Page 2 of 2
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 08:26
by ste1983
Any official news on this from Hobson?
Love how all the Warren haters jump on this as a chance to have pop despite him not even promoting the show.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 08:49
by Clint Magnum
earsjohn wrote:Clint Magnum wrote:This seems to be gathering pace.
I would suspect both camps as well as the thousands of punters who've bought tickets would want a definitive answer ASAP.
Surely the tickets state "Championship Boxing" and a WBO inter-pointless strap will be on the line at least.
Its billed specifically as an IBF World Title Fight. One would think they wouldn't start selling tickets on this until they'd at least had a signed waiver to defer the mandatory from the IBF. They could end up with egg on their face.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 09:38
by palooka
ste1983 wrote:Any official news on this from Hobson?
Love how all the Warren haters jump on this as a chance to have pop despite him not even promoting the show.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 12:15
by Final round
The IBF have approved the fight
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 12:16
by Gazmac81
Nice one
Final round wrote:The IBF have approved the fight
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 12:33
by JimJim2009
Whatever happens, I think its fair to say - taking into account what happened with the IBF belt last year - that Hobson needs to work on his communication with the IBF.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 13:14
by DMA1987
ste1983 wrote:Any official news on this from Hobson?
Love how all the Warren haters jump on this as a chance to have pop despite him not even promoting the show.
Why do you like Warren?
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 15 May 2014, 13:31
by JimJim2009
Having a pop at Warren was valid, even though he isn't the promoter - Warren announced the fight, and talked it up for months.
They were all caught with their pants down. Looks like favours have been called in with Goldenboy to smooth the way to IBF approval. This sort of thing should be sorted out before the fight is announced though.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 16 May 2014, 14:44
by palooka
columbo wrote:robpalmer135 wrote:columbo wrote:Unless Palmer is pigg and it's some elaborate ploy.... it is a bit of a strange coincidence that he pops up when he never comes on here after pigg has been here...
Who is Pigg....I am not Pigg. Genuinely.
Alright fairplay mate. He's some fella who's been talking poo about you on here.[/quote]
Funny poo as well.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 18 May 2014, 14:57
by Yes We Can
Scorbutic wrote:
Shut up Rob (PIGG?)
i feel a Wilson ban coming on.
oink oink
PIGG.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 20 May 2014, 01:43
by bodyactive
everyone is looking at a the politics and not the fight..Bookies have Butler favorite I thing Butler has alot more ability than Hall but that doesnt guarantee a win especially when uv got someone as tough big and mentally strong in front of you especially 2nd half of the fight.Butlers team keep mentioning that he dominated sparring. well u cant go on that either. looking forward to seeing it def 50/50.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 20 May 2014, 03:26
by Clint Magnum
bodyactive wrote:everyone is looking at a the politics and not the fight..Bookies have Butler favorite I thing Butler has alot more ability than Hall but that doesnt guarantee a win especially when uv got someone as tough big and mentally strong in front of you especially 2nd half of the fight.Butlers team keep mentioning that he dominated sparring. well u cant go on that either. looking forward to seeing it def 50/50.
Agreed. I think this and the announcement of John Lewis Dickenson v Ovil Mckenzie are really interesting 50/50 fights. It'll be interesting to see who they match with Bradley Saunders.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 21 May 2014, 19:07
by bodyactive
also on the bill is jason cunninghan, Josh leather v tommy carus Rhys evans, Thomas Patrick Ward, Jordan King, Lewis Scott.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 22 May 2014, 03:24
by nick885
JimJim2009 wrote:tear up wrote:How does butler deserve his shot better than ward he s had one bantam weight fight ward was lucky he got his shot by the way
If you judge it strictly on fights at bantamweight then I concede one fight isn't enough, I was meaning more generally - there's only 3lbs difference between divisions. If you are good in one division, I don't think you have to necessarily start from scratch when moving up into the next. I wouldn't argue Butler is a top contender in either weight division but I think he's acceptable as a voluntary for the IBF bantamweight title. The previous challenger wasn't.
Who has butler fought other than fighters with just a few rounds under their belt or fighters in the twilight of their careers.
Re: Hall v Butler not for the IBF title
Posted: 22 May 2014, 07:46
by stujones
Didn't give Hall a chance at all until I saw them face to face - they look different weight divisions. I still like Butler for the win, but not as convinced as I was.
I have a similar thing re Cotto vs Martinez. Felt that Cotto has more left in the tank of the two, but seeing them face to face -Martinez is so much bigger.