BoxRec

leeds i think we all agree that we were expecting a better opponent but burns doesnt have a mandatory till september so in a way you can see what burns and his team are doing.

i honestly think that burns year will go like this....

the laryea fight in march

the new mandatory fight vs perez or cruz in july

then finally the fana fight in november

That's not good enough.

One crap defence is accepable, but two simply isn't.

In a division as weak as this he ought to be looking to get in with the top fighters immediately, especially with his history of performing worse against opponents that aren't all that - I had him edging out O'Hara by a single point..... that fighter shouldn't have been capable of beating Martinez!

Stick him in. If he loses he loses, sod it, have another try.

in todays boxing mate you should know that most fighters are looking for easy fights when they are champions , it gives them £££ whilst the risk is not great

just about every fighter in the game does it...not just ricky burns

its been happening for years and will continue to do so

Well lets hope Fana doesn't fight anyone before November then. Not only was he never really that good, he is 37 and a 37 who has been around for a fair length of time.

Burns should beat Fana without any trouble. Hell I think O Hara would probably give Fana a tough fight.

That Jap WBA champion looks to be a real threat mind you. Good looking record, got some decent names on it.

I have no real problem with this fight. OK, so it's not Uchiyama or Ao. But Laryea is tough and he will put up a fight. Turning it round, if Appleby had beaten Laryea, Appleby-Burns would have been acceptable. I also didn't think Evensen was that bad - again he was tough, if a little limited but was certainly very game and Burns couldn't switch off throughout the fight. especially coming only 3 months after the grueling battle with Martinez.

stujones wrote: That Jap WBA champion looks to be a real threat mind you. Good looking record, got some decent names on it.

Uchiyama, Stu? He's a bad man. Have you seen the Salgado fight?

earsjohn wrote:I have no real problem with this fight. OK, so it's not Uchiyama or Ao. But Laryea is tough and he will put up a fight. Turning it round, if Appleby had beaten Laryea, Appleby-Burns would have been acceptable. I also didn't think Evensen was that bad - again he was tough, if a little limited but was certainly very game and Burns couldn't switch off throughout the fight. especially coming only 3 months after the grueling battle with Martinez.

I kinda see what you're saying mate but FFS Evensen was a midget -- he looked like a dog-damned superbantamweight. It was horrible, like watching something from the 90s Golden Era (c-in-a-circle copyright Autobarn, of this parish) when knockover jobs were brought over to be fed to the likes of Eamonn Loughran & we were all told that it was a proper world title fight. The fight itself was only acceptable because A) Evensen fought like a nutter, above & beyond the call of duty & B) Burns was not with it. I am sick of having to rely on the remote possibility of the challenger having a particularly good night & the champ being off just so we get an edifying spectacle from a world title fight.

& Appleby would not have been an acceptable opponent. Failing at domestic level qualifies you for a world title shot how?

earsjohn wrote:I have no real problem with this fight. OK, so it's not Uchiyama or Ao. But Laryea is tough and he will put up a fight. Turning it round, if Appleby had beaten Laryea, Appleby-Burns would have been acceptable. I also didn't think Evensen was that bad - again he was tough, if a little limited but was certainly very game and Burns couldn't switch off throughout the fight. especially coming only 3 months after the grueling battle with Martinez.

Disagree that Appleby vs Burns would have been acceptable.... it would have happened, but it is not acceptable.

Appleby had recently got smashed in a British title fight, to a fighter who has just lost. This was supposed to be a gimmie for a belt. You're gludging at straws to call it a title fight - this was supposed to be a Ghanian import, designed to make Appleby look "back" - and it backfired.... Not because the Ghanian was the second coming of Ali, but because Appleby needs to regroup and rethink his career options.

Had Appleby won this fight in a few rounds, which lets be honest most people tipped, we wouldn't be saying "oh he's back"... we would be condemming the opponent. One of these typical "Commonwealth" title fights - only not for the Commonwealth title.

Even if he did win a couple of rounds, Burns is ranked in the top 4 of the devision..... Do you think it would be acceptable for like... Chris John to fight Liam Walsh - after all, he beat an African for a title? Do you think he would have got slatted.... what about at Lightweight.... Okay, lets consider the #2 Lightweight - Guerrero... I know, lets bung in Lee McAllister with him - I'm sure HBO would buy it up, after all he's beaten a few of these imports and hasn't lost his proffesional title.

Why should we settle and accept less.

stujones wrote:

earsjohn wrote:I have no real problem with this fight. OK, so it's not Uchiyama or Ao. But Laryea is tough and he will put up a fight. Turning it round, if Appleby had beaten Laryea, Appleby-Burns would have been acceptable. I also didn't think Evensen was that bad - again he was tough, if a little limited but was certainly very game and Burns couldn't switch off throughout the fight. especially coming only 3 months after the grueling battle with Martinez.

Disagree that Appleby vs Burns would have been acceptable.... it would have happened, but it is not acceptable.

Appleby had recently got smashed in a British title fight, to a fighter who has just lost. This was supposed to be a gimmie for a belt. You're gludging at straws to call it a title fight - this was supposed to be a Ghanian import, designed to make Appleby look "back" - and it backfired.... Not because the Ghanian was the second coming of Ali, but because Appleby needs to regroup and rethink his career options.

Had Appleby won this fight in a few rounds, which lets be honest most people tipped, we wouldn't be saying "oh he's back"... we would be condemming the opponent. One of these typical "Commonwealth" title fights - only not for the Commonwealth title.

Even if he did win a couple of rounds, Burns is ranked in the top 4 of the devision..... Do you think it would be acceptable for like... Chris John to fight Liam Walsh - after all, he beat an African for a title? Do you think he would have got slatted.... what about at Lightweight.... Okay, lets consider the #2 Lightweight - Guerrero... I know, lets bung in Lee McAllister with him - I'm sure HBO would buy it up, after all he's beaten a few of these imports and hasn't lost his proffesional title.

Why should we settle and accept less.

And if Laryea beats Burns? I'd much prefer Burns v Laryea in March than no Burns fight as the more difficult options either aren't available, aren't profitable or are unwilling.

Laryea won't beat Burns thats my issue.

I'm pretty sure one fighter from the top twenty would be available. I'm sure Stephen Foster would pull out of his fight in a heart beat to fight Burns.

Spud wrote:Mr W arren is the best promoter by some considerable distance - I see this thread is yet another slating his qualities as Europe's Number 1.

Yes Mr W arren protects his fighters - yes Mr W arren gets his fighters the right fights for the maximum possible gain for both the fighter and the business - but surely you will concede thats what Boxing Promoting is all about.

You conveniently forget he still puts on the biggest shows with the quality fights on so many occasions that very few others are capable of doing so.

Welcome back Spud!

Spud wrote:Yes Mr W arren protects his fighters - yes Mr W arren gets his fighters the right fights for the maximum possible gain for both the fighter and the business - but surely you will concede thats what Boxing Promoting is all about.

As a fan, none of this concerns me. I just want to see decent match ups, especially for a so called world champ. Thank fcuk for Bradley v Alexander because I'm quickly becoming a fair weather fan of this sport

Warren given you a job yet?

Lenny wrote:

Spud wrote:Yes Mr W arren protects his fighters - yes Mr W arren gets his fighters the right fights for the maximum possible gain for both the fighter and the business - but surely you will concede thats what Boxing Promoting is all about.

As a fan, none of this concerns me. I just want to see decent match ups, especially for a so called world champ. Thank fcuk for Bradley v Alexander because I'm quickly becoming a fair weather fan of this sport

This.

Dare I say it... Burns needs to step up...?

Lenny wrote:

Spud wrote:Yes Mr W arren protects his fighters - yes Mr W arren gets his fighters the right fights for the maximum possible gain for both the fighter and the business - but surely you will concede thats what Boxing Promoting is all about.

As a fan, none of this concerns me. I just want to see decent match ups, especially for a so called world champ. Thank fcuk for Bradley v Alexander because I'm quickly becoming a fair weather fan of this sport

Warren given you a job yet?

Dear oh dear!!!

Thats a witty last comment - wow you thought a lot about that one.

I absolutely love doing bits here and there for Fight Academy and have no interest going elsewhere my proper job nowadays wont allow me to put as much time into boxing anyhow.

It seems you are amongst many many posters who are in denial about Mr W arren because its the popular thing to do by slagging what is a very very good promoter indeed. You and others will write absolutely anything to slate him in your tunnel visioned vendetta.

I do not like Mr W arren and dislike a certain member of his staff even more - but you simply cannot escape from the facts concerning W arrens qualities as a promoter of the highest quality.

Seriously spud, I don't care about promoters, I have no favourites. I don't care about fighters earnings, governing bodies or politics. What I would like to see is good even fights. Burns was superb on the night he won the title, and what a great little fight. Now once again we are left with a world champ fighting in way below par contests that excite no one.

With these days of fighters turning out 2-3 times a year, too unworthy challengers in a row for world title defences is not good enough to me as a fan. It's not why I watch boxing.
Appleby did make some sense, people always want to see local rivalries. I wasn't aware of his last fight being an eliminator though.

FW's shows are bringing us some good matchups at the moment. This ain't one of them

Lenny, Get real and stop being naive.

Whilst you, me and every boxing supporter wants to see good fights - the promoter wants to pay his bills, a fighter wants to pay his bills and for a fighter if he is in the very very small percentage of boxers who gets a world title bauble then he gets a chance for a couple of softish defences before he has to fight his mandatory and thus those couple of softish fights might just be enough to cover his mortgage when he has to retire from the sport in his 30's.

We all want good fights, we all want to see good shows - but boxing is also a business for those within it and its a very harsh business where only the toughest survive.

But of course none of you read recent Court of Appeal judgements...

Loynesy wrote:But of course none of you read recent Court of Appeal judgements...

I wondered when someone would come in with that one!!!

Please elaborate