Fitzgerald probably told them to say that too. + NOT 5'9!margaret thatcher wrote: ↑24 Jul 2024, 09:52 the police sent another message saying dont approach him, he's a loose canon
What is Ted Cheesemans thriving business? Always like him as a fighter. Last time I heard he had a gambling addiction. Glad he's doing well.SeanBrennan wrote: ↑30 May 2024, 14:54he's not on top now. Fowler made loads of money, Ted's got a thriving business. It just shows how things can change doesn't it. I struggle to sympathise with Fitz.Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 May 2024, 03:32We had Cheese, Fitz and Fowler..jameswilson wrote: ↑28 May 2024, 20:32 Jesus and the orphans how on earth can it be over 5 years since he stuck Fowler flat on his arse.
Fitz was the probably behind them both in terms of what Matchroom wanted to do..
But he came out on top
A building business, no idea if it's thrivingTaansend wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 12:21What is Ted Cheesemans thriving business? Always like him as a fighter. Last time I heard he had a gambling addiction. Glad he's doing well.SeanBrennan wrote: ↑30 May 2024, 14:54he's not on top now. Fowler made loads of money, Ted's got a thriving business. It just shows how things can change doesn't it. I struggle to sympathise with Fitz.Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 May 2024, 03:32
We had Cheese, Fitz and Fowler..
Fitz was the probably behind them both in terms of what Matchroom wanted to do..
But he came out on top
He seems to live a very extravagant lifestyle on social media.Coco wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 13:24A building business, no idea if it's thrivingTaansend wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 12:21What is Ted Cheesemans thriving business? Always like him as a fighter. Last time I heard he had a gambling addiction. Glad he's doing well.SeanBrennan wrote: ↑30 May 2024, 14:54
he's not on top now. Fowler made loads of money, Ted's got a thriving business. It just shows how things can change doesn't it. I struggle to sympathise with Fitz.
He had a crippling gambling addiction. He's got a building firm as far as I am aware and it's doing well. Not heard from or about him for some time. His father I read about as he's active in the ex boxers associations so he's often mention in Boxing News.Taansend wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 12:21What is Ted Cheesemans thriving business? Always like him as a fighter. Last time I heard he had a gambling addiction. Glad he's doing well.SeanBrennan wrote: ↑30 May 2024, 14:54he's not on top now. Fowler made loads of money, Ted's got a thriving business. It just shows how things can change doesn't it. I struggle to sympathise with Fitz.Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 May 2024, 03:32
We had Cheese, Fitz and Fowler..
Fitz was the probably behind them both in terms of what Matchroom wanted to do..
But he came out on top
Let's see, if his convictions are spentOld bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 04:31 Be surprised if he's allowed his license back, he's amassed a lot of convictions and the board take a dim view of that.
The board let a convicted rapist Tyson fight in the UK, twice. Tyson would’ve had a US licence though (not sure which state, prob Vegas)Old bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 04:31 Be surprised if he's allowed his license back, he's amassed a lot of convictions and the board take a dim view of that.
Tyson's convictions were spent, the only issue was whether the government would give him a visa or notJamesPhilips wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 12:48The board let a convicted rapist Tyson fight in the UK, twice. Tyson would’ve had a US licence though (not sure which state, prob Vegas)Old bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 04:31 Be surprised if he's allowed his license back, he's amassed a lot of convictions and the board take a dim view of that.
Of course Fitzgerald doesn’t bring money like Tyson. No way the board would block a Tyson fight.
Who were the names that the board blocked on a licence in the past because they had a criminal record?
I'm going by memory here but Scott Harrison, Richard Towers , Mark Heffron ,JamesPhilips wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 12:48The board let a convicted rapist Tyson fight in the UK, twice. Tyson would’ve had a US licence though (not sure which state, prob Vegas)Old bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 04:31 Be surprised if he's allowed his license back, he's amassed a lot of convictions and the board take a dim view of that.
Of course Fitzgerald doesn’t bring money like Tyson. No way the board would block a Tyson fight.
Who were the names that the board blocked on a licence in the past because they had a criminal record?
Thanks for this. So it seems that refusing a fighter a licence due to criminal record is totally up to the Board’s discretion????Old bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 16:01I'm going by memory here but Scott Harrison, Richard Towers , Mark Heffron ,JamesPhilips wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 12:48The board let a convicted rapist Tyson fight in the UK, twice. Tyson would’ve had a US licence though (not sure which state, prob Vegas)Old bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 04:31 Be surprised if he's allowed his license back, he's amassed a lot of convictions and the board take a dim view of that.
Of course Fitzgerald doesn’t bring money like Tyson. No way the board would block a Tyson fight.
Who were the names that the board blocked on a licence in the past because they had a criminal record?
if, having called the licence holder before it, it
reasonably considers that it is not in the interests or
the welfare of boxing that the licence holder
should continue to hold his licence or licences including,
without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, where:
(i) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder, being a Boxer, is not medically fit
to box; or
(ii) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder being a Referee or Timekeeper, is
not fit to continue to officiate.
(iii) a licence holder owes £1,000 or more to the Board
or an Area Council;
(iv) a licence holder is declared bankrupt;
(v) a licence holder is convicted of a criminal offence
that in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council
may affect the BBBofC’s reputation or otherwise
affects the licence holder’s suitability to continue
to hold a licence; or
(vi) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder’s behaviour has brought or is likely
to bring the BBBofC into disrepute.
Yes seems it in some cases. They do go down the conviction has to be completed, so say a boxer gets 3 years but is released after 18 months then they wouldn't consider a licence till the 3 year mark as sentance is still continuing.JamesPhilips wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 16:04Thanks for this. So it seems that refusing a fighter a licence due to criminal record is totally up to the Board’s discretion????Old bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 16:01I'm going by memory here but Scott Harrison, Richard Towers , Mark Heffron ,JamesPhilips wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 12:48
The board let a convicted rapist Tyson fight in the UK, twice. Tyson would’ve had a US licence though (not sure which state, prob Vegas)
Of course Fitzgerald doesn’t bring money like Tyson. No way the board would block a Tyson fight.
Who were the names that the board blocked on a licence in the past because they had a criminal record?
if, having called the licence holder before it, it
reasonably considers that it is not in the interests or
the welfare of boxing that the licence holder
should continue to hold his licence or licences including,
without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, where:
(i) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder, being a Boxer, is not medically fit
to box; or
(ii) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder being a Referee or Timekeeper, is
not fit to continue to officiate.
(iii) a licence holder owes £1,000 or more to the Board
or an Area Council;
(iv) a licence holder is declared bankrupt;
(v) a licence holder is convicted of a criminal offence
that in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council
may affect the BBBofC’s reputation or otherwise
affects the licence holder’s suitability to continue
to hold a licence; or
(vi) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder’s behaviour has brought or is likely
to bring the BBBofC into disrepute.
ThanksOld bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 16:36Yes seems it in some cases. They do go down the conviction has to be completed, so say a boxer gets 3 years but is released after 18 months then they wouldn't consider a licence till the 3 year mark as sentance is still continuing.JamesPhilips wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 16:04Thanks for this. So it seems that refusing a fighter a licence due to criminal record is totally up to the Board’s discretion????Old bones Ian wrote: ↑31 Oct 2026, 16:01
I'm going by memory here but Scott Harrison, Richard Towers , Mark Heffron ,
if, having called the licence holder before it, it
reasonably considers that it is not in the interests or
the welfare of boxing that the licence holder
should continue to hold his licence or licences including,
without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, where:
(i) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder, being a Boxer, is not medically fit
to box; or
(ii) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder being a Referee or Timekeeper, is
not fit to continue to officiate.
(iii) a licence holder owes £1,000 or more to the Board
or an Area Council;
(iv) a licence holder is declared bankrupt;
(v) a licence holder is convicted of a criminal offence
that in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council
may affect the BBBofC’s reputation or otherwise
affects the licence holder’s suitability to continue
to hold a licence; or
(vi) in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council a
licence holder’s behaviour has brought or is likely
to bring the BBBofC into disrepute.
Spent convictions is different as each sentence has a spent limit meaning you don't necessarily need to declare it , but in my own experience I had to declare my early convictions for silly offences when applying for job working for a charity in police detention centre.
Might be the same for boxing licence then it's looked at case by case.