Page 2 of 6
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 13:40
by Finn
Murray needs to sign with warren or hatton, warren would have found a way for him to have a world title by now. Hatton has pull through his name and connections.
Henny is crap any other promoter would have made froch or murray household names by now. Froch was a world champion for god sake and is practically unknown in britain to the everyday man on the street.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 13:42
by Spud
I acknowledge the error of judgement there Mr Journalist - however surely its not a bad thing to expect your fellow promoters to do business the honourable way instead of thinking "lets shaft this ****" - I will state again - naivity yep - but I was with Hennessy Sports at the very beginning and naturally watched them since - I honestly believe they have some fundamental things completely and utterly right - the interests of the fan coming to see a decent show - in addition Hennessy pays his boxers very well indeed and on the whole he looks after their interests well - I feel he has made a mistake in my view with Murray.
I look at the job Hennessy has done and I feel unlike others in this country he can hold his head up high and state he has tried to do things the right way - boxing has its murky way of doing business and it saddens me. I only ever got to see and hear what people allowed me to and that quite frankly was enough to tell me right from the very beginning people within boxing have never given Meaty Mick Hennessy a chance - and in addition watch out any other new promoter coming into the sport - the brick walls put in front of them would astound people.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 14:12
by bigdaddy
chubs wrote:The simple answer is wrong promoter he should go with Warren
Here its a lot closer to home why he dosnt get the big fights

Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 15:02
by whicker
lurkyshaka wrote:Following on from the other thread about Murray being forgotten i think its fair to pose the question....Why doesn't Murray get more attention in general amongst the fans and within the sport?
He's a Manc and Manchester has a good fight following. He has an entertaining style and is a quality operator. He also gives good honest interviews, and seems a nice enough fella. So why isn't he catching the attention the way he should be?
Is his problem simply a promotional one?
Honest answer from me if that he has been in so few well matched fights.
Lee Meager, as it happens, wasn't quite up to it.
McAllister and Lawton and then Thaxton were brave opponents, but Murray looked very comfortable throughout both fights.
I dunno- it's not like his opponents are bad- they are decent enough- but his matchups just seem to lack the spark that is needed.
Domestically, Mitchell or Arthur would be exciting match ups, or internationally, Katsidis, or any World Title fight.
That said, the same could be saod about Hatton- or Bruno. Perhaps there IS more too it than that?
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 15:09
by Autobarn
murray's had a good range of opponents and i've never felt the matchups were lacking spark. buckland kept up a tremendous tempo, mcallister was slick, awkward, fast and big at the weight. murray met meager - favoured by many - inside and overpowered and outclassed him in the pocket.
think that it'll take someone above domestic and euro level to give murray a really hard, exhilarating fight. reckon a ligthweight elim could be very exciting, and hope he gets in the mix vs tough mexicans like antillon and soto.
the one fight that had ppl really buzzing was murray-fewkes, but obviously fewkes got sick, and was having weight problems so murray would never have got credit for the win. he had to wait for the british title (thaxton doing his own thing), had to wait a long time for the euro. so it's good that he's got his lonsdale belt and ready to move on from europe.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 15:18
by whiskey
Murray will probably leave, although personally I'm not sure it would be the brightest move.
Hennessy Sports has flaws, but when I compare the career of John Murray, to that of Warren-promoted Kevin Mitchell, it's like night and day it really is.
Murray was headlining his own shows, in Manchester on ITV whilst Kevin Mitchell was fighting on an undercard at York Hall.
Murray fought for the WBC youth title on a WBC world title undercard, then English, British and European titles and has fought 3 or 4 times a year - and remains unbeaten and is breaking through into the World Scene.
Murray has fought the who's who of British lightweights - wheras Mitchell has fought a tedious bunch of nobodies from Eastern Europe.
Mitchell was working on the London underground to make ends meet... then he was 'thrown' in against Breidis Prescott in a sink or swim fight, he won and then was destroyed by Katsidis in double quick time, on account of poor experience.
Now where is Mitchell ? he's at rock bottom and on the scrap heap. Wow he might get a run out against Alex Arthur, who aint done sod all for years for minimum corn.
The grass is greener, but it wilts fast if you lose.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 15:24
by Spud
G0mez wrote:The grass is greener, but it wilts fast if you lose.
Absolutely spot on!!!
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 15:44
by charlieb
As little as I think of MH as a promoter, Murray's been with him a good while now and I remember Froch being in the similar position of having a decent domestic / euro record, looking potentially world class without having a world class scalp to his name. It took the Pascal fight to put Froch on the map and if MH can line Murray up in a similar fashion, that shouldn't be an awful long way away by now (you'd think).
Jumping ship might not be the best bet. Although personally, I don't think Murray will make it at world level, at least not in the same way that Froch has. Maybe if he can keep on making lightweight, but how likely is that?
Moving to Warren would open up a few options though, he's got some decent fighters at or around Murray's weight and fattening him up for Gavin might net him a nice payday down the line.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 16:14
by Autobarn
why would they fat him up for frankie gavin?
murray's getting a good manchester following, is headlining, and mullering top UK and european contenders and is world ranked having been nominated for a WBC final elim...
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 16:18
by 1southpaw
Spud wrote:I think on the whole "Meaty" Mick Hennessy is a very good promoter indeed.
However - with that said - the longer John Murray's career goes on the longer I think Mick could have done so much more for him with regards to Murray's profile with the general public.
Hennessy doesn't have enough shows and his fighters will go stagmant if john wants the fights i can see him moving camps
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 20:26
by charlieb
Autobarn wrote:why would they fat him up for frankie gavin?
murray's getting a good manchester following, is headlining, and mullering top UK and european contenders and is world ranked having been nominated for a WBC final elim...
It just makes sense to have a potential world champion on the books who just happens to be at or around the same weight as one of your star prospects. Add Mitchell to the mix, it makes sense. I'm not saying he should be shelved until Gavin comes of age, I'm sure Wazza could do well with him in his own right.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 26 Sep 2010, 23:07
by gobbles
G0mez wrote:Murray will probably leave, although personally I'm not sure it would be the brightest move.
Hennessy Sports has flaws, but when I compare the career of John Murray, to that of Warren-promoted Kevin Mitchell, it's like night and day it really is.
Murray was headlining his own shows, in Manchester on ITV whilst Kevin Mitchell was fighting on an undercard at York Hall.
Murray fought for the WBC youth title on a WBC world title undercard, then English, British and European titles and has fought 3 or 4 times a year - and remains unbeaten and is breaking through into the World Scene.
Murray has fought the who's who of British lightweights - wheras Mitchell has fought a tedious bunch of nobodies from Eastern Europe.
Mitchell was working on the London underground to make ends meet... then he was 'thrown' in against Breidis Prescott in a sink or swim fight, he won and then was destroyed by Katsidis in double quick time, on account of poor experience.
Now where is Mitchell ? he's at rock bottom and on the scrap heap. Wow he might get a run out against Alex Arthur, who aint done sod all for years for minimum corn.
The grass is greener, but it wilts fast if you lose.
Murray has boxed once in Manchester his whole career. He's ranked No 2 by the WBC and boxing at a sports centre in Wigan. His career is going in reverse - start in Vegas, end up in Wigan.
Mitchell's last fight was at Upton Park. He's boxed on a lot of big shows, was chief support to Haye-Maccarinelli, only boxed on York Hall undercard on his first fight back after a year out.
Can't see him re-signing with Hennessy. That hasn't gone well since Thaxton sidestepped him when European champion and Hennessy wouldn't put him on the Froch-Dirrell bill.
If Murray was going to sign with Hatton, Joe Murray wouldn't have just left.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 01:34
by goldbird
Is the fighter partly to blame for staying with a promotor who clearly isn't doing his job
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 04:23
by leforge
When did Joe Muray leave the hattons then?
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 04:33
by Autobarn
gobbles wrote:G0mez wrote:Murray will probably leave, although personally I'm not sure it would be the brightest move.
Hennessy Sports has flaws, but when I compare the career of John Murray, to that of Warren-promoted Kevin Mitchell, it's like night and day it really is.
Murray was headlining his own shows, in Manchester on ITV whilst Kevin Mitchell was fighting on an undercard at York Hall.
Murray fought for the WBC youth title on a WBC world title undercard, then English, British and European titles and has fought 3 or 4 times a year - and remains unbeaten and is breaking through into the World Scene.
Murray has fought the who's who of British lightweights - wheras Mitchell has fought a tedious bunch of nobodies from Eastern Europe.
Mitchell was working on the London underground to make ends meet... then he was 'thrown' in against Breidis Prescott in a sink or swim fight, he won and then was destroyed by Katsidis in double quick time, on account of poor experience.
Now where is Mitchell ? he's at rock bottom and on the scrap heap. Wow he might get a run out against Alex Arthur, who aint done sod all for years for minimum corn.
The grass is greener, but it wilts fast if you lose.
Murray has boxed once in Manchester his whole career. He's ranked No 2 by the WBC and boxing at a sports centre in Wigan. His career is going in reverse - start in Vegas, end up in Wigan.
Mitchell's last fight was at Upton Park. He's boxed on a lot of big shows, was chief support to Haye-Maccarinelli, only boxed on York Hall undercard on his first fight back after a year out.
Can't see him re-signing with Hennessy. That hasn't gone well since Thaxton sidestepped him when European champion and
Hennessy wouldn't put him on the Froch-Dirrell bill.
If Murray was going to sign with Hatton, Joe Murray wouldn't have just left.
from what i heard, murray didn't want to fight on anyone's undercard - not unless it was a stay busy fight (and i'm not sure he wanted one at that time).
re vegas to wigan - has a nice ring to it, but it was vegas undercard for the most, very far down the bill, so far down there were no TV camera (for one of the fights). in wigan he was headliner, with sky sports televising.
wasn't mitchell-johanesson (classic war, BTW) moved to haye-macca because johanesson had pulled out injured of an earlier date?
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 05:29
by Dioufy
I think his profile isn't higher because he's not fought overly often and precisely none of his fights have been even beforehand. Apart from maybe Meager.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 05:36
by Autobarn
thing is how many brits have fights that appear even beforehand? it's not just about fights but also careers.
murray only got thaxton when thaxton had nowhere else to go, for instance.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 05:39
by Dioufy
Autobarn wrote:thing is how many brits have fights that appear even beforehand? it's not just about fights but also careers.
murray only got thaxton when thaxton had nowhere else to go, for instance.
The Thaxton fight was simply a waste of everybody's time. As was Lawton, and even Buckley to some degree. Look at the odds for Saturday's fight - Murray was 33/1-on. Not many people, casual folk, are overly interested in what they percieve as a mismatch.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 05:43
by Deserter
Autobarn wrote:thing is how many brits have fights that appear even beforehand? it's not just about fights but also careers.
murray only got thaxton when thaxton had nowhere else to go, for instance.
'Barn, what I don't understand is that you're constantly ducking around the issue in a defensive posture when you of all people should be disappointed at the way he's been handled given your belief in him as a fighter?
If he's as good as you believe he is and if he's as marketable as you believe he is, can you deny that his profile should be light years ahead of where it actually is?
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 08:18
by whiteboy
G0mez wrote:Murray will probably leave, although personally I'm not sure it would be the brightest move.
Hennessy Sports has flaws, but when I compare the career of John Murray, to that of Warren-promoted Kevin Mitchell, it's like night and day it really is.
Murray was headlining his own shows, in Manchester on ITV whilst Kevin Mitchell was fighting on an undercard at York Hall.
Murray fought for the WBC youth title on a WBC world title undercard, then English, British and European titles and has fought 3 or 4 times a year - and remains unbeaten and is breaking through into the World Scene.
Murray has fought the who's who of British lightweights - wheras Mitchell has fought a tedious bunch of nobodies from Eastern Europe.
Mitchell was working on the London underground to make ends meet... then he was 'thrown' in against Breidis Prescott in a sink or swim fight, he won and then was destroyed by Katsidis in double quick time, on account of poor experience.
Now where is Mitchell ? he's at rock bottom and on the scrap heap. Wow he might get a run out against Alex Arthur, who aint done sod all for years for minimum corn.
The grass is greener, but it wilts fast if you lose.
You really should be rewarded by Mick for the effort you put in on here.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 08:37
by liamlion
A good old school type fighter, but the lad appears to have the personality of a cardboard cut-out.
I genuinely think this has something to do with his lack of profile.
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 10:26
by SexySouthPaw
leforge wrote:Murray will leave will go hattons that's the question!
Actually thats a statement
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 13:02
by jizzle
SexySouthPaw wrote:leforge wrote:Murray will leave will go hattons that's the question!
Actually thats a statement
Is it? It's barely English!
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 13:44
by Deserter
Spud wrote:
I acknowledge the error of judgement there Mr Journalist - however surely its not a bad thing to expect your fellow promoters to do business the honourable way instead of thinking "lets shaft this ****" - I will state again - naivity yep - but I was with Hennessy Sports at the very beginning and naturally watched them since - I honestly believe they have some fundamental things completely and utterly right - the interests of the fan coming to see a decent show - in addition Hennessy pays his boxers very well indeed and on the whole he looks after their interests well - I feel he has made a mistake in my view with Murray.
I look at the job Hennessy has done and I feel unlike others in this country he can hold his head up high and state he has tried to do things the right way - boxing has its murky way of doing business and it saddens me. I only ever got to see and hear what people allowed me to and that quite frankly was enough to tell me right from the very beginning people within boxing have never given Meaty Mick Hennessy a chance - and in addition watch out any other new promoter coming into the sport - the brick walls put in front of them would astound people.
Spud, the problem is that you are completely contradicting yourself here - you regularly praise Fwank these days as the UK's best promoter, but Hennessy, who has a complete different modus operandi, is praised by you as well.
Even parking that, judging him as a promoter... well, to put it bluntly, the clue's in the name... you are meant to publicise the fighter and build them as a commodity.... and he's promoted John Murray about as successfully as Stevie Wonder would be as a driving instructor ;;-)
Re: Why isn't John Murray higher profile?
Posted: 27 Sep 2010, 13:57
by Autobarn
Deserter wrote:Autobarn wrote:thing is how many brits have fights that appear even beforehand? it's not just about fights but also careers.
murray only got thaxton when thaxton had nowhere else to go, for instance.
'Barn, what I don't understand is that you're constantly ducking around the issue in a defensive posture when you of all people should be disappointed at the way he's been handled given your belief in him as a fighter?
If he's as good as you believe he is and if he's as marketable as you believe he is, can you deny that his profile should be light years ahead of where it actually is?
oh, i've been well disappointed. i'm very glad, however, that he was finally lifted out of that career slump where he seemed unmotivated and lacking inspiration (those 2 very poor fights - we all know which ones).
i think i've said many times, he should have been matched with thaxton earlier, but murray's own image as a post hatton pressure fighter with wicked body attack would have seen a conflict of interest in the hennessy stable (witter an anti hatton world champ, thaxton a former hatton opponent well overpoweered but could have won it on the cuts).
as a murray fan i'm glad he's kept his lonsdale belt, picked up an EBU title and stopped a good, euro level opponent - all on TV. the last two fights, while we saw murray in command, were waged at an excellent pace. i've been very satisfied with the last few fights. there's no one at domestic or euro level to give him a riveting war. so surely this WBC elim, or lightweight title shot, is the next sensible step, the next logical step.
given that ricky hatton never really put the best manchester fighters on the undercards to his massive shows (closest we got was jamie moore's untelevised fight with esau herrera, hatton-lazcano u/c), everybody else was bound to be under the radar.
i prefer to see things half full rather than half empty. murray's learned his craft, won the stepping stone titles and has some big names on his radar. you never know, maybe someone like soto or antillon will think fighting a brit will be a walk in the part - post morales-limond...if one of those guys faced & unerestimated murray...