BoxRec

I'm paying 30 bucks n.z ppv. I'm so glad he's english, . Don't know much about McCloskey but watching it with a few paddies so might make my money back :) Khans the best thing in british boxing at the moment shocked if anyone says anything different.

I definitely want Khan to win, but hopefully McCloskey can establish himself as a contender at 140 by putting in a good performance. He's a good fighter and seems like a great guy.

There's your 100.
Amir Khan 31% [ 31 ] x
Paul McCloskey 69% [ 69 ]

Khan. More talented fighter and better fights down the line. That said I won't be paying to watch, and wouldn't be disappointed if McCloskey causes an upset. We all love an underdog.

yid14 wrote:I'm paying 30 bucks n.z ppv. I'm so glad he's english, . Don't know much about McCloskey but watching it with a few paddies so might make my money back :) Khans the best thing in british boxing at the moment shocked if anyone says anything different.

with David Haye and Carl Froch

I really want McCloskey to win but fear Khan is too fast and too slick for the Dungiven southpaw. In point of fact both guys are really nice individuals, despite the public perception of Khan. I've met both of them and found them to be charming and intelligent people with genuine love of the sport we all love boxing.

If Dudey wins it is a nice underdog thing, and he's due his day in the sun. Ian's poll though was to ask who did you want to win? Well I've answered that. If it had been who do you think will win? then my answer would've been different. I'd have to go for Amir. in either event I'll be happy enough and it does look like it will be a decent bout.

Chambers2 wrote:

yid14 wrote:I'm paying 30 bucks n.z ppv. I'm so glad he's english, . Don't know much about McCloskey but watching it with a few paddies so might make my money back :) Khans the best thing in british boxing at the moment shocked if anyone says anything different.

with David Haye and Carl Froch

Yeah I agree, hopefully we can throw in Degale and/or Groves - but at the moment Khan is the new Hatten

Other sportsmen whom surrounded themselves with an inexperienced money hungry team that included family members?

Two that come to mind - Naz and Nicholas Anelka.

Like Khan, both of them have been big earners in their sports, although neither have been considered likeable figures and both have had an ill advising family member involved in their management which resulted in becoming a figure of hate and arguably one of unfulfilled potential.

Based on the results of this poll, Khan looks set to join the club.

To be honest I would not be surprised to see Khan leaving Freddie Roach sometime in the next couple of years over money.

yid14 wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:

yid14 wrote:I'm paying 30 bucks n.z ppv. I'm so glad he's english, . Don't know much about McCloskey but watching it with a few paddies so might make my money back :) Khans the best thing in british boxing at the moment shocked if anyone says anything different.

with David Haye and Carl Froch

Yeah I agree, hopefully we can throw in Degale and/or Groves - but at the moment Khan is the new Hatten

throw in the likes of RICKY BURNS,Brook, Cleverly, Murray, Gavin......... and we've got some exciting times ahead DD

HAPPY DAYS!!

(^^^Especially for you Billy^^^)

Chisora/fury and DarrenBarker. Not sure about Kell Brook (although wouldn't say it to his face) British boxing is certainly healthy at the mo.

yid14 wrote:Chisora/fury and DarrenBarker. Not sure about Kell Brook (although wouldn't say it to his face) British boxing is certainly healthy at the mo.

Kell Brook's career's gone abit quiet of late, but I think he's gonna go far (I'm often wrong). Hopefully Eddie Hearn can get him active and in for titles ASAP

Paul McCloskey of course! Come on Paul

johnswan1 wrote:McCloskey. I'm Irish but even if I wasn't, I find it very difficult to relate to Khan and his team. Together they represent a lot of what is wrong about boxing. I would like to see him sparked in even more devastating fashion than he was against Prescott.

Much the same as my reasons.
Maybe not as badly - but, I see Khan damaging the sport for the guys who hope to follow in his footsteps in much the same way as Audley did early in his career :(

Khan

The Dark Destroyer wrote:Khan. I'm surprised so many are hoping Khan will lose, why is he getting stick for decisions made by his team? He clearly isn't the brains behind the operation, why blame him?

But he made the decision to leave the decisions up to them in the first place ...

Captain Hook wrote:For 68% of people to want to see a fantastic world champion, and decent guy, lose his title is unbelievable. I find it flabbergasting how much ill will there is towards Khan on this forum.

Respect to McCloskey and his fans, and of course the Irish contingent are behind him, but it seems the majority of UK posters want Amir to lose as well.

He's a good guy and a great boxer, I guess it's the PPV issue, the tweeting and other factors which cast a shadow over his popularity.

I want khan to win, and think he will, but I hope Paul does himself justice.

That's Britain for you Hooky, build'em up and knock'em down.

I just want to see a good fight after all the bollocks surrounding it.

steve689 wrote:Paul McCloskey of course! Come on Paul

You've changed ;;-)

tonyevs wrote:

johnswan1 wrote:McCloskey. I'm Irish but even if I wasn't, I find it very difficult to relate to Khan and his team. Together they represent a lot of what is wrong about boxing. I would like to see him sparked in even more devastating fashion than he was against Prescott.

Much the same as my reasons.
Maybe not as badly - but, I see Khan damaging the sport for the guys who hope to follow in his footsteps in much the same way as Audley did early in his career :(

Khan damaging the sport???? FFS, some people.

He did more for the sport in this country than anyone in 30 years. It was him getting to the Olympic final at 17 that led to the amateur code being funded at a decent level for the first time in history. All those boxers who have ever had the chance to go to a national squad training and not have to get time off work to do so should be on their knees thanking him.

The entire set-up at Sheffield is thanks to him, if not they would still be doing weekend training camps at Crystal Palace, just like he had to.

And it was Hatton that made PPV a reality all the time in this country. If the money on offer from Sky only covers McCloskey's purse, why should Khan fight for nothing? I didn't see Matchroom, after their very public negotiations agree to take a paycut for the fans.

What's bad in boxing????? Some people are totally clueless.

MachoMan09 wrote:I pretty much agree with Captain Hook. Whilst I think the people around Khan are a shower of wankers, the lad himself is a cracking fighter with bags of heart, skill, speed and power. His vulnerability makes him even more exciting to watch and I've never watched a fight of his that wasn't good value (boxing wise). He is at least as compelling to watch as Haye, moreso probably, and it is a shame that he is disliked so much. If he was white or black, he'd be loved.

He's a gobby dimwit, not in an entertaining fashion a la Naz/Eubank but more in the Audley mould.

MachoMan09 wrote:

jtourettes wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:I pretty much agree with Captain Hook. Whilst I think the people around Khan are a shower of wankers, the lad himself is a cracking fighter with bags of heart, skill, speed and power. His vulnerability makes him even more exciting to watch and I've never watched a fight of his that wasn't good value (boxing wise). He is at least as compelling to watch as Haye, moreso probably, and it is a shame that he is disliked so much. If he was white or black, he'd be loved.

He's a gobby dimwit, not in an entertaining fashion a la Naz/Eubank but more in the Audley mould.

I would agree that he's a bit dimwitted but he's not "gobby" in the manner you imply. He's actually a nice kid and I maintain what I said above.

I'm not so sure. Some of the shite he's come out with on Twitter and his more recent 'I'm a PPv fighter' would qualify as gobby to me.

jtourettes wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:

jtourettes wrote:

He's a gobby dimwit, not in an entertaining fashion a la Naz/Eubank but more in the Audley mould.

I would agree that he's a bit dimwitted but he's not "gobby" in the manner you imply. He's actually a nice kid and I maintain what I said above.

I'm not so sure. Some of the shite he's come out with on Twitter and his more recent 'I'm a PPv fighter' would qualify as gobby to me.

That was a total tabloid job by the "new look" Boxing News. He was asked if he felt he deserved to be on PPV, what's he going to say? No?
What he said was, when he was first on PPV he didn't deserve to be, but now he did. Hardly gobby

gobbles wrote:
Khan damaging the sport???? FFS, some people.

He did more for the sport in this country than anyone in 30 years. It was him getting to the Olympic final at 17 that led to the amateur code being funded at a decent level for the first time in history. All those boxers who have ever had the chance to go to a national squad training and not have to get time off work to do so should be on their knees thanking him..

Your joking - being sarcastic right?
30yrs? why not the last 114yrs .. that sounds even funnier

gobbles wrote: And it was Hatton that made PPV a reality all the time in this country. If the money on offer from Sky only covers McCloskey's purse, why should Khan fight for nothing? I didn't see Matchroom, after their very public negotiations agree to take a paycut for the fans...

PPV Hattons fault then?

and ..

ummm ..

gobbles wrote:
What's bad in boxing????? Some people are totally clueless.

Yep. Proved yourself right there mate

MachoMan09 wrote:

gobbles wrote:

jtourettes wrote: I'm not so sure. Some of the shite he's come out with on Twitter and his more recent 'I'm a PPv fighter' would qualify as gobby to me.

That was a total tabloid job by the "new look" Boxing News. He was asked if he felt he deserved to be on PPV, what's he going to say? No?
What he said was, when he was first on PPV he didn't deserve to be, but now he did. Hardly gobby

Precisely and Amir is easier to catch out than most with that method of questioning. They could have a field day with "Amir, have you stopped beating your wife?" if the lad ever gets married.

Ok, wasn't aware it was tabloid sesque stitch-up. The twitter shite still stands though as it'as straight from the horses mouth.

tonyevs wrote:

gobbles wrote:
Khan damaging the sport???? FFS, some people.

He did more for the sport in this country than anyone in 30 years. It was him getting to the Olympic final at 17 that led to the amateur code being funded at a decent level for the first time in history. All those boxers who have ever had the chance to go to a national squad training and not have to get time off work to do so should be on their knees thanking him..

Your joking - being sarcastic right?
30yrs? why not the last 114yrs .. that sounds even funnier

gobbles wrote: And it was Hatton that made PPV a reality all the time in this country. If the money on offer from Sky only covers McCloskey's purse, why should Khan fight for nothing? I didn't see Matchroom, after their very public negotiations agree to take a paycut for the fans...

PPV Hattons fault then?

and ..

ummm ..

gobbles wrote:
What's bad in boxing????? Some people are totally clueless.

Yep. Proved yourself right there mate

Try answering the points because you ahven't even attempted to answer one.

Would we have had three medals in Beijing and three medals at the 2007 World Champs without the investment that came after Khan's performance in Athens and the huge political and widespread public support that he brought?
Would the ABA have been able to set up a the HQ at Sheffield, which has benefited not only the guys who have and will make it to the Olympics but a whole generation who are now funded athletes, including DeGale, Groves, Price, Gavin, Smith and lots who only made the development squad?

Hatton showed there was a fortune to be made on PPV, so now every big fight is on PPV not on free Sky.
Is it Cleverly's fault his fight next month is on PPV? Why not accuse him of being "bad for British boxing"? Why aim the accusation at Khan?
The fights are on PPV because Sky can make a profit rather than forking out £300-£400,000 for the rights.