BoxRec

G0mez wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:FWIW gomez, (1) I agree that all Khan-hatred can't be ascribed to racism but I also think that (2) some of it has to be, and that (3) it's pretty ridiculous to boo Khan for shaking the hand/acknowledging his trainer and someone who he obviously has a great deal of respect for

i cant answer why everone boo'ed Amir that was there CP.

But things like this didn't endear him to the army of hatton fans really do they ? ..

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/more-spor ... -21201964/

banjo wrote:Why does people bring up things like God and Allah? They don't exist lol

G0mez wrote:Oh the irony ! My Allah comment was in reference to Christ this, Christ that, Jesus Christ the other in your post mate. You talk about god and i mention one word and suddenly it's more ammunition for you. Trap sprung.

Your obsessed with religion and racial issues. Implying its running through every person who disagrees with you like the words 'Blackpool' run through a stick of rock.

Running round declaring who you think are bigots and beating your 'yes, but racism is the issue!!' drum.

Like i said (again and again and again...) you try to label everyone who does not like Khan as a bigot or secret-squirell racist.Jumping all over anyone that goes against your opinion.

You cant post your own views, you just like taking to task other people's - and when you cannot understand or respect what they think you start declaring how they are a bigot.

I've tried to qualify myself as 'not a bigot' in my previous response - such was the offence i took at you trying to insinuate such a thing. Upon reflection, why should i have even bothered ? your like a broken record.

Carlos-Wigan wrote:Hello Spud,

I think what Khan has done is what most boxers do. Like football players today they show loyalty only to themselves. They will change circumstances at a drop of a hat to suit themselves and they have all done it whilst maintaining a 'man in the street' persona, if you can manage to see past that then without prejudice you have to admit Khan is no more a sinner than any of his contemporaries. I'll agree that Khan does not have that likeable 'man in the street' persona that the average lager lout can relate to but to treat Khan and make him out to be a villian and boo him is wrong - everything Khan has meant to have done - other boxers have done also.

Truth is always bad PR Spud, Is it true what Khan is saying? I think it is but others disagree, no-one has to like Khan - I mean there are boxers I don't like either - Sam Sexton, the Walsh brothers, but I will give credit where its due and admit that Sam Sexton (especially) has plenty you positive traits. Its OK to come out with anti-Khan spiel about his driving and his hand picked opponents and his treatment of trainers with your mates down the pub but to do it here where we have a clue - the criticism needs balance - everything Khan is meant to be guilty of - others have been worse - but you never heard the bile about them either.

Khan will now stand and fall on his own merits with Golden Boy - This is more a risk to his health and his legacy than staying with Warren surely? He could have defended that WBA title at the reebok and the MEN ala Calazghe and Hatton but with Golden Boy he is going to have to earn his keep or he will be out on his ear - thus he will be more active and against more dangerous fighters if past Golden Boy promotions are anything to go by. Will he succeed? I have no idea to be honest - it will be fun to watch though.

As for the racism issue regarding Khan - are you saying it doesn't exist at all?

G0mez wrote:Carlos,

Whilst i think your response it more of a point-scoring excerise than a debate, i appreciate your stance on everything.

That said and put aside, I think you have completely forgotten what the thread is titled.

I'll remind you that its a thread about the reasons why Khan is leaving, written by a journalist, whom for the most part has been exposed by the lion's share of the posters on here for being a totally ridiculous article.

Many have concluded that it's more to do with dumping Warren, avoiding Maidana and lastly but perhaps most significantly the increase in higher earning's tax.

You find it somehow impossible to comprehend the numerous reasons why someone would think Khan Ltd is a joke and has run out of patience. Trainers, records, ridiculous press releases, calling out names but fighting bums.

I really looked forward to Khan turning pro. I was also looking to see him do really well. But after 50 press releases from 'bashing murray in sparring' to 'I'll help Pacquaio prepare for Hatton' or 'Prescott is a level below me now' etc etc - i've completely bored of it.

If Khan was a flow chart, you could bet that every decision would be the weakest opponent / most profitable route as possible. Not a desire to be the best or to fight the best. Purely 'team' mission for fame & cash - and that is obvious for all to see.

G0mez wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:i was just saving Gomez the trouble of writing that himself, complete with the usual catchphrases

Appreciated

MecnunK wrote:
@Gomez - You are getting irrational in you replies the more you defend your hatred of Khan. What it has to do with Christ or Allah? and your grandfather died for freedom of speesh?..Ohh yeah the Japanese were really breathing down our necks just off the Cornish coast and announicng they were going to eliminate certain topics from discussion forever..lol, you dont need to prescribe to Bushesque rhetoric to justify your dislike of Khan and "japs" is a racial slur for people of Japanese descent much like p@@ki.

My replies flow perfectly well if you care to read through them in whole rather than take a sentence you can manipulate.(afterall i started the topic). Secondly your 'lol' at millions of servicemen killed by the japs (an abbreviation) shows your mentality. I suggest you head back to AmirFans.co.uk 'lol'

MecnunK wrote:
p.s MY great grandfather died fighting in WW1, but for me to say he died for the freedom of my speech would be ludicrous, he died because he was a soldier, probably stupidly brave and this is what they get paid for with death being an occupational hazard.

G0mez wrote:

MecnunK wrote:
p.s MY great grandfather died fighting in WW1, but for me to say he died for the freedom of my speech would be ludicrous, he died because he was a soldier, probably stupidly brave and this is what they get paid for with death being an occupational hazard.

I'm sure your great grandad would love to know that the loved one's he left behind whilst he was out there dying in a ditch, think that he was 'stupid' and that oh well, it's an 'occupational hazard'.

You sharp object.

MecnunK wrote:Back to hating on Khan!!

Counter-puncher wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:
Murray and Thaxton did just as much talking as Khan and as far as I can tell, they never agreed terms either. In fact, those two made names (or tried to) for themselves simply by calling out Khan rather than producing the results to force the issue, and Khan's trash talking of them was merely his response.

Furthermore, the only reason Khan's trash talking got more coverage is because he's the bigger name, and thus more likely to be reported on. Simple.

oliver, on a point of timescale i very definitely recall that khan made the first move re trashtalking with thaxton

from memory the timescale was, khan interview 'all these british lightweights better fight me now before i am above their level'

response from Thaxton, 'brilliant i'd love to fight him'

response from khan' 'all these british lightweights talking about me and trying to cash in on my name, i will have to show them etc etc etc blah blah blah'

i definitely remember he threw the first verbal at thaxton, and then made out like it was thaxton who started it all.

oliverfennell wrote:
OK, you're probably right about the timescales. But my point merely is that to make a fight requires BOTH to agree. Consequently BOTH have failed, and it is only Khan who's criticised for "duckinh".

Terry D wrote:

carrotcruncher wrote:He gets an idea in his head, perhaps on the back of a spliff or ten, and tries to make the facts fit the hypothesis.

Really? He sounds like a fine fellow. Nice PR work. Stopped reading at this point, concentration went...

Terry D wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:I don't mean the TV crew, I mean the fans.

He took some flak. Fans tend to be understanding when it comes to weight. They only went barmy when it was Castillo pushing his luck. Corrales doing the same. Plus Guzman once again failing the limit. You could see that Murray had tried to make it and had done all he could physically to make the weight. Fans tend to go OTT at times but if Murray came out and said that his lack of chances was due to his white skin tone and the fact that white, working class lads don't have an edge in modern Britain, well he'd get some stick wouldn't he?