BoxRec

My advice for Smith, Johnson, Jonas etc would be to f*ck Gallagher off. Can’t see Hearn too keen to work with him from now on.

Callum Smith’s career is gonna go the same way as Brook’s at this rate.

2 guys ppl love to hate , now hating on each other,

Fast car v tesco joe. Make it ppv!

Anyone who thinks there will be mega money purses for a long time must be deluded. Surely better to have regular fights than nothing ?

What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ? Same with the Smiths, unless it is a decent match up who cares about them ?

If the SKY and BT money stopped there would be no boxers earning much at all.

tony1234 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:35 Anyone who thinks there will be mega money purses for a long time must be deluded. Surely better to have regular fights than nothing ?

What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ? Same with the Smiths, unless it is a decent match up who cares about them ?

If the SKY and BT money stopped there would be no boxers earning much at all.

Yeah how many times have we had to watch the smiths etc in matches against no hopers. That doesn't really bring anything to a card.

tony1234 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:35 What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ?

Gallagher kept saying she was a 36 year old single parent. Maybe he thinks there is a huge amount of woke boxing fans who want to subscribe to watch her.

BigDoofus wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:53

tony1234 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:35 What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ?

Gallagher kept saying she was a 36 year old single parent. Maybe he thinks there is a huge amount of woke boxing fans who want to subscribe to watch her.

Bringing up Jonas being a single mum and looking for sympathy and pity isn't a good idea for Gallagher. Jonas is likeable so I'm not going to get into it but people will ask questions about what happened in the relationship etc. Intrusive personal questions that really don't need to be asked. He should think before he talks.

tony1234 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:35 What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ? Same with the Smiths, unless it is a decent match up who cares about them ?

Jonas was going to be on the bill with Katie Taylor, Rachel Ball and Terri Harper, who she just had a very close fight with

There was a lot of value for Jonas on that bill.

BigDoofus wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:53

tony1234 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:35 What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ?

Gallagher kept saying she was a 36 year old single parent. Maybe he thinks there is a huge amount of woke boxing fans who want to subscribe to watch her.

Or a huge amount of boxing fans who care how many kids she has or what her relationship status is.

ash.123 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 16:34

BigDoofus wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:53

tony1234 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:35 What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ?

Gallagher kept saying she was a 36 year old single parent. Maybe he thinks there is a huge amount of woke boxing fans who want to subscribe to watch her.

Or a huge amount of boxing fans who care how many kids she has or what her relationship status is.

You would think boxing is an upper class sport populated by participants drawn from privileged backgrounds.

I think there is something insidious about Gallaghers' deliberate choice of words in this. Raising the race card, and talking about Jonas being a single mum, which is playing another kind of card too, especially since he wants her to be paid more. Do we pay on the going rate, or do we pay on who we think "deserves" more money, eg a single mum ? He can say what he likes privately but to come out with this toxic stuff publicly is bang out of order. Perhaps he sees himself as an emerging social justice warrior. Eddie said Joe has already apologised to Sky, in my mind he needs to retract these comments completely. Instead of trying to shake more money out of Eddie, maybe Joe could forego his trainers fee for Natasha, and give her a 10% payrise.

I watched Danny Flexen’s interview with Joe earlier. He blamed his lack of media training for calling Eddie and Sky racists and said that he actually meant to say equality.

So rather than implying Natasha Jonas got a poor offer because she was black, it’s now because she’s a woman.

Yet the offer was for more than she got for fighting for the WBC title in her last fight and it’s from the only British promoter who’s putting on women’s fights on TV on a regular basis.

Joe needs to stop doing interviews or he’ll damage the prospects of his fighters.

I watched the Eddie IFL interview afterwards and he was, rightly based on the accusations, raging.

maverick23 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 16:59
Joe needs to stop doing interviews or he’ll damage the prospects of his fighters.

I watched the Eddie IFL interview afterwards and he was, rightly based on the accusations, raging.

Based on Eddies reaction , i think Joes already done damage to his fighters prospects , and too be honest i don't blame Eddie , If everytime he don't get his own way he throws the toys out the pram , who would want to deal with him ... Plus from my opinion anyway , who wants to see womens boxing , I don't, personaly i think Eddie puts too many women on his shows ,,, leave em at home , to clean the house, and cook the tea . meat and 3 veg ready, for when there partner gets home from the pub ,l I say partner because in this liberal age , most probably don't have husbands anyway . And the Smiths , well leave them at home has well unless Callum wants to give Ryder a rematch ,

Black Sam Bellamy wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 05:16 Joe's created a problem here for himself and his stable by directing all his fighters to a single promoter.

Yeah but he had to as he fell out with the other side (FW) as well.

brian13 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 16:12

tony1234 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 15:35 What sort of value is Natasha Jonas on a bill ? Same with the Smiths, unless it is a decent match up who cares about them ?

Jonas was going to be on the bill with Katie Taylor, Rachel Ball and Terri Harper, who she just had a very close fight with

There was a lot of value for Jonas on that bill.

Yeah and Joe then tried to conduct business via Twitter....it wasn’t World Title money (for Jonas) - Eddie replied MTK we’re happy with deal.

If you listen to Hearn’s IFL.....Sam Hyde offered fights....all KO’d.....Marcus Morrison similar....I get Joes trying to get most he can for the fighters but they are all ending up inactive because of him.

3132DW wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 18:11

Black Sam Bellamy wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 05:16 Joe's created a problem here for himself and his stable by directing all his fighters to a single promoter.

Yeah but he had to as he fell out with the other side (FW) as well.

I watched a Danny Flexen interview with Paul Butler recently (as I was curious about where he was with a promotional company) and he was saying he probably shouldn't have left Frank.

They split not long after Paul teamed up with Joe if I remember right.

maverick23 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 16:59 I watched Danny Flexen’s interview with Joe earlier. He blamed his lack of media training for calling Eddie and Sky racists and said that he actually meant to say equality.
So rather than implying Natasha Jonas got a poor offer because she was black, it’s now because she’s a woman.

He said that his race comment was actually "inequality" referring to Jonas and Callum Johnson (a white male).

FightFanPlan wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 20:51

3132DW wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 18:11

Black Sam Bellamy wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 05:16 Joe's created a problem here for himself and his stable by directing all his fighters to a single promoter.

Yeah but he had to as he fell out with the other side (FW) as well.

I watched a Danny Flexen interview with Paul Butler recently (as I was curious about where he was with a promotional company) and he was saying he probably shouldn't have left Frank.

They split not long after Paul teamed up with Joe if I remember right.

From a pure fighting point of view I'd choose Frank over Hearn every time.

BigDoofus wrote: ↑28 Oct 2020, 04:55

maverick23 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 16:59 I watched Danny Flexen’s interview with Joe earlier. He blamed his lack of media training for calling Eddie and Sky racists and said that he actually meant to say equality.
So rather than implying Natasha Jonas got a poor offer because she was black, it’s now because she’s a woman.

He actually said that his race comment was actually "inequality" referring to Jonas and Callum Johnson (a white male).

Was he referring to Johnson being disadvantaged because he's a white male ? (I've not seen the interview)

JimJim2009 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2020, 06:57

BigDoofus wrote: ↑28 Oct 2020, 04:55

maverick23 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 16:59 I watched Danny Flexen’s interview with Joe earlier. He blamed his lack of media training for calling Eddie and Sky racists and said that he actually meant to say equality.
So rather than implying Natasha Jonas got a poor offer because she was black, it’s now because she’s a woman.

He actually said that his race comment was actually "inequality" referring to Jonas and Callum Johnson (a white male).

Was he referring to Johnson being disadvantaged because he's a white male ? (I've not seen the interview)

He lumped Jonas and Johnson in together. He was trying to make excuses for his race comment and failing badly. His point seemed to be that he played the race card because he hadn't had media training.

Listening to Hearn you’’d think he was managing Brook purely out of the goodness of his heart. Like he’s never made any money out of Kell at all he surely talks a load of bollox doesn’t he

MightyWarrior wrote: ↑28 Oct 2020, 08:22 Listening to Hearn you’’d think he was managing Brook purely out of the goodness of his heart. Like he’s never made any money out off Kell at all he surely talks a load of bollox doesn’t he

Absolutley. Kell has a bit of moan about the fight not being on Sky and Eddie responded by throwing him under a bus, and then bizarrely shitting on all the fights he has promoted.

As for Joe G?

Boxing eh.

ash.123 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2020, 06:26

FightFanPlan wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 20:51

3132DW wrote: ↑27 Oct 2020, 18:11

Yeah but he had to as he fell out with the other side (FW) as well.

I watched a Danny Flexen interview with Paul Butler recently (as I was curious about where he was with a promotional company) and he was saying he probably shouldn't have left Frank.

They split not long after Paul teamed up with Joe if I remember right.

From a pure fighting point of view I'd choose Frank over Hearn every time.

How come?

garethhop wrote: ↑28 Oct 2020, 08:34

MightyWarrior wrote: ↑28 Oct 2020, 08:22 Listening to Hearn you’’d think he was managing Brook purely out of the goodness of his heart. Like he’s never made any money out off Kell at all he surely talks a load of bollox doesn’t he

Absolutley. Kell has a bit of moan about the fight not being on Sky and Eddie responded by throwing him under a bus, and then bizarrely shitting on all the fights he has promoted.

As for Joe G?

Boxing eh.

I watched the Brook interview and felt bad for him because it really made you think that Eddie had let him down

But I then watched the interview with Hearn who seemed genuine in that he hadn’t been involved with it all and clearly disputed what Kell has to say.

I reckon there might be someone feeding Kell some poor info indicating that Eddie’s been kept aware/been involved with things when he hasn’t.

Re: the Golovkin fight it made Kell a multi millionaire and I’m sure Eddie did well out of it too. Kell was going OTT saying he saved the day by taking the fight and then Eddie went OTT giving them impression that he didn’t profit out of some Kell’s fights.

team ed for the win

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑29 Oct 2020, 03:29 team ed for the win

Don't think Brook will be to concerned , when he's finished counting his millions ,, he'll just start again .