i am on a boxing down

[hitman_hatton1]

the profile of the sport has never been so low.

greedy promoters have spoiled boxings profile.

all this ppv nonsense is ridiculous.

don't mind having to pay for really big big fights.

but paying for the likes of khan-prescott and khan-kotelnik is when u know the sport has eaten itself. :(

[hitman_hatton1]

Just think you can watch Man Utd play Barcelona, arguably the 2 best teams in the world in the Champions league final on free TV, yet have to pay through the nose twice to watch an average Alphabet "world" title.

football may have sold itself down the river.

but the difference is it has the fanbase to do it.

it has the profile to get away with it.

boxing does not.

[hitman_hatton1]

Hey mark, spend an evening with me at the York Hall
or somewhere in the London area and i'll soon get your
enthusiasm back for the game DD
There's still been some cracking fights this year already,
not mentioned were Berto/ Collazo & Mundine/ GealeNothing can be done about injuries in a two horse race.
Other sports ie, team sports just bring in someone else
to replace an injured player.
Plus we still have the unpredictability of exciting matches
being made, in the next couple of weeks some great fights
could be made and will put a different perspective on it.

yeah and neither fight was on uk television.

[jspain]

i think ppv is alot to do with it and also that the regular coverage is often a letdown. since last november on ppv we have had

hatton - malignaggi
the double bill on 6th dec
khan - barrera in march
hatton - pac in may
khan kotelnik in july

mayweather - marquez would have been ppv as well. before the end of the year khan will be out again once if not twice. also if hatton returns that will be ppv as well propably. that averages out at nearly one a month.

in these times that we are in thats too much for alot of people. it does not help when the regular coverage is often ordinary. and then on ppv night when the undercard is so crap and the main event sometimes a letdown you are left feeling somewhat short-changed. i mean witter and rees have fought kotelnik but now that khan is its suddenly ppv. the fact that khan has a ppv deal no matter who he fights is not good either. i know hatton was the same but times have changed since then. a ppv main event should be when both guys are ppv worthy. if we only had ppv once or twice a year and it was a real special event it would be worth it. they call them special events on sky box office. the problem is they are now occuring too often to be special and they are not a treat anymore. for boxing fans who want to see all the action they have basically tagged on an extra 21 euros to the bill every month or so.

i compared sky to setanta earlier in the thread and most of the good quality fights are on setanta. when you compare setanta and sky both in terms of subscription costs and quantity of fights. setanta should be the icing on the cake but to me at the minute it seems that setanta is the whole cake. and you get it for a third of the price of sky. that definitely does not add up for boxing fans.

[nobby_nobbins]

I feel exactly the same MadMark and have been passionate about boxing for almost as long as you. It's so rare we get the match ups we want. I'm actually drifting away from the sport and spend more time watching tennis these days. The best players face each other on a regular basis in tennis and aren't terrified of losing. Fighters like Froch help, but he can't save boxing single-handed.

[DavidPayne]

Remember when you paid for Bruno v Tyson, remember when you bought your first SKY SPORTS subscription?

Thats when YOU shagged the sport.

Supply and demand baby, and its coming home to roost.

[Punchy Joe]

Remember when you paid for Bruno v Tyson, remember when you bought your first SKY SPORTS subscription?

Thats when YOU shagged the sport.

Supply and demand baby, and its coming home to roost.

Well I'm tired of shagging the filthy ho, she's charging more and more for a dirty fishing smelling service if you get me drift and I'm pissed off with her.
she's not the young beautiful goddess she once was, she's well worn and had far too much dick.

[DavidPayne]

Remember when you paid for Bruno v Tyson, remember when you bought your first SKY SPORTS subscription?

Thats when YOU shagged the sport.

Supply and demand baby, and its coming home to roost.

i never paid for Bruno-Tyson because it was on some weird channel if i remember rightly and i ended up listening to the radio. The whole sky sports thing is easy to slag off in hindsight and as a sports fan i like what i get, the problem is i'm a boxing fan more than anything else and recently that has sucked. The time when Warren took all his fighters to Sky was when ITV got cold feet with regards to boxing. It was Watson-Eubank 2, Benn -McClellan that upset them because of what happened to the fighters. i'm led to believe it was Naz's antics the week after the McClellen injury when Naz really showed up and humilated Liendo in what they saw as bad taste they pulled the plug. Sky took on the boxing and at the time did a good job by giving us decent domestic fights, US stuff and ringside. Supply and demand i get but if ITV were pulling 10m pulls for saturday shows why pull the plug? because that is "supply and demand". The answer i feel was they just read to much into the negative press surrounding boxing at the time and someone(a non boxing fan) made the call to give it the chop.

I'd argue Benn v McClellan solidified and recruited as many boxing fans as it lost. ITV called it wrong, but a lull of coverage and a return would have maintained the audiences I'm sure.

We all followed to SKY like sheep without foresight and now we're all finding out the harsh reality of 20 years as a niche sport, occassional days out in the sun on ITV or BBC for Audley and Froch but on the whole in the shadows away from the big audiences, and simultaneously complicating the structure and hierarchy of the sport to such a degree that only Academics and Anoracks could tell you who the fkk the heavyweight champion of the world is.

But then, boxing has been in crisis since 1900.

[Gaz_73]

Boxing's other problem is that the younger generation are getting more interested in UFC and MMA,

I actually disagree with this.

Most people beefs in this thread are problems that boxing has that are nothing to do with MMA. If boxing rights thes wrongs (lack of depth to shows, over-protected fighters, proliferation of titles, IMO) people
would watch again.

When I first got SKY, it was mainly for the Boxing (despite me being a football fan). However the quality of what is shown had deteriorated so far that I no longer buy PPV's and seldom see Friday fight nights.

That doesn't mean that I "don't watch boxing" but there is no correlation in the quality if fights that I can see as part of my standard subscription (Setanta and ITV 4) and fights I have to pay £15 for (SBO)

[jamesmcdonnell]

Remember when you paid for Bruno v Tyson, remember when you bought your first SKY SPORTS subscription?

Thats when YOU shagged the sport.

Supply and demand baby, and its coming home to roost.

Oh right, so what should we have done, organised a mass protest and formed a picket line around people's subscription button on their sky remote? What a silly comment Dave.

If anything the greed of the fighters is what shagged the sport, wanting fabulous paydays for routine defences is what changed the business model.

[charlieb]

I've done my fair share of whinging in the past, but I'm genuinely worried now. If Setanta folds, there's no place to go other than Sky Sports. That's very bad news.

Talk of boxing finding a home on the net via PPV streaming is just not realistic. The stats out there which make the case that people are watching more and more media online, in ever increasing numbers, are all well and good, but the ability to make money online with streaming media is still very grim and years away from being viable.

It might be the same case as shopping on the net, which caused the net bubble to burst way back in the day because people just didn't trust it, but then over years and years it finally made inroads and took over.

Then you still have the problem that there are only so many boxing fans and if streaming takes off it's not as though people will stumble upon it. I just cant see the money being there to propel the sport into mainstream with that route.

Our best hope is that our remaining great fighters (Froch/Haye), as well as the new batch (Degale/Khan/Sutherland/Fury/Price/Gavin etc.), do some special things. Special enough to force the arseholes at Sky to sit up and take notice as well as peak the other mainstream channels interest enough to take the sport seriously again, once the bust turns boom.

I'm rambling, it's a quagmire.

[DavidPayne]

Remember when you paid for Bruno v Tyson, remember when you bought your first SKY SPORTS subscription?

Thats when YOU shagged the sport.

Supply and demand baby, and its coming home to roost.

Oh right, so what should we have done, organised a mass protest and formed a picket line around people's subscription button on their sky remote? What a silly comment Dave.

If anything the greed of the fighters is what shagged the sport, wanting fabulous paydays for routine defences is what changed the business model.

Its not a silly comment at its core. Ask yourself why they got fabulous paydays for routine defences? I know some sort of socialist picket line wouldn't have happened, but though fuelled by hindsight, I think fans should ACCEPT their large lemming like role in the sport being in its current situation.

If SKY don't do the numbers for their initial outlay, they dont comeback to it.

[Autobarn]

I don't believe in watching, especially not PPVing, fights online, live.

Streaming can be a pain in the arse for those who don't want to do the techie fiddling about. It's inconvenient, if your PC is too slow or if you need this or that downloading. I don't want to watch on small screen, don't want to route a computer broadcast onto my TV - I believe a big screen TV would show the quality up.

Streaming is like waiting for a Commodore 64 cassette game to load, at times. Hit and miss, and pray to God an ant doesn't sneeze near you.

Not worth the hassle.

Let's hope if all the promoters are on Sky, that they really have to compete with each other, that they have to put on good fights otherwise they get no TV. Don't just let the promoters put on anything. It is annoying that they sort of, "save the good stuff for next time".

[Quixall]

Remember when you paid for Bruno v Tyson, remember when you bought your first SKY SPORTS subscription?

Thats when YOU shagged the sport.

Supply and demand baby, and its coming home to roost.

I get your general point David, but it was still down to the broadcasting regulatory bodies, as to what sky sports could offer, how much they could charge etc. The government allowed the regulatory bodies to become toothless, because it got huge tax revenues out of sky and all tne other cable and satellite companies, because it was a new financial revenue stream. In the end, the bbc were priced out of the market, because Sky slowly, as revenue's increased, managed to offer better financial packages to promoters and the fighters themselves. It got to the point where most of the marquee fights were scheduled to Sky sports and more recently Setanta and so the consumer had no choice, other than to pay sky if he wanted to see marquee fights. The public was assured that this would not be the case when theses concerns were initially raised at the outset of cable and satellite tv companies, but unfortunately the regulatory bodies set up by the government were toothless talking shops that had no real power to regulate the new burgonong market place. That was not the fault of the public, it is and was the fault of sucessive government's

[Gaz_73]

Remember when you paid for Bruno v Tyson, remember when you bought your first SKY SPORTS subscription?

Thats when YOU shagged the sport.

Supply and demand baby, and its coming home to roost.

Oh right, so what should we have done, organised a mass protest and formed a picket line around people's subscription button on their sky remote? What a silly comment Dave.

If anything the greed of the fighters is what shagged the sport, wanting fabulous paydays for routine defences is what changed the business model.

Its not a silly comment at its core. Ask yourself why they got fabulous paydays for routine defences? I know some sort of socialist picket line wouldn't have happened, but though fuelled by hindsight, I think fans should ACCEPT their large lemming like role in the sport being in its current situation.

If SKY don't do the numbers for their initial outlay, they dont comeback to it.

I understand what you say, however there is another aspect that hasn't been taken into account.

SKY have generally given us less and less over the years for our money.

15 years ago, you would have got Benn, Naz, Eubank on a show on SKY Sports.
10 years ago, you would have got Naz, Calzaghe, Eubank etc on a SBO show for £9.99
Today you get one Hatton fight and pay £14.95 for the privelege. Amir Khan was fighting on ITV for free, then next thing he is fighting on SKY for £15 with no real increase in quality of opponent.

10 years ago, I wouldn't have been happy at pay per view, but the quality of the show justified me spending my money, however, they give you far less for your money today.

Tyson v Bruno 1 saw the dawn of Boxing on subscription channels
Tyson v Bruno 2 saw the dawn of Boxing on PPV

Thank fornicate they never thought a third time!!!!

[Quixall]

Boxing's other problem is that the younger generation are getting more interested in UFC and MMA,

I actually disagree with this.

Most people beefs in this thread are problems that boxing has that are nothing to do with MMA. If boxing rights thes wrongs (lack of depth to shows, over-protected fighters, proliferation of titles, IMO) people
would watch again.

When I first got SKY, it was mainly for the Boxing (despite me being a football fan). However the quality of what is shown had deteriorated so far that I no longer buy PPV's and seldom see Friday fight nights.

That doesn't mean that I "don't watch boxing" but there is no correlation in the quality if fights that I can see as part of my standard subscription (Setanta and ITV 4) and fights I have to pay £15 for (SBO)

I have put on many threads before that boxing could reclaim it's position as the number one combat sport, if it changes it's whole attitude and does a root and branch reform of the whole system, ie, governing bodies, media, promoters, financial packages, costs to the public, amateur programs etc etc. The UFC nad MMA become a problem, because it's a fact that a lot of people are now watching as much UFC and MMA as they are boxing, the figures in America prove this point, so if boxing wants to stay ahead of the game and it's direct competitors, then it needs to make itself more attractive to audiences. Only recently, Roy Jones Jr promoted a show where MMA was on the undercard i believe, which would never have been the case even five years ago. An up and comin champion like Chad Dawson can barely raise an audience to watch his fights and he is touted in some corners (not by me) as the next big thing in boxing. UFC and MMA audiences have greatly increased in recent years and if boxing does'nt alter in a significant way, then it will find it's audience switching sides. We have even had two posters, one who i know very well, BigMark, saying that they are watching more tennis than boxing a the minute and i know for a fact that BigMark is a boxing fanatic.........That's a bad sign if someone is so disalusioned they are watching tennis instead.

[Gaz_73]

I am a huge MMA fan however it just means that I am watching more fighs than I was before. The decline in the amount of Boxing I watch is down to what a believe is a drop in the quality of Boxing.

When done correctly Boxing is still brilliant. It needs to consistently deliver good fights and quality cards.

Boxing has the same problem Premier League football has. Whilst the fans winge about the product, the people in the game are making far to much money to change the model.

[hitman_hatton1]

I am a huge MMA fan however it just means that I am watching more fighs than I was before. The decline in the amount of Boxing I watch is down to what a believe is a drop in the quality of Boxing.

When done correctly Boxing is still brilliant. It needs to consistently deliver good fights and quality cards.

Boxing has the same problem Premier League football has. Whilst the fans winge about the product, the people in the game are making far to much money to change the model.

what fans whinge about the premier league?

they may whinge about the dominance of the top 4.

but the league as a whole is top quality and one of the best in europe.

football has no problems whatsoever i'd argue.

[hitman_hatton1]

yes i like tennis but wouldnt watch it over boxing, well saying that if the US open classed with FFN i may sky+ the boxing but would watch the tennis live if it was a decent match. The difference with Tennis is the good guys still get beat by each other and can be by any top 100 player where as in boxing these days 9 out of 10 times you know who's going to win.

yeah but that's only cos your rigging the prediction league in your favour ffs.

nearly spat me teeth out when i saw u were top this week.

[Gaz_73]

I am a huge MMA fan however it just means that I am watching more fighs than I was before. The decline in the amount of Boxing I watch is down to what a believe is a drop in the quality of Boxing.

When done correctly Boxing is still brilliant. It needs to consistently deliver good fights and quality cards.

Boxing has the same problem Premier League football has. Whilst the fans winge about the product, the people in the game are making far to much money to change the model.

what fans whinge about the premier league?

they may whinge about the dominance of the top 4.

but the league as a whole is top quality and one of the best in europe.

football has no problems whatsoever i'd argue.

Spiralling admission prices, ridiculous kick off times, lack of English talent, souless out of town stadiums..............................

[hitman_hatton1]

Spiralling admission prices, ridiculous kick off times, lack of English talent, souless out of town stadiums..............................

but fans still turnout in big numbers.

alright some clubs don't pack em in all that well.

but even there getting 20.000 or more.

still think the premier league is strong and has nothing much to worry about.

[Gaz_73]

Spiralling admission prices, ridiculous kick off times, lack of English talent, souless out of town stadiums..............................

but fans still turnout in big numbers.

alright some clubs don't pack em in all that well.

but even there getting 20.000 or more.

still think the premier league is strong and has nothing much to worry about.

It makes money and that is the important thing in the game. Boxing is heading that way,imho. Money is more important than titles.

[exittored]

British Boxing is Fine in Theory

I always ask, is there a Good Fighter at Heavyweight, Middle, Welter, Light and Featherweight and we sort of have that in HAYE, FROCH, KELL BROOK, KHAN and MITCHELL who are still mostly young guys and all exciting boxer's who have good Fanbases.

Its just a shame that June 20th and June 27th Fights involving Haye and Khan infront of over 80,000 Fans combined were Cancelled but thats just a very unusual occurance!

[exittored]

i agree we do have a good core of fighters in the UK at the moment and more than a few coming through. What concerns me is with the possible loss of Setanta and ITV coverage would could see more and more fights not being shown. Now as a boxing fan that's sad because :1. i dont get to see the fights i want and 2. the boxers are getting no exposure on the TV so no national press coverage or casual sports fan interest. Boxing it seems to me at the moment depends a lot on fighters building up local interest and followings much like football to sell tickets at local shows, for example there is a reason Tony Jeffiries is fighting again in Sunderland next month.

Yeah the Big Shame was that on the 20th and 27th June, BOXING would have got the most Exposure it would have had all year with Haye and Khan Fighting and not having to compete with Football for Media Coverage.

I guess its always been like that Film 'Field of Dreams', 'If you build it, they'll come'

'If you put on the right Fights, they'll also come'

Its rare that Great Domestic Fights havent been Near Sell-outs, people just know when there is a Good Fight!

[whicker]

One problem is an almost total lack of competative fights. Undercards are generally "work outs" for prospects, and comeback fights for recently beaten popular fighters, or warm up fights.

Hard to get excited about these bouts.

Entire shows are run on this basis.

We now also see a lot of poorly matched title fights. The Commonwealth title seems the most abused- opponents clearly brough in who are not really at title level. Its happening in more and more British title fights too, which is a shame.

In the end Ricky Hatton, one of the most popular fighters ever, simply wasn't as good as people thought he was. At the highest level, he was beatend with surprisng ease.

David Haye's massive potential seems to be bogged down with contract problems, deals and all that soap opera.

And Khan , when just on the verge of being the next household name, was moved over to pay per view, and it just all seems to have gone wrong (in terms of general popularity.)