BoxRec

Might be...

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Might be...

Cagey answer

KO Artist wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

KO Artist wrote:WARREN, FRANK JOHN.

YOU ARE TOO fornicating SENSITIVE.

CLAUDE MIGHT BE AN ANORAK BUT HE CARES ABOUT THE GAME.

FACE IT THE VIEWING FIGURES FOR A TERRESTRAIL TOP FIGHT WERE DOG SHIT.

STEVE DAVIS V DENNIS TAYLOR GOT 19 MILLION VIEWERS AT PAST MIDNIGHT, AND PEOPLE HAD WORK THE NEXT DAY.

HELL, SNOOKER IS WASHED UP THESE DAYS BUT THE FINALS STILL GET WAY OVER 2 M VIEWERS, MORE LIKE 5 - 7MILLION.

ITV MUST HAVE BEEN DISSAPOINTED.

THEIR HEAD OF SPORT IS ON RECORD SAYING HE WAS DISSAPOINTED WITH THE FIGURES. WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO FRANK? CALL HIM AN ANORAK AND SLAG HIM OFF? NO, YOU WONT CAUSE HE WILL TELL YOU TO DO ONE.

\

Poor comparison, the snooker final didn't start at 2am did it?

I think Warren has a fair point, fact is Joe was watched by more people on ITV at 4 am, than he ever would have been on Sky.

What's the problem?

Its not a poor comparison. The boxing didnt start at 2am either. It started at 11pm.

Either way the snooker got 18.5m viewers whilst Calzaghe acheived just over 10% of that.

Maybe the comparison is slightly unfair insofar as Joe is nowhere near as well known as STeve Davis was in the mid 80's.

Whatever, ITV are dissapointed and its they who matter.

How many channels were available on Easter Weekend in 1985 so we can compare the audiences options, oh yes 3 or possibly 4 compared to over 200. Sort of fucks up your point that fact.

Mick Sturbs wrote:

KO Artist wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:\

Poor comparison, the snooker final didn't start at 2am did it?

I think Warren has a fair point, fact is Joe was watched by more people on ITV at 4 am, than he ever would have been on Sky.

What's the problem?

Its not a poor comparison. The boxing didnt start at 2am either. It started at 11pm.

Either way the snooker got 18.5m viewers whilst Calzaghe acheived just over 10% of that.

Maybe the comparison is slightly unfair insofar as Joe is nowhere near as well known as STeve Davis was in the mid 80's.

Whatever, ITV are dissapointed and its they who matter.

How many channels were available on Easter Weekend in 1985 so we can compare the audiences options, oh yes 3 or possibly 4 compared to over 200. Sort of fucks up your point that fact.

No it doesnt fornicate it up. There may be 1000 channels now but less than 10 get any share worth mentioning. In 1985 ther were four channels, and Davis Taylor got 18.5million viewers.

Calzaghe got a maximum of 2 million spead over 2 channels at different times counting repeats.

By the way you havent presented me with ANY facts to fornicate up my point.

You keep referring to facts but havent come up with any.

jamesmcdonnell wrote: What exactly did Sharman say?

"The only downside for me after that incredible performance is that Joe had to do it in the early hours. We're well aware we now have a world superstar on our hands. We have to deliver a better time slot for the viewers - and for Joe - next time. We'll be working closely with his promoter allegedly to ensure that happens. We don't really want another 2.30am start."

The article, as I said earlier, simply has a negative spin on the same facts someone else did a positive article on.

The first paragraph says millions chose bed before boxing. They didn't choose to watch something else - it had a big audience share, especially these days when at that time part of the audience up at that time can now look at partly-clad women writhing on the screen. That wasn't an option in 1985. Well, not via terrestrial.

All Sharman is saying is wouldn't it be great if they could have it on at prime time as loads more people would watch.

Thats not all he is saying. You can see above that he actually said, we have to deliver a beeter time slot for viewers.

KO Artist wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Might be...

Cagey answer

Truthful answer me old china, not sure yet.....

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote: What exactly did Sharman say?

"The only downside for me after that incredible performance is that Joe had to do it in the early hours. We're well aware we now have a world superstar on our hands. We have to deliver a better time slot for the viewers - and for Joe - next time. We'll be working closely with his promoter allegedly allegedly to ensure that happens. We don't really want another 2.30am start."

The article, as I said earlier, simply has a negative spin on the same facts someone else did a positive article on.

The first paragraph says millions chose bed before boxing. They didn't choose to watch something else - it had a big audience share, especially these days when at that time part of the audience up at that time can now look at partly-clad women writhing on the screen. That wasn't an option in 1985. Well, not via terrestrial.

All Sharman is saying is wouldn't it be great if they could have it on at prime time as loads more people would watch.

Agreed, there's nothing particularly negative about that comment, he's just saying, it would be better to have it on earlier, something I don't think anyone including Warren would disagree with.

There are lots more distractions now than back in 1985, extra channels, internet, etc, it's not the same playing field it was back then so direct comparisons are misleading.

The history between Warren and Abrams is unprofessional on both sides to be honest, it seems clear from the tone of the article that Abrams has an axe to grind where Warren is concerned. I would have thought he would at least be glad that boxing was back on ITV after over a decade's absence, especially after the right royal balls up the BBC made of their coverage.

KO Artist wrote:Thats not all he is saying. You can see above that he actually said, we have to deliver a beeter time slot for viewers.

Was Sharman unhappy with the viewing figures considering it was on at 2.30am? No.

Would he prefer to have an earlier start time so more people could watch? Yes.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:The history between Warren and Abrams is unprofessional on both sides to be honest, it seems clear from the tone of the article that Abrams has an axe to grind where Warren is concerned. I would have thought he would at least be glad that boxing was back on ITV after over a decade's absence, especially after the right royal balls up the BBC made of their coverage.

Abrams didn't write the article.

So then why is Warren having a go at Abrams then. I must confess it's a while since I read Boxing News, so excuse my ignorance.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:So then why is Warren having a go at Abrams then. I must confess it's a while since I read Boxing News, so excuse my ignorance.

Someone called Dave Jarvis wrote the article. Warren is having a go at Abrams because he is the Editor.

I suspect that such is the time pressure of working for Boxing News, that Abrams doesn't exactly get that much time to go through everything with a fine tooth comb.

I doubt very much that anything was done out of malice - but it's just my personal opinion.

The group who own Boxing News (Newsquest, I think) must be stingy as you like. It's amazing how they run a weekly magazine with that much copy with only three full-time writers and, if I'm right, one sub/art editor. Pressure must be horrendous.

Not wishing to offend the institution but cracks are starting to show. They are missing the odd fight in Britain here and there (I don't blame them...some promoters don't even seem to inform the public outside a five-mile radius what is going on) and for their international coverage there are more and more mentions of 'Fightnews.com'.

From my uninvolved standpoint, it seems that if it wasn't for the goodwill of aspiring writers who submit pieces for nothing and freelancers who are content to work for a relative pittance, BN would be in bother.

The mag is great at present though and in some respects (design, certainly) getting better. Tony Connolly is a super reporter too.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:So then why is Warren having a go at Abrams then. I must confess it's a while since I read Boxing News, so excuse my ignorance.

Youve not been reading the Bible.

Thats sacrelidge

Oh right, well in that case I take back a lot of what I said. I had assumed it was Claude laying into Warren due to their past history, which is not exactly cordial.

And yes, by all accounts Newsquest are stingy as fornicate, and they don't exactly do BN any favours, they've had lots of problems with fees not being paid before.

Lord alone knows the magazine business is very tough as it is, without running a mag on a fringe sport like boxing.

The competition from websites is extreme also, and getting worse all the time. Once websites start generating any significant advertising revenue, I think it's the death knell for boxing magazines, or at the least they will need to run the magazine in tandem with a website.

KO Artist wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:So then why is Warren having a go at Abrams then. I must confess it's a while since I read Boxing News, so excuse my ignorance.

Youve not been reading the Bible.

Thats sacrelidge

Mainly it's because nowhere near me ever seems to have it in stock, and I'm not really one to get subscriptions.

FACT : TV Viewing figures are hugely down on those of 20 years ago
FACT: The highest viewing figure on Xmas Day 2005 was 10.1m for Eastenders

For multiple reasons people do not sit down and watch TV in the same numbers.
For anyone to spin a story that this is some sort of ratings flop is poor journalism IMO.
Would it have got more viewers if it had been on at 9.30 after the X-Factor grand final? Of course it would but US TV dictates it starts 2.30Am.

You think Boxing News would be delighted at seeing this fight in the UK. From what I am reading it seems they would rather have Joe Calzaghe vs Tocker Pudwill at 10.00pm.
I have to say I agree with Warren even if I don’t like the way he’s said it.

neverwin wrote:FACT : TV Viewing figures are hugely down on those of 20 years ago
FACT: The highest viewing figure on Xmas Day 2005 was 10.1m for Eastenders

For multiple reasons people do not sit down and watch TV in the same numbers.
For anyone to spin a story that this is some sort of ratings flop is poor journalism IMO.
Would it have got more viewers if it had been on at 9.30 after the X-Factor grand final? Of course it would but US TV dictates it starts 2.30Am.

You think Boxing News would be delighted at seeing this fight in the UK. From what I am reading it seems they would rather have Joe Calzaghe vs Tocker Pudwill at 10.00pm.
I have to say I agree with Warren even if I don’t like the way he’s said it.

Absofuckinglutely spot on, well done my man.

Well, I think you will find that's the opinion of most of us on here. There's a few who agree with the sentiments of the boxing news article, but very few.

I actually agree with Warren that the viewing figures for the fight were good considering the time and BN negative slant seems rather naive... having said that Warren is rather unproffessional by bringing such personal insults up against Claude...

As stated earlier, ITV's boss has actually gone on record and said the viewing figures were disappointing, so allegedly is wrong there.

He really laid into Claude there. Bit strong.

The History is that Abrahams was Warren's tea-boy in the late 80's and was fired for being lazy. Warren has made no secret that Abrahams does not do his job properly and never finds out the facts before printing them as any decent Journalist would or should. Abrahams is not popular among the press pack in general also and this grates with him as Harry Mullan was a well respected figure who knew the sport inside out and picked the phone up at least once a week. Claude is simply recycling internbet stories and printing silly 'gossip' stories from the corridors of shows.

Interestingly the guy who wrote the article in BN used to work at Sky until Shaman got rid of him and also Abrahams was at the BBC until he was embarrassed into leaving due to his bias reporting.

This was not only an inaccurate article but written and edited by people who have an axe to grind. Is it right to report inaccurarcies like this this in a paper of record, without revealing any bias influence?

Abrahams never goes abroad to watch British Boxers but alway's goes to the States to see non-British interest events. Was he in Rome when Nelson, Maccarinelli and Lockett fought on the same card? No, yet he is alway's at Ringside in Monte Carlo when 'Brit' Roman Greenburg fights because he is taking free flights, hotel rooms and expenses from Robert Waterman.

Hardly a journalist of integrity is our Claude, or indeed a fit man to be editing the so called 'Bible' and trade paper that is Boxing News.

Harry Mullan would turn in his grave if he knew what a mess BN has become IMO.

some or indeed all of the above may be true....
However as long as Frank continues to spout utter SHITE in his NOTW column i dont think he is in a position to criticise anything else written in the boxing press....

Talk about axe to grind..... Warrens Axe must have been worn thin after all he has written in the NOTW...

boxingchat wrote:The History is that Abrahams was Warren's tea-boy in the late 80's and was fired for being lazy. Warren has made no secret that Abrahams does not do his job properly and never finds out the facts before printing them as any decent Journalist would or should. Abrahams is not popular among the press pack in general also and this grates with him as Harry Mullan was a well respected figure who knew the sport inside out and picked the phone up at least once a week. Claude is simply recycling internbet stories and printing silly 'gossip' stories from the corridors of shows.

Interestingly the guy who wrote the article in BN used to work at Sky until Shaman got rid of him and also Abrahams was at the BBC until he was embarrassed into leaving due to his bias reporting.

This was not only an inaccurate article but written and edited by people who have an axe to grind. Is it right to report inaccurarcies like this this in a paper of record, without revealing any bias influence?

Abrahams never goes abroad to watch British Boxers but alway's goes to the States to see non-British interest events. Was he in Rome when Nelson, Maccarinelli and Lockett fought on the same card? No, yet he is alway's at Ringside in Monte Carlo when 'Brit' Roman Greenburg fights because he is taking free flights, hotel rooms and expenses from Robert Waterman.

Hardly a journalist of integrity is our Claude, or indeed a fit man to be editing the so called 'Bible' and trade paper that is Boxing News.

Harry Mullan would turn in his grave if he knew what a mess BN has become IMO.

CLAUDE IS ONE OF THE BEST BOXING JOURNALISTS IN THE WORLD.

YOU ARE WARRENS ARSE WIPER. END OF STORY

KO Artist wrote:

boxingchat wrote:The History is that Abrahams was Warren's tea-boy in the late 80's and was fired for being lazy. Warren has made no secret that Abrahams does not do his job properly and never finds out the facts before printing them as any decent Journalist would or should. Abrahams is not popular among the press pack in general also and this grates with him as Harry Mullan was a well respected figure who knew the sport inside out and picked the phone up at least once a week. Claude is simply recycling internbet stories and printing silly 'gossip' stories from the corridors of shows.

Interestingly the guy who wrote the article in BN used to work at Sky until Shaman got rid of him and also Abrahams was at the BBC until he was embarrassed into leaving due to his bias reporting.

This was not only an inaccurate article but written and edited by people who have an axe to grind. Is it right to report inaccurarcies like this this in a paper of record, without revealing any bias influence?

Abrahams never goes abroad to watch British Boxers but alway's goes to the States to see non-British interest events. Was he in Rome when Nelson, Maccarinelli and Lockett fought on the same card? No, yet he is alway's at Ringside in Monte Carlo when 'Brit' Roman Greenburg fights because he is taking free flights, hotel rooms and expenses from Robert Waterman.

Hardly a journalist of integrity is our Claude, or indeed a fit man to be editing the so called 'Bible' and trade paper that is Boxing News.

Harry Mullan would turn in his grave if he knew what a mess BN has become IMO.

CLAUDE IS ONE OF THE BEST BOXING JOURNALISTS IN THE WORLD.

YOU ARE WARRENS ARSE WIPER. END OF STORY

Do you need a passport to enter your world?

boxing chat are you expecting a apology in tomorrow issue