BoxRec

Chris S,
That is a very naive response mate.
I've been very lucky to make a few friends in boxing over the years, and to a man, their private opinions about certain issues, compared to their public persona on TV are totally different.
By saying that I do not criticise them one iota.

I know this is a bit off topic but I think makes my point.
There was a classic out take once on TV of a top Councillor in Scarborough extolling the virtues of the place's superb beaches, blue flags, wnderful Hotels etc and then when he thought the camera stopped rolling, he turned around and said "And if you believe that load of bollocks you're a f**kin idiot".
He was still on live.

twenty six wrote:I know this is a bit off topic but I think makes my point.
There was a classic out take once on TV of a top Councillor in Scarborough extolling the virtues of the place's superb beaches, blue flags, wnderful Hotels etc and then when he thought the camera stopped rolling, he turned around and said "And if you believe that load of bollocks you're a f**kin idiot".
He was still on live.

That is the point, we (boxing fans) are sick of being spoken too like idiots by PR bullshit rather than incisive commentary. I know the root problem is the producers who want to smother any deviation from their script. A good example of this was the undercard bill from Sunderland that we got prior to the Hatton-Mayweather (or was it Hatton-Pac??); it was one of the worst shows that I can remember seeing, truly awful, every fight was a complete mismatch. However, every time it cut to studio commentary there was the irritation of having to sit through Sky's pundit scrapping the bottom of the barrel for a 'positive', rather than just calling it as it was.

I do not except that we are naive to question this or to demand improvement. You can get good straight, honest commentary on a HBO show, whereby the commentators will disagree with a point being made by their co-commentator, will criticise a referee or a judges scoring if they are below par and they will criticise a boxers performance etc if it is warranted. There isnt this script were they have to invent 'positives' for the sake of it. Sky should learn from the likes of HBO, it will improve their quality of coverage and better serve the boxing pundit, rather than treat them like a 'f**kin idiot'.

Sky would learn nothing from HBO who are possibly the worst broadcasters of the lot, Lampley and his fellow fanboys are true bottom of the barrel stuff.

Nelson was actually pretty insightful when he started but I feel he's been homogenised.

And I speak as someone who switched Sky Sports back on this weekend after a 3 year break.

McCrory is plain awful as a pundit but still better than Piper, who surely has a conflict of interest?

What would be interesting?

Having a former referee in the studio. I'd like to see Micky Vann, for example, talking about the fight (he's witnessed more than most of us) and coudl also comment on any technical issues too. That would be an interesting diversion from the monotony of Nelson, McCrory and Piper.

I always think of Blankety Blank.

Top row Tom O'Conner - Rusty Lee - Bruno Brookes

Front row Sam Fox - Kenny Everett - Rula Lenska

Sky Sports has too many Bruno Brookes and not enough Kenny Everett.

DavidPayne wrote: What would be interesting?

Having a former referee in the studio. I'd like to see Micky Vann, for example, talking about the fight (he's witnessed more than most of us) and coudl also comment on any technical issues too. That would be an interesting diversion from the monotony of Nelson, McCrory and Piper.

Mickey vann would be an excellent call

DavidPayne wrote:
I always think of Blankety Blank.

Top row Tom O'Conner - Rusty Lee - Bruno Brookes

Front row Sam Fox - Kenny Everett - Rula Lenska

Sky Sports has too many Bruno Brookes and not enough Kenny Everett.

How is your methadone programme coming along, David?

Get the two yanks in who commentated the Froch v Taylor fight. Class effort. Compare that last round to the poor effort from Rawling and Barry Mac! It was miles apart.

I usually have a go at the yanks for bigging it up too much, but they brought an excitement to that fight along with a fair bit of accurate knowledge. It doesn`t have the judgemental edge that many of the British commentators bring ie: pick a theme and hammer it to death at the expense of actually calling the fight objectively.

"Froch - punches..in bunches and it`s over" Great Stuff.

hitman_hatton1 wrote:darke & mccrory in the commentary box.

andy kerr presenting.

jim watt, steve bunce and chris eubank doing the analyst bit.

adam smith doing the roving reporter job. give that old trainspotter something to do.

his after fight interviews and ringside interviews are classics tbh.

Mccrory in the box? Are you joking? We don't want 2 yes men in there.

twenty six wrote:There's obviously a lot of criticism of Presenters.
However, some seem to be under the misguided view that each and every Presenter can say what they like, when they like.
You couldn't be further from the truth.
The Producer is the "conductor" and at times is screaming through the headphones directing affairs.
Have a go at it.
Stick your I Pod earphones in playing something, and try to keep talking on a boxing matter.
It's not easy.
I know for instance exactly how Johnny feels about the fight, but he's not going to be allowed to vent his anger and launch into anyone, that's just not how it's done in media circles.
To say that McCrory and Nelson did not comprehend any injustice is laughable.
We are subjected to Moderators here - now multiply that by 100 and that's where you are with the media.
I do accept that Presenters have different styles - some we like, some not as much - but if you think changing them is going to lead to a massive change in towing the party line with what is said, then you're wrong.
That could of course change if there was a change of Producer.

Mccrory and Nelson are yes men. Get rid. Watt is the best by far and at least Barry used to voice is own opinion occasionally.

I don't really care about the presenters and Bounce can get irratating at times even if he is saying what he thinks.

I think the main problem is like a couple of people have said before about hyping up boxers, matches and stuff then they only show a couple of rounds or just the knock down or fight stoppage.

The easy way to to manage this is to not talk up up and coming fights as much and just show some boxing.

The majority of people who watch Friday fight nights are boxing fans and already know what's coming up the following week they just care about seeing boxing.

I definetly like to watch boxing on tv with a couple of mates around, a few beers and a take away, I don't care what to hear what the presenters or commentators have to say. They should take a leaf out of ITV 4'S books

banjo wrote:Sky would learn nothing from HBO who are possibly the worst broadcasters of the lot, Lampley and his fellow fanboys are true bottom of the barrel stuff.

I like Teddy Atlas on 5. Some people ridicule him but I like the guy and the discussion he has with his co-host. He does't lord it like some kind of know it all he just provides good, personable insight, before, during and after fights.

Atlas once fended of a gang of 6 muggers using only his gruff, no nonsense, New York vernacular and a pointed finger inside his pocket.

He didn't really I made up that part.

i would get rid of all of the current team and completely freshen it up bunce and woodhall are possibles and a respected american to give a different view would be good and a once fortnightly 2 hour show that would show 24 rounds of tittle fights from all over the world all fights should be whole and not highlighted

I think I'm hearing Andy Kerr interview Arsene Wenger on ITV1's Champions League coverage. 8)

Asterix wrote:I think I'm hearing Andy Kerr interview Arsene Wenger on ITV1's Champions League coverage. 8)

you were.

he started off as a dorky local sports reporter up here. Now he's a dorky sports reporter somewhere else.

Alrite is Andy, i wouldn't necessarily want him in my team if I was challenging the egg heads, but he's done excellently for himself. You don't live in the north east so he must have got a national gig just for you to have heard of him I imagine. Setanta??

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

Asterix wrote:I think I'm hearing Andy Kerr interview Arsene Wenger on ITV1's Champions League coverage. 8)

you were.

he started off as a dorky local sports reporter up here. Now he's a dorky sports reporter somewhere else.

Alrite is Andy, i wouldn't necessarily want him in my team if I was challenging the egg heads, but he's done excellently for himself. You don't live in the north east so he must have got a national gig just for you to have heard of him I imagine. Setanta??

Yeah, Kerr was the main 'Bunce's Boxing Hour' presenter.

Asterix wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

Asterix wrote:I think I'm hearing Andy Kerr interview Arsene Wenger on ITV1's Champions League coverage. 8)

you were.

he started off as a dorky local sports reporter up here. Now he's a dorky sports reporter somewhere else.

Alrite is Andy, i wouldn't necessarily want him in my team if I was challenging the egg heads, but he's done excellently for himself. You don't live in the north east so he must have got a national gig just for you to have heard of him I imagine. Setanta??

Yeah, Kerr was the main 'Bunce's Boxing Hour' presenter.

yeah he used to be "the apprentice" at the end of the half hour local news summary, and read the sport, not the main sports presenter. I always thought personally he looked a bit wooden and rather than know about the sports (he doesn't look sporty), he's just kind of grown into the role. He probably works extremely hard at his career behind the scenes and that's to be applauded.
To say he probably knows less about boxing than 90% of this forum and he got the Setanta gig, you have to give him a lot of credit really. They asked me first but I said I'd only work if I got paid more than Buncey but they never returned my call......