Page 2 of 2
Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 08:44
by J
shows what i know, how ridiculous all over the tie joke on here? pathetic ....wasnt even a member of the BBN staff who posted the joke up.
Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 09:25
by TerribleTerry
Terry D wrote:I offered to take him out to dinner
That was brave, it could have ended up costing you a few quid -
Richard looks like he knows his way around a dinner plate!
Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 10:16
by 101boxing
thats going to get you in quicker, insulting the bloke!!
Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 10:26
by TerribleTerry
101boxing wrote:thats going to get you in quicker, insulting the bloke!!
The fact that as reputable a web site as BBN, which serves the British scene so admirably, is denied entry by SN to shows is a fact that should be highlighted, and if Maynard gets some flack for his ridiculous stance (and no, I dont mean when he boxes lefty..), then so be it IMO!
Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 10:48
by Crew2
I posted some Danny Williams clips on YouTube once and got banned, SN had contacted them and threatened legal action
Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 10:49
by Crew2
Now I cant actually view YouTube at all from home. Thanks to SN
I just innocently posted a highlight reel of Danny. Didnt expect that
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:06
by dondada
TerribleTerry wrote:101boxing wrote:thats going to get you in quicker, insulting the bloke!!
The fact that as reputable a web site as BBN, which serves the British scene so admirably, is denied entry by SN to shows is a fact that should be highlighted, and if Maynard gets some flack for his ridiculous stance (and no, I dont mean when he boxes lefty..), then so be it IMO!
We get creds from everyone apart from SN.
Here's what happened when I was first banned. I was let back in since this but the whole site is banned now.
A few days before Hatton-Tszyu, someone on a boxing forum posted a light-hearted joke about Frank (who, as I have always said, is accommodating most of the time when you get him on the blower). I replied to the thread with a single, smiley emoticon.
Coincidentally, my press pass for the bill didn't materialise!
I kid you not.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:11
by steve689
We know your not kidding Ian old boy
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:14
by oliverfennell
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:TerribleTerry wrote:101boxing wrote:thats going to get you in quicker, insulting the bloke!!
The fact that as reputable a web site as BBN, which serves the British scene so admirably, is denied entry by SN to shows is a fact that should be highlighted, and if Maynard gets some flack for his ridiculous stance (and no, I dont mean when he boxes lefty..), then so be it IMO!
We get creds from everyone apart from SN.
Here's what happened when I was first banned. I was let back in since this but the whole site is banned now.
A few days before Hatton-Tszyu, someone on a boxing forum posted a light-hearted joke about Frank (who, as I have always said, is accommodating most of the time when you get him on the blower). I replied to the thread with a single, smiley emoticon.
Coincidentally, my press pass for the bill didn't materialise!
I kid you not.
Sounds like Spud Woolatt was working for SN that day.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:23
by Wales
Watch it Olly, or you'll get a PM... remember.. theres more than one way to skin a cat.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:24
by Lightsoot
oliverfennell wrote:Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:TerribleTerry wrote:
The fact that as reputable a web site as BBN, which serves the British scene so admirably, is denied entry by SN to shows is a fact that should be highlighted, and if Maynard gets some flack for his ridiculous stance (and no, I dont mean when he boxes lefty..), then so be it IMO!
We get creds from everyone apart from SN.
Here's what happened when I was first banned. I was let back in since this but the whole site is banned now.
A few days before Hatton-Tszyu, someone on a boxing forum posted a light-hearted joke about Frank (who, as I have always said, is accommodating most of the time when you get him on the blower). I replied to the thread with a single, smiley emoticon.
Coincidentally, my press pass for the bill didn't materialise!
I kid you not.
Sounds like Spud Woolatt was working for SN that day.
Spud was long removed from anything to do with Sports Network in the summer of 2005. Let's be accurate about things. He was involved with Fight Academy at that time (and still is) and prior to that it was Hennessy Sports and Frank Maloney.
It's sad that BBN are banned from SN shows but they made a brave call by allowing one of their writers (Terry Dooley) to file an interview with Terry Marsh where it was inevitable that the subject of Warren would be mentioned in some capacity.
Even if it was only referred to in passing it was always going to ignite Warren's fuse. I'm not lobbing stones at Ian or Kevin, they do a great job and made a courageous call and backed their writer which was good of them.
In hindsight, perhaps their judgement on this issue wasn't the best? Before anyone pipes up, I am speaking from experience because I've made a number of fornicate-ups myself in my time.
As for Terry Dooley, cheeky chappy that he thinks he is, was he too eager to make a name for himself as internet reporters often try and do?(again, speaking from experience).
Proud of your accomplishments, Terry?
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:39
by dondada
I can't remember posting Terry's article - I blame Kev!
If it was me, I must have been temporarily insane.
It had nothing to do with backing Terry - if I'd have seen it, it wouldn't have gone up in that form, end of.
99% of internet reporters haven't got a clue what's libellous and what isn't - or what might be construed as such, especially by a particularly litigious party. That's why I'd like to think BBN is a bit different.
I'd like to write a lot more vitriolic stuff...but can't afford the time or legal fees!
Kev and I both have full-time jobs and families and it does get very busy for us. Terry's interview was a rare case of something slipping through the net.
But...we were already banned BEFORE this, Ben!
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:41
by Podmore_Birmingham
Wales wrote:Watch it Olly, or you'll get a PM... remember.. theres more than one way to skin a cat.
Top quality, Wales. That takes me back to BoxingTalk's forum.
Tom Podmore.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:42
by oliverfennell
Ben Carey wrote:Spud was long removed from anything to do with Sports Network in the summer of 2005. Let's be accurate about things. He was involved with Fight Academy at that time (and still is) and prior to that it was Hennessy Sports and Frank Maloney.
I was joking, Ben.
Based on his style of "say nice things about Ricky Hatton or you won't get a seat at his next fight" and general overreactions to any slightest and almost entirely perceived slights.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 08:46
by DavidPayne
I think Spud may become like Purple Akiki, an urban legend used to scare small children at bed time. Like the bogey man.
You have to walk in sponge shoes around the sensitivities of some.
Good to see Ben contributing.
DP
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 09:09
by Autobarn
It's actually quite sinister. Conform or we won't let you in. How good is that when boxing gets far too little column space as it is. Bloody idiots. Look at the drivel we see in the papers. Press should boycott Warren's shows.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 09:10
by DavidPayne
Would anyone, the general public that is, actually notice.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 09:15
by c_phillips
Coco wrote:Albert wrote:Coco wrote:
Why is this fabulous news????
Gareth Jones is a good man and a good journalist.
Being banned for this speculation is nonsensical.
And he does travel around the country for the little fights, working for Boxing News a lot of the time and also for local Welsh papers.
The majority of posters on here have said far worse and stated it as fact.
Should we all be banned from his shows too!!
We can all have an opinion, mine is Jones articles are both boring and blatantly obvious at times.
Of course we can all have an opinion, and if you feel he is boring and obvious then fair enough, but do you really think that is worthy of a permanent ban??
Is this a personal thing???
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 09:16
by c_phillips
c_phillips wrote:Coco wrote:Albert wrote:
We can all have an opinion, mine is Jones articles are both boring and blatantly obvious at times.
Of course we can all have an opinion, and if you feel he is boring and obvious then fair enough, but do you really think that is worthy of a permanent ban??
Is this a personal thing???
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 10:04
by dondada
Autobarn wrote:It's actually quite sinister. Conform or we won't let you in. How good is that when boxing gets far too little column space as it is. Bloody idiots. Look at the drivel we see in the papers. Press should boycott Warren's shows.
I agree but there is very little solidarity in 'the media'. If every paper apart from one was banned, that one paper would go very big on it because it was exclusive!
The only critical voice there is in the media about Sports Network is Niall Hickman. And why? Because he's got a libel action against him from them!
Nobody in print is really critical because it's just not worth their bother.
MW is right about Boxing News/Claude Abrams. They should have absolutely crucified that Macc-Gunn match but they are, if you pardon the pun, Gunn-shy now. Harry Mullan would have, rightly, slated it from the roof tops.
Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 10:10
by MightyWarrior
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
MW is right about Boxing News/Claude Abrams. They should have absolutely crucified that Macc-Gunn match but they are, if you pardon the pun, Gunn-shy now. Harry Mullan would have, rightly, slated it from the roof tops.
Yeah Harry slated Duff and co over the endless Bruno mismatches, and was banned for awhile. He replied by not reporting their shows, just printing a few pictures with the result.
Eventualy BN was invited back, but I recall Harry stuck to his guns right to the end. I'm sure Warren was cheering BN for that, at the time.