BoxRec

oliverfennell wrote:

Goz wrote:

WildWaylon wrote: I may be wrong but I think more tickets are sold to wrestling fans than boxing fans - The arenas always seem packed and they put on shows every week.

The Spice Girls in their pomp probably sold more tickets than the Red Hot Chilli Peppers. Or Take That broke records set by the Beatles ffs!

You see my point? The arenas are full of children and adults who either 1 - Accompanied them or 2 - Have *stunted* interests.

But would a journalist who wrote about the Spice Girls be less qualified to write about The Beatles?

Why is Evans' boxing writing compromised by him also being a wrestling writer?

I couldnt write very much about the Spice Girls - I would be hard pushed to name them all - On the other hand I could write quite a bit about the Beatles and tell you things not written down that the general public know nothing of so I would be more qualified to write about the Beatles - Lets put it this way my three or four lines about the Spice Girls (lucky if I could write that much) wouldnt be a very good read - You might then say but Waylon the Beatles were your era, and they were, so its not surprising you know a lot less about artists in modern times (90s to present) - To some extent thats true, but I do still have an interest in modern music, James Morrison for example has produced some great stuff and I know James very well - The Chilli Peppers who he has worked with are also a great band - REM etc etc - Now I am just rambling on.

Goz wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:
But would a journalist who wrote about the Spice Girls be less qualified to write about The Beatles?

Why is Evans' boxing writing compromised by him also being a wrestling writer?

Ok I wasn't really in the deeper conversation - Ant is a good writer don't really want to knock him.

But...

Covering wrestling - If you are writing about it purely professionally to pay the bills then fair play, I'd do the same but - if you actually like wrestling then it would in some way diminish my opinion of your opinion when it comes to boxing.

It's all hype and bullshite, you are possibly looking for something in combat sport that most traditional boxing fans aren't.

The same way as somebody telling me they liked Take That, I just wouldn't really want to read what they had to say about the Beatles - it would render it almost irrelevant.

Superb!!!

SticknMove wrote:

King Tubby wrote:

Deserter wrote: Just an aside, but Wenger actually played professional football to a decent level - take a look at the latest issue of 4-4-2.

Being a pro doesn't mean that much in boxing, a good amateur is better than a bad pro, so you wouldn't need to have been a pro to be a good pundit. Buncy's good stuff.

Get out of thread Buncy.

Leave Buncy alone. Buncy is the Best !

King Tubby wrote:

Deserter wrote:

King Tubby wrote:Buncy's better than most, doesn't matter that he hasn't fought as a pro, Arsene Wenger knows more about football than most ex footballers. ps Buncy knows FA about football.

Just an aside, but Wenger actually played professional football to a decent level - take a look at the latest issue of 4-4-2.

Being a pro doesn't mean that much in boxing, a good amateur is better than a bad pro, so you wouldn't need to have been a pro to be a good pundit. Buncy's good stuff.

I'm not disputing that, I was just pointing out that the inference of your analogy was that Wenger hadn't played as a pro footballer and actually he had.

WildWaylon wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:

Goz wrote: The Spice Girls in their pomp probably sold more tickets than the Red Hot Chilli Peppers. Or Take That broke records set by the Beatles ffs!

You see my point? The arenas are full of children and adults who either 1 - Accompanied them or 2 - Have *stunted* interests.

But would a journalist who wrote about the Spice Girls be less qualified to write about The Beatles?

Why is Evans' boxing writing compromised by him also being a wrestling writer?

I couldnt write very much about the Spice Girls - I would be hard pushed to name them all - On the other hand I could write quite a bit about the Beatles and tell you things not written down that the general public know nothing of so I would be more qualified to write about the Beatles - Lets put it this way my three or four lines about the Spice Girls (lucky if I could write that much) wouldnt be a very good read - You might then say but Waylon the Beatles were your era, and they were, so its not surprising you know a lot less about artists in modern times (90s to present) - To some extent thats true, but I do still have an interest in modern music, James Morrison for example has produced some great stuff and I know James very well - The Chilli Peppers who he has worked with are also a great band - REM etc etc - Now I am just rambling on.

The fact you could write authoratively about The Beatles does not in itself mean you could be a good music writer. The fact you could NOT write authoratively about the Spice Girls suggests you could not.

Not saying you want to be a music writer, but hopefully you get my point. Good journalists can - and should be able to - cover a multitude of topics.

No I'm sorry, wrestling is just wrong. If Ant covered wrestling, then we can't take anything he writes on boxing seriously any longer.

Any serious boxing articles he pens will be forever tainted by the image of mullet haired males prancing around in spandex tights.

It's like asking Cliff Richard to write a book on the Joy Of Sex, or Elton John giving a lecture on the art of making love to a woman.

MightyWarrior wrote:No I'm sorry, wrestling is just wrong. If Ant covered wrestling, then we can't take anything he writes on boxing seriously any longer.

Any serious boxing articles he pens will be forever tainted by the image of mullet haired males prancing around in spandex tights.

It's like asking Cliff Richard to write a book on the Joy Of Sex, or Elton John giving a lecture on the art of making love to a woman.

I think darts as anything more than a pub game is wrong, yet yesterday is was simultaneously on two terrestrial TV channels and John Rawling was commentating on one of them. Since I personally don't like darts, should I therefore cease to respect Rawling as a boxing writer?

oliverfennell wrote: I think darts as anything more than a pub game is wrong, yet yesterday is was simultaneously on two terrestrial TV channels and John Rawling was commentating on one of them. Since I personally don't like darts, should I therefore cease to respect Rawling as a boxing writer?

Yes

Terry D wrote:One thing about writing about wrestling is that it must be a god-send for eating up the word count, if you care for word counts.

You can consume a lot of words describing the wrestlers exotic dress and hair, a bit of time on the contest then, when one guy wins, you can write, 'So Triple H wins this one and it was easy-Easy-easy-Easy-easy'.

I actually watched WWE a few years ago, it was better than Eastenders at that time.Triple H was getting some great one liners and doing a good job at being the fun/bad guy.

"Undertaker, this my be your yard (dramatic pause) but it is in the middle of my wooooooooorld!"

"Austin, you had it all, titles, success, everything, but quicker than it takes for a hand to slap on the canvas three times (dramatic pause) I took it all away."

Always thought HHH, the cerebral assassin, could play Caesar.

Did they ever solve the mystery of Stephanie's McMahon's growth spurt?

Gasp! You've watched wrestling! You just disqualified yourself from having any further credibility as a boxing writer ;)

Terry D wrote:One thing about writing about wrestling is that it must be a god-send for eating up the word count, if you care for word counts.

God forbid you ever wrote about wrestling then - I don't think there's a server on earth which could handle it!

Rawling is two timing boxing with a best of 5 short order spear contest for short sighted people? They call it darts but has anyone ever seen a blowpipe being used?

There’s a reason why people do not use the phrase ‘stepping up to the oche’ when one is facing a challenge. And there’s a reason why those in the darting community do not use the phrase ‘stepping up to the plate’ – generally because the fat bastards that play the game will try to eat everything on it.

As for Rawling – tut tut I am very disappointed.

8)

just took 15 minutes to try and get a handle on this thread, it's got f******g as much to do with Steve Bunce as I don't know what.

1) Wenger looks like he'd get both his skinny legs broken after 5 minutes. But I'm sure I read he's played a bit. His real talent lies in his brain power. I believe he is fluent in 5 languages (maybe more), has some kind of degree in Economics, again I probably do him a disservice it's more than likely a doctorate knowing that guy. And lets be fair when it comes to football and spotting talent he knows his sh*t. Understatement.

2) To "enjoy" / "tolerate", call it what you will - Pro wrestling, you have to see it for what it is. I can manage a few minutes here and there quite honestly as it's so brainless as we all seem agreed, it's kind of unpredictable.........plus , to be fair, there's something unmissable about watching some pumped up tough, fast , powerful looking geezer sounding off to someone from 20 yards away then rushing them like they're going to dismember (that might just be a new , gay wrestling move I have just invented there..).....even though you KNOW when they get right up to their face they just stop and say......ooh , terribly sorry, can't we resolve this in a violence free manner.....
I laugh at these people who torture themselves watching it cos they think everyone who watches it believes the fights are real when it's so obvious to them that they're staged. Well realise this, you're not the only person that knows this ok!

3) I think as Oliver said, if you can get paid to write, then bollocks to it, just do it. What you gonna do wait til they cut the gas off! I could amaze wrestling fans with stories of their heroes if that's what they wanna read.....but I also follow boxing to an extent where I know it would not detract from the validity of my boxing opinions.

4) I should probably say something about Steve Bunce before I finish. He can be both annoying in as much as he talks over people a lot, and he can also be pretty bloody good and the one thing you can't fail to see is that he loves boxing so he ain't going anywhere hopefully. Think that's all there is to be said on Bunce really.

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:just took 15 minutes to try and get a handle on this thread, it's got f******g as much to do with Steve Bunce as I don't know what.

Funny how threads evolve (or DEvolve), isn't it. Darts is on the verge of being introduced, too.

Let's get it straight... Bucey and darts are made for each other.... Trust me.

and knock Sid Wardell off his perch?? Never........"which one of these two fat, athletic bast*rds will be world champion this year".......the one that's still hitting the round chunk of horsehair after 12 pints.

Incidentally I saw that BBC one ITV simultaneous darts job and it was no laughing matter.

Terry D - if you thought that was long get on over to Emerson's unecessarily complicatedly entitled top pound for pound consensus thingumejig. Therapy is expensive....this is free

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote: I laugh at these people who torture themselves watching it cos they think everyone who watches it believes the fights are real when it's so obvious to them that they're staged. Well realise this, you're not the only person that knows this ok!

To be honest, when I was younger I did think a bit like that.

But now I understand that at least 10% of the wrestling crowd do understand it's staged.

And I think it's even sadder.

I would rather watch any real sport than that tosh. And I count Darts and even bloody Lawn Bowls in that list.

Goz wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote: I laugh at these people who torture themselves watching it cos they think everyone who watches it believes the fights are real when it's so obvious to them that they're staged. Well realise this, you're not the only person that knows this ok!

To be honest, when I was younger I did think a bit like that.

But now I understand that at least 10% of the wrestling crowd do understand it's staged.

And I think it's even sadder.

I would rather watch any real sport than that tosh. And I count Darts and even bloody Lawn Bowls in that list.

Why, though, is it such a problem that people want to watch wrestling even when they know it's staged?

Because, after all, so are movies, soap operas, the theatre, and so on.

People go along to live stage performance (as that is essentially what pro wrestling is) of other kinds and react to the plot, but it's not because they think it's real. They're just enjoying the show.

What's the difference?

And don't say "because wrestling is presented as though it's real". In a way it is, because you're not going to be overtly reminded of the fact it isn't, but when you have, as Ian McNeilly pointed out earlier, a dwarf versus a seven-footer, you KNOW it's tongue-in-cheek. Same goes with a lot of WWE programming.

Goz wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote: I laugh at these people who torture themselves watching it cos they think everyone who watches it believes the fights are real when it's so obvious to them that they're staged. Well realise this, you're not the only person that knows this ok!

To be honest, when I was younger I did think a bit like that.

But now I understand that at least 10% of the wrestling crowd do understand it's staged.

And I think it's even sadder.

I would rather watch any real sport than that tosh. And I count Darts and even bloody Lawn Bowls in that list.

Lawn Bowls is awesome.... Nah seriously, it quite a good laugh to play - especially if your a competitive bastard. Especially seeing all the grannies look at you in disgust when your screaming stuff like "I demand a remeasure etc".