BoxRec

Agreed the ITV music of the 80's was great. Seem to remember the BBC intro music was good back then too.

MightyWarrior wrote:Agreed the ITV music of the 80's was great. Seem to remember the BBC intro music was good back then too.

The old BBC music was excellent.

They use it for a boxers entry to the ring sometimes now, but an orchestrated version which is not as good.

for the BBC to improve they need to:

1. come up with a brand new hard hitting theme tune that gets you pumped (i.e. ITVs old fight night theme, maybe just steal this)

2. possibly keep jim neilly, hes tolerable and the only decent UK main commentator is ian darke, taken by SKY. however, drop the shitty co-commentators (duke frickin mckenzie) and bring in an experienced ex-fighter who is intelligent, articulate and wise cracking (in steps the brilliant gary mason, former BBC fighter, superb analyst)

3. QAULITY CONTROL. do a lot of these awful domestic fights really deserve broadcast? do we really need to refer to WBO and all the even lower titles as WORLD titles?AND MAINLY, abandon all the stupid fornicating wrestling gimmicks i.e. carl frochs disgraceful cartoon promo which pisses on the intellect of all boxing fans

4. bring in a main presenter who understands the game and isn't irritating, and finally, bring in some good previews with pre fight talks and weigh ins, rather than their usual 'few kayo clips with jazzy instrumental' technique.

or maybe just watch abunch of tapes of ITVs fight night and copy everything.

overhand, jim neilly is not tolerable by any stretch of the imagination.
Conversely, he is 100% intolerable. Always harkening back to an irrelevant fight that stood out for him because it was one of only a handful he had ever seen, always saying 'he wasn't too far away with that left hand', 'Skelton of the Matt variety', always getting things wrong and displaying no knowledge or history of the game whatsoever. its cringeworthy whenever he says anything. john rawling is an inexpensive, safe substitute.

I actually thought Jim Neilly was a bad as ever last night. He seemed to be commentating Oboh vs Lowe as if it was an amateur contest. Lowe hit Oboh with a straight right(?) that landed flush but hardly budged Oboh and Neilly said "That punch might change the course of the contest" and he keeps mentioning "scoring blows" like its the crappy amateur system.

BBC are crap.Their fighters aren`t much better.Can`t see them staying with the sport too much longer.Froch and Haye aren`t for real.

Have BBC got back Match of the day for next season, if so I think that the funding and coverage for the boxing will suffer big time, unless ITV get involved. (my opinion of course)

chado wrote:Have BBC got back Match of the day for next season, if so I think that the funding and coverage for the boxing will suffer big time, unless ITV get involved. (my opinion of course)

Yes, they've got the footie back and, yes, boxing will suffer. Parkinson had a strop when they told him his chat show would be screened at 9pm on Saturday nights to allow MOTD to be screened afterwards, and bailed out to ITV.
Boxing, regrettably, has to do what it's told.

Riddick Blowe wrote:overhand, jim neilly is not tolerable by any stretch of the imagination.
Conversely, he is 100% intolerable. Always harkening back to an irrelevant fight that stood out for him because it was one of only a handful he had ever seen, always saying 'he wasn't too far away with that left hand', 'Skelton of the Matt variety', always getting things wrong and displaying no knowledge or history of the game whatsoever. its cringeworthy whenever he says anything. john rawling is an inexpensive, safe substitute.

hehe, true.

but he was okay in lewis/rachman but he can bebad. im just so used to the lead man being terrible and coming up with all these stupid jokes and phrases, reg gutteridege anyone?

harry carpenter was archaic and dull, you just need a good co-commentator like jim watt or gary mason to undo things.

duke mckenzie is not the man. no one gives a fornicate about him or his opinion plus he isn't very articulate or intelligent.

overhand_right wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:overhand, jim neilly is not tolerable by any stretch of the imagination.
Conversely, he is 100% intolerable. Always harkening back to an irrelevant fight that stood out for him because it was one of only a handful he had ever seen, always saying 'he wasn't too far away with that left hand', 'Skelton of the Matt variety', always getting things wrong and displaying no knowledge or history of the game whatsoever. its cringeworthy whenever he says anything. john rawling is an inexpensive, safe substitute.

hehe, true.

but he was okay in lewis/rachman but he can bebad. im just so used to the lead man being terrible and coming up with all these stupid jokes and phrases, reg gutteridege anyone?

harry carpenter was archaic and dull, you just need a good co-commentator like jim watt or gary mason to undo things.

duke mckenzie is not the man. no one gives a fornicate about him or his opinion plus he isn't very articulate or intelligent.

Marvin Hagler and John Rawling should be given a chance.

stujones wrote:

overhand_right wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:overhand, jim neilly is not tolerable by any stretch of the imagination.
Conversely, he is 100% intolerable. Always harkening back to an irrelevant fight that stood out for him because it was one of only a handful he had ever seen, always saying 'he wasn't too far away with that left hand', 'Skelton of the Matt variety', always getting things wrong and displaying no knowledge or history of the game whatsoever. its cringeworthy whenever he says anything. john rawling is an inexpensive, safe substitute.

hehe, true.

but he was okay in lewis/rachman but he can bebad. im just so used to the lead man being terrible and coming up with all these stupid jokes and phrases, reg gutteridege anyone?

harry carpenter was archaic and dull, you just need a good co-commentator like jim watt or gary mason to undo things.

duke mckenzie is not the man. no one gives a fornicate about him or his opinion plus he isn't very articulate or intelligent.

Marvin Hagler and John Rawling should be given a chance.

Yes, definitely Rawling.
Incidentally, do you remember a guy by the username of Big Fat Journeyman who used to post on here? That was Jim Neilly.

bennie wrote:

stujones wrote:

overhand_right wrote: hehe, true.

but he was okay in lewis/rachman but he can bebad. im just so used to the lead man being terrible and coming up with all these stupid jokes and phrases, reg gutteridege anyone?

harry carpenter was archaic and dull, you just need a good co-commentator like jim watt or gary mason to undo things.

duke mckenzie is not the man. no one gives a fornicate about him or his opinion plus he isn't very articulate or intelligent.

Marvin Hagler and John Rawling should be given a chance.

Yes, definitely Rawling.
Incidentally, do you remember a guy by the username of Big Fat Journeyman who used to post on here? That was Jim Neilly.

100% sure on that one Bennie? Just been reading some of the archieve, I liked bigfatjourneymen posts. Seemed to prefer Rawlings commentating to Neily's!!!.

Most of his post where about the BBC, but he used to deny being involved. Although sneakily, he denied being a BBC journalist (nothing about a BBC commentator).

Oh well, he's good a Rugby.

stujones wrote:

bennie wrote:

stujones wrote: Marvin Hagler and John Rawling should be given a chance.

Yes, definitely Rawling.
Incidentally, do you remember a guy by the username of Big Fat Journeyman who used to post on here? That was Jim Neilly.

100% sure on that one Bennie? Just been reading some of the archieve, I liked bigfatjourneymen posts. Seemed to prefer Rawlings commentating to Neily's!!!.

Most of his post where about the BBC, but he used to deny being involved. Although sneakily, he denied being a BBC journalist (nothing about a BBC commentator).

Oh well, he's good a Rugby.

Yeah, I'm sure. He used to race on to the board every time Neilly was mentioned.

Duke McKenzie tried to be clever i think when he said that the 2nd round was better for david than the 1st. He sounded stupid.

never been a fan of that commentary team.

What the BBC need is a commentator and analysist who demand respect and talk sense, Rawling is a safe and knowledgable commentator but he needs a strong sidekick. Basically Neilly and McKenzie are both crap, Duke gets excited and talks utter rubbish which surprises me because when he was used as a pundit on SKY he impressed me before he defected to the BBC. Ian Darke has the same problem with his own yes man Glenn McCrory who got paid money to sit and agree with Darke an dplay things safe, Jim Watt is a far better analysist even if he does repeat himself at times he clearly knows what is going on in and around the ring and keeps us informed...remember he noticed Chavez's arm problem against Morales before most others did. The whole SKY set up is much better but then again as Steve Bunce mentioned in his recent BM column, they had some bad fights in March and April.

Jonny Nelson is becoming an excellent analyst. He is doing a really good job tonight - he is not afraid to go away from the corporate line, he is articulate and brings a good technical viewpoint.

steve689 wrote:Shit i didn't realise there was Boxing on tonight? What did i miss

nothing

Shit i didn't realise there was Boxing on tonight? What did i miss

No disrespect Tuaman2004 but i have never heard anything from Ronald to suggest he knows anything about the sport, after all he justs asks pre-meditated and scripted questions.

Loynesy wrote:Jonny Nelson is becoming an excellent analyst. He is doing a really good job tonight - he is not afraid to go away from the corporate line, he is articulate and brings a good technical viewpoint.

Good call. It seems he's getting more and more confident, i think there's been a noticable change over the last few months.
Sky are starting to put together a decent team. Darke and Watt are very good on commentary. McGuigan and Nelson are both excellent and hopefully will become the first choice pundits.

glittermonkey wrote:

Loynesy wrote:Jonny Nelson is becoming an excellent analyst. He is doing a really good job tonight - he is not afraid to go away from the corporate line, he is articulate and brings a good technical viewpoint.

Good call. It seems he's getting more and more confident, i think there's been a noticable change over the last few months.
Sky are starting to put together a decent team. Darke and Watt are very good on commentary. McGuigan and Nelson are both excellent and hopefully will become the first choice pundits.

What about Glenn "I auditioned for James Bond" McCory.

Screw McCrory his time is up, i said a while ago that Nelson is the best analysist...he talks sense and doesn't babble on adding "At the end of the days" and "You know what i means" to every sentence.

stujones wrote:

glittermonkey wrote:

Loynesy wrote:Jonny Nelson is becoming an excellent analyst. He is doing a really good job tonight - he is not afraid to go away from the corporate line, he is articulate and brings a good technical viewpoint.

Good call. It seems he's getting more and more confident, i think there's been a noticable change over the last few months.
Sky are starting to put together a decent team. Darke and Watt are very good on commentary. McGuigan and Nelson are both excellent and hopefully will become the first choice pundits.

What about Glenn "I auditioned for James Bond" McCory.

I really don't know what to say about him. He's just sort of there isn't he. Unobtrusive would be the word that best describes Glen. I've got to know what exactly he does before i have an opinion on him.

glittermonkey wrote:

stujones wrote:

glittermonkey wrote: Good call. It seems he's getting more and more confident, i think there's been a noticable change over the last few months.
Sky are starting to put together a decent team. Darke and Watt are very good on commentary. McGuigan and Nelson are both excellent and hopefully will become the first choice pundits.

What about Glenn "I auditioned for James Bond" McCory.

I really don't know what to say about him. He's just sort of there isn't he. Unobtrusive would be the word that best describes Glen. I've got to know what exactly he does before i have an opinion on him.

The only one who went for Barrera vs Hamed though.