible for that and there'll probably stop doing it in the future.

Oh right, great, so it's okay to batter people if it might teach them a lesson?

Who does the battering?

Who decides who deserves a battering?

The bloke from Marinos does the battering down my way
Good he is

but seriously, and it is a serious topic
violence only gets you so far
crikey you can't even defend your property versus a burglar without getting sued for assault

the problem in my view is that social media can't be moderated (a la Boxrec) the world is just too vast. any herbert can troll about, and spout pure nonsense for either a rise, or for self inlating ego purposes.

a tongue in cheek comment could be interpreted as a direct threat.

if the police parked outside the said house and our man drives up;
"Allo Allo, evening all, we've 'ad a complaint"
"what's this on your back seat, boxing gloves?"

"WELL HE WROTE SOME STUFF ON INTERNET AND I'M GONNA SHOW HIM THE ERROR OF HIS WAYS"

"Well sir, even I can't give him a good old clip round the ear'ole these days and you certainly cannot"
"And what you are doing is tantamount to premeditated conspiracy to commit assault (Ok I made that up)

------------------------------------------
Its all nonsense isn't it. PC gone mad. I love what Curtis has done. Made a stand against a complete fool. Don't want him to get into trouble though.
Me old dad always goes back to the 50s and 60s
you know, I sort of envy him a bit

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

Wales wrote: I dont think there was a threat of violence, he only ever said he was going for a chat. Didnt once say im going to punch your face in etc...

I did say implicit. But come on, if there was no implied violence why is the lad too scared to answer his door to a professional boxer?

Due to the realisation that his vile, unwarranted and deliberately provocative actions have - and should have - consequences.

I'm sure there will be copycat exposures.

Its not bizzare, he has said he was going there to discuss what he had written - how is that a threat of violence. If you'd like to interpret that as a threat of violence then thats your perogative. But it wouldnt hold water "in a court of law" IF all he said was im going to discuss his comments with him face to face, then never even arrived at his house.

Good on him I say anyway.