SKY Sports News are the pits *Frampton / Martinez spoiler*

[veriton]

frampton v quigg is a big fight lol it's just a europe level match in reality. as for frampton v martinez being the best fight of the week, people really need to look around and see the likes of yaegashi v gonzalez (1 and 2 in the division) and see some proper elite boxing. i'm all for backing our own guys but let's keep it real please.

would frampton or quigg do much against rigondeaux? we all know the answer to that.

[Datsue]

frampton v quigg is a big fight lol it's just a europe level match in reality. as for frampton v martinez being the best fight of the week, people really need to look around and see the likes of yaegashi v gonzalez (1 and 2 in the division) and see some proper elite boxing. i'm all for backing our own guys but let's keep it real please.

would frampton or quigg do much against rigondeaux? we all know the answer to that.

Whilst I concur with your visit from consensus reality, we should remember we are boxing fans so therefore should like good little drones exist happily on our designated due diet of fantasy & bullshit, otherwise we might start wondering why we constantly pay to be fed dogshit on a stick.

Quigg-Frampton is a nice fight, for like I said the British World title, sort of like back in the 30s they had White World Heavyweight champions (& only slightly less despicable in concept, 'cos less racist!).

[veriton]

ha! spot on. it's crap to see all the hype about what are, in the grand scheme of things, not really all that significant. frampton is getting a love-in with the press at the moment without really beating anyone that significant. still, kid is selling tickets on the back of all the blarney so it'd be wrong to be too hard on him. give me roman gonzalez any day though, a real top boxer travelling and beating the number one in the division with a superb display. hardly worth mentioning alongside frampton and his re-runs.

[Datsue]

I wonder if we can come up with something catchy & flippant to mention every time Quigg & Frampton are called world champions in the inevitable boring hypefest? Maybe it'll catch on?

"Parochial World Title"?

"Xenophobe's World Title"?

"Champion of the English-Speaking World"?

"I Only Care About Fighters Of My Nationality But It's Definitely Nothing To Do With Blinkered Prejudice World Title"?

"I'll Believe Anything A PR Flack Tells Me World Title"?

Answers on a postcard please, to the usual address.

[earsjohn]

frampton v quigg is a big fight lol it's just a europe level match in reality. as for frampton v martinez being the best fight of the week, people really need to look around and see the likes of yaegashi v gonzalez (1 and 2 in the division) and see some proper elite boxing. i'm all for backing our own guys but let's keep it real please.

would frampton or quigg do much against rigondeaux? we all know the answer to that.

Whilst I concur with your visit from consensus reality, we should remember we are boxing fans so therefore should like good little drones exist happily on our designated due diet of fantasy & bullshit, otherwise we might start wondering why we constantly pay to be fed dogshit on a stick.

Quigg-Frampton is a nice fight, for like I said the British World title, sort of like back in the 30s they had White World Heavyweight champions (& only slightly less despicable in concept, 'cos less racist!).

Are either of you suggesting that there is a Super-Bantam fight out there that could make more money than Quigg-Frampton?

I'm sure I don't need to explain that there is a difference between the sport of boxing and the business of boxing.

[Datsue]

Oooh, ooh, ooh, the "Matt Smith* "Fvck The Yanks, British People Don't Care About Them Anyway" Commemorative Glory Days of British Sport World Title"?


*: Correct me if I've got his name wrong someone, the dude who was head of ITV Sport at the time who basically created the parallel Benn-Eubank-Watson-Collins-Cornelius Carr-Neville Brown-Calzaghe Bubbleverse er, sorry, Golden Age, famously quoted as saying "Fvck the Yanks etc etc" when it was obvious Toney & Roy Jones were too risky to bother with?

[earsjohn]

Oooh, ooh, ooh, the "Matt Smith* "Fvck The Yanks, British People Don't Care About Them Anyway" Commemorative Glory Days of British Sport World Title"?

*: Correct me if I've got his name wrong someone, the dude who was head of ITV Sport at the time who basically created the parallel Benn-Eubank-Watson-Collins-Cornelius Carr-Neville Brown-Calzaghe Bubbleverse er, sorry, Golden Age, famously quoted as saying "Fvck the Yanks etc etc" when it was obvious Toney & Roy Jones were too risky to bother with?

I call it the Glorious Age of Gary Newborn.

[Datsue]

Are either of you suggesting that there is a Super-Bantam fight out there that could make more money than Quigg-Frampton?

I'm sure I don't need to explain that there is a difference between the sport of boxing and the business of boxing.

Yeah, but I'm a terrible romantic; flog me dogshit-flavoured lollies, I refuse to go "yum-yum".

It's a good fight & worth lots of pennies, yes, yes it is.

Is it also at the same time a parochial second-level "world" title contest that's only worth so much money 'cos pudenda like us have already been fleeced to the level where the respective fighters have had their profiles raised to a point where non-idiots (i.e non-boxing fans) take notice?

Why, yes, yes it is!

Please to be excusing me if, whilst getting my arse used for a toast-rack, I dare to comment on the rather good filleting I'm getting. But I'm not going to bite down hard any longer, ta.

PS: I'm not ranting at you. I'm not happy wtih the state of affairs in modern boxing. I don't really see how anyone can defend the status quo, myself. It's a pile of dogshit. On a stick. Getting holier than thou at others for daring to mention same seems a touch niggardly, in my view.

[Datsue]

PS: reading back your comment, what about my responses indicate that I am ignorant of the division between the business & the (withered, dying, vestigial) "sport"?

That seems entirely my fvcking point, actually.

PPS: I am fond of "Parochial World Title", has a nice ring to it. But I suppose "KAH-CHING! TWELVE PEOPLE WILL GET RICH OUT OF THIS, SO WHO GIVES A SHITE ABOUT SPORT??!?!!? BEND OVER & FVCKING LIKE IT BEEEEATCHES!!!"-World Title will have to do.

[veriton]

I wonder if we can come up with something catchy & flippant to mention every time Quigg & Frampton are called world champions in the inevitable boring hypefest? Maybe it'll catch on?

"Parochial World Title"?

"Xenophobe's World Title"?

"Champion of the English-Speaking World"?

"I Only Care About Fighters Of My Nationality But It's Definitely Nothing To Do With Blinkered Prejudice World Title"?

"I'll Believe Anything A PR Flack Tells Me World Title"?

Answers on a postcard please, to the usual address.

I'm almost hankering for the days it used to be the WBO world title

[earsjohn]

Are either of you suggesting that there is a Super-Bantam fight out there that could make more money than Quigg-Frampton?

I'm sure I don't need to explain that there is a difference between the sport of boxing and the business of boxing.

Yeah, but I'm a terrible romantic; flog me dogshit-flavoured lollies, I refuse to go "yum-yum".

It's a good fight & worth lots of pennies, yes, yes it is.

Is it also at the same time a parochial second-level "world" title contest that's only worth so much money 'cos pudenda like us have already been fleeced to the level where the respective fighters have had their profiles raised to a point where non-idiots (i.e non-boxing fans) take notice?

Why, yes, yes it is!

Please to be excusing me if, whilst getting my arse used for a toast-rack, I dare to comment on the rather good filleting I'm getting. But I'm not going to bite down hard any longer, ta.

PS: I'm not ranting at you. I'm not happy wtih the state of affairs in modern boxing. I don't really see how anyone can defend the status quo, myself. It's a pile of dogshit. On a stick. Getting holier than thou at others for daring to mention same seems a touch niggardly, in my view.

Fair do's. I guess I don't see things quite so black and white. Fights that *should* happen, often don't, while fights that do happen are often presented as something they really aren't. But is the current position so different from the past? The context may have changed (satellite TV, internet coverage, etc), but its fundamentally the same - a small group of aging white guys working selfishly to separate boxers and boxing punters from their money on an increasingly efficient basis.

Do I like it morally? Of course not. But, cynically perhaps, any change to the current situation is likely to be for the worse and not the better.

[veriton]

im trying to think of perspective.... i reckon frampton v quigg is about the same level as billy schwer v colin dunne. would i buy a ticket for it? yes. is it a fight between two of the best fighters in the world - you're having a laff.

[gasman]

I believe it is now called "Sky Sports News HQ".

Neither channel can say they have the moral high ground here, BN nearly as bad.

[stevedoc]

im trying to think of perspective.... i reckon frampton v quigg is about the same level as billy schwer v colin dunne. would i buy a ticket for it? yes. is it a fight between two of the best fighters in the world - you're having a laff.

i get what you're saying but i think frampton is a level above schwer and dunne who were good euro/brit level more like hoko vs mcmillan

[Datsue]

I wonder if we can come up with something catchy & flippant to mention every time Quigg & Frampton are called world champions in the inevitable boring hypefest? Maybe it'll catch on?

"Parochial World Title"?

"Xenophobe's World Title"?

"Champion of the English-Speaking World"?

"I Only Care About Fighters Of My Nationality But It's Definitely Nothing To Do With Blinkered Prejudice World Title"?

"I'll Believe Anything A PR Flack Tells Me World Title"?

Answers on a postcard please, to the usual address.

I'm almost hankering for the days it used to be the WBO world title

[tony1234]

SSN is on a repeat late at night so as the fight didn't finish until nearly midnight I doubt there was anyone in the studio to update things

[ILikeBeer]

Well it's been 40 mins or so since Frampton won the IBF title yet SKY Sports News have not mentioned the result at all. It's not been on their rolling ticker and has not been mentioned by the 2 in the studio. This for me is disgusting. If this was Scott Quigg or a Matchroom fighter it would probably be their leading story. This is nothing short of biased reporting and shows how unhealthy the Matchroom "monopoly" is. Their failure to mention the fight at all is piss poor from the UK's leading sports broadcaster. It's no good for the fans or the sport.

Sky has always been a bit like this with some sports, and boxing is one of them. It didn't mention Formula One that much, until Sky had it's own channel for Formula 1 either.

Some sports, like football, are too big and popular for them to ignore or pretend isn't important as it's not on Sky.

What you've got remember is that Sky is a business, and that Sky Sports News is a channel. They care as much about viewers as anything else. If they can get away without hyping something that's on a different sports channel to their own, they will.

[gasman]

Glad to see this piece in my local paper.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport ... 68779.html

[chad]

Glad to see this piece in my local paper.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport ... 68779.html

Quiggs' result was featured as breaking news tonight, literally minutes after the fight ended on SKY Sports News.

Another low for me this week from SKY. SKY ran a Twitter poll this evening as to who the fans think would win if Quigg and Frampton fought. It's not uncommon for SKY to run a live poll during their Fight Night shows with the outcome revealed and discussed towards the end of the broadcast. Anyway about an hour ago SKY, on Twitter, revealed the result 78% Frampton 22% Quigg questioning if this is really how the fans see it. The poll then continued to run with the divide becoming wider for Frampton. For the first time I can remember the poll was not revealed or discussed on TV. It's not like they ran out of time, they had to fill about 30 minutes air time after the Quigg fight. I can only assume they decided to keep it off TV as the poll did not come anywhere close to supporting the Matchroom fighter. Second week in a row they've failed to report a Frampton victory

[earsjohn]

Glad to see this piece in my local paper.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport ... 68779.html

Quiggs' result was featured as breaking news tonight, literally minutes after the fight ended on SKY Sports News.

Another low for me this week from SKY. SKY ran a Twitter poll this evening as to who the fans think would win if Quigg and Frampton fought. It's not uncommon for SKY to run a live poll during their Fight Night shows with the outcome revealed and discussed towards the end of the broadcast. Anyway about an hour ago SKY, on Twitter, revealed the result 78% Frampton 22% Quigg questioning if this is really how the fans see it. The poll then continued to run with the divide becoming wider for Frampton. For the first time I can remember the poll was not revealed or discussed on TV. It's not like they ran out of time, they had to fill about 30 minutes air time after the Quigg fight. I can only assume they decided to keep it off TV as the poll did not come anywhere close to supporting the Matchroom fighter. Second week in a row they've failed to report a Frampton victory

You're like a bitter, jilted lover. Let it go!

[chad]

Glad to see this piece in my local paper.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport ... 68779.html

Quiggs' result was featured as breaking news tonight, literally minutes after the fight ended on SKY Sports News.

Another low for me this week from SKY. SKY ran a Twitter poll this evening as to who the fans think would win if Quigg and Frampton fought. It's not uncommon for SKY to run a live poll during their Fight Night shows with the outcome revealed and discussed towards the end of the broadcast. Anyway about an hour ago SKY, on Twitter, revealed the result 78% Frampton 22% Quigg questioning if this is really how the fans see it. The poll then continued to run with the divide becoming wider for Frampton. For the first time I can remember the poll was not revealed or discussed on TV. It's not like they ran out of time, they had to fill about 30 minutes air time after the Quigg fight. I can only assume they decided to keep it off TV as the poll did not come anywhere close to supporting the Matchroom fighter. Second week in a row they've failed to report a Frampton victory

You're like a bitter, jilted lover. Let it go!

Never

[gasman]

Glad to see this piece in my local paper.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport ... 68779.html

Quiggs' result was featured as breaking news tonight, literally minutes after the fight ended on SKY Sports News.

Another low for me this week from SKY. SKY ran a Twitter poll this evening as to who the fans think would win if Quigg and Frampton fought. It's not uncommon for SKY to run a live poll during their Fight Night shows with the outcome revealed and discussed towards the end of the broadcast. Anyway about an hour ago SKY, on Twitter, revealed the result 78% Frampton 22% Quigg questioning if this is really how the fans see it. The poll then continued to run with the divide becoming wider for Frampton. For the first time I can remember the poll was not revealed or discussed on TV. It's not like they ran out of time, they had to fill about 30 minutes air time after the Quigg fight. I can only assume they decided to keep it off TV as the poll did not come anywhere close to supporting the Matchroom fighter. Second week in a row they've failed to report a Frampton victory

The whole thing is like scripted 'reality Sports TV' from the punditry, commentary, and partial Sky Sport News coverage. They moved into that big studio and have rebranded to Sky Sports HQ but its simply a bigger and shinier version of their bullcrap. The worst sin of the lot is their blanket use of 'sky sources' for seemingly every breaking sports story - rarely do they credit the original source who actually broke the story.