BoxRec

I do think that the feeling of collusion and smugness ever since the Matchroom / Sky monopoly has got the backs up of people.

That, combined with, "I don't believe everything they tell me on the telly!" has made for many anti Sky, Smith, Hearn, Joe Gallagher comments. We get it, lots of angry young men who dislike the system.

Love it when people qualify their negative statements with "nothing personal but..."

So now people are looking to the new upcoming gWarren TV deal as the saviour, even though when Warren had his own monopoly years ago, he thrived on middling world champions and middling world title fights involving an exceptional world champion, Calzaghe. Apart from Naz and Benn I never saw an FW fighter make the most of his abilities and after Naz left him I always suspected he didn't want any of his fighters to get too big for him, then we saw what happened when Calzaghe left him, nothing but trouble. I honestly am sceptical that if he overthrows the existing order, his fighters will get pushed as hard as Hearn fighters in such fights as McDonnell v Kameda (both), Brook v Porter, Degale v Dirrell, Crolla v Linares, etc.

Back then there was the sense of smugness and collusion and we didn't always like the commentary, promotion, manipulation.

Best case scenario, we end up with two major promotional and TV forces who are both forced to up their game in healthy competition.

Smith and Sky have a job to do which is to sell the matches that Matchroom make, so yes quite often they have to sprinkle glitter on a turd, if Smith turned up to a press conference and said such and such a bout is a load of horseshit and advises us all not to buy it, he's going to be out the door isn't he? He's doing what Sky are paying him to do, Sky don't give a toss about us lot who inhabit the internet forums and only make up a small percentage of the viewers of these box office extravaganzas, they want to appeal to all the people who have very little interest in boxing and by doing that they need to hype it up and that's what they pay the likes of Smith, Nelson and Robinson for.

Autobarn wrote:I do think that the feeling of collusion and smugness ever since the Matchroom / Sky monopoly has got the backs up of people.

That, combined with, "I don't believe everything they tell me on the telly!" has made for many anti Sky, Smith, Hearn, Joe Gallagher comments. We get it, lots of angry young men who dislike the system.

Love it when people qualify their negative statements with "nothing personal but..."

So now people are looking to the new upcoming gWarren TV deal as the saviour, even though when Warren had his own monopoly years ago, he thrived on middling world champions and middling world title fights involving an exceptional world champion, Calzaghe. Apart from Naz and Benn I never saw an FW fighter make the most of his abilities and after Naz left him I always suspected he didn't want any of his fighters to get too big for him, then we saw what happened when Calzaghe left him, nothing but trouble. I honestly am sceptical that if he overthrows the existing order, his fighters will get pushed as hard as Hearn fighters in such fights as McDonnell v Kameda (both), Brook v Porter, Degale v Dirrell, Crolla v Linares, etc.

Back then there was the sense of smugness and collusion and we didn't always like the commentary, promotion, manipulation.

Best case scenario, we end up with two major promotional and TV forces who are both forced to up their game in healthy competition.

aye, people forget that. i can remember going to watch steve roberts defend his "world title" at barnsley metrodome.

banjo wrote:Smith and Sky have a job to do which is to sell the matches that Matchroom make, so yes quite often they have to sprinkle glitter on a turd, if Smith turned up to a press conference and said such and such a bout is a load of horseshit and advises us all not to buy it, he's going to be out the door isn't he? He's doing what Sky are paying him to do, Sky don't give a toss about us lot who inhabit the internet forums and only make up a small percentage of the viewers of these box office extravaganzas, they want to appeal to all the people who have very little interest in boxing and by doing that they need to hype it up and that's what they pay the likes of Smith, Nelson and Robinson for.

I would rather have rob mcCraken richie woodhall and maliggnagi commentating these 3 would tell it how it is and probably not mention past fight or other fighters the way ferret does,nelson smith and robinson have had their day. But till why was adam smith at the meeting between the bbbc and chisora? This means sky run british boxing not bbbc

thechump wrote:

banjo wrote:Smith and Sky have a job to do which is to sell the matches that Matchroom make, so yes quite often they have to sprinkle glitter on a turd, if Smith turned up to a press conference and said such and such a bout is a load of horseshit and advises us all not to buy it, he's going to be out the door isn't he? He's doing what Sky are paying him to do, Sky don't give a toss about us lot who inhabit the internet forums and only make up a small percentage of the viewers of these box office extravaganzas, they want to appeal to all the people who have very little interest in boxing and by doing that they need to hype it up and that's what they pay the likes of Smith, Nelson and Robinson for.

I would rather have rob mcCraken richie woodhall and maliggnagi commentating these 3 would tell it how it is and probably not mention past fight or other fighters the way ferret does,nelson smith and robinson have had their day. But till why was adam smith at the meeting between the bbbc and chisora? This means sky run british boxing not bbbc

Probably because the table landed on his head.