BoxRec

banjo wrote:

whicker wrote:Banjo, unless you are familiar with the Koran I suggest you avoid making daft comments about it- which other may find very offensive.

There is a relvant point here. A lot of British people have a lot of negative images about members of the Islamic faith, and these images largely come from a biased and unfair media.

Its the same problem with Warrens articles- people will read it and think it is true, and form their opinions based on it.

The lack of humour on this forum is extremely disturbing, maybe I should rephrase it "like all religious text it is nonsense"

Happy now

Not an issue for me, it just that direct references to a specific religion can be very offensive. If you like that kind of humour, get your arse over to Sickipedia (dot org).

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Ok fella, ill spell it out for you


allegedly allegedly is a boxing promoter right?

He uses his article to Promote his fights and fighters. His article isnt the Quran, its a medium for him to go about his busines of Promoting boxing


The fact that Warren can get away with his "article" every week proves his is indeed Britains number 1....

allegedly is not a 'BOXING' Promoter.

He is a allegedly/Sports Networks Promoter.

He promotes HIS INTERESTS not the interests of the sport.

ps - he is also a bitch.

I think the fact that this column appears in The S*n puts serious doubts of its credibility straight away as it seems only the unemployed read it.

banjo wrote:I think the fact that this column appears in The S*n puts serious doubts of its credibility straight away as it seems only the unemployed read it.

One of the best times in my life was when i was unemployed and used to go to the library to read the SUN with the other wretches

The other best time was when i was elected President of France, for a week back in 2003

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

banjo wrote:I think the fact that this column appears in The S*n puts serious doubts of its credibility straight away as it seems only the unemployed read it.

One of the best times in my life was when i was unemployed and used to go to the library to read the SUN with the other wretches

The other best time was when i was elected President of France, for a week back in 2003

Why did you only last a week?

banjo wrote:I think the fact that this column appears in The S*n puts serious doubts of its credibility straight away as it seems only the unemployed read it.

well then FW will be getting plenty of new readers

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:I think most people of sound mind and body would know full well that Fwanks column is more than a touch shall we say "one eyed"

That rules out the majority of the suns readers then.

billy bessey wrote:

DG. wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Ok fella, ill spell it out for you


allegedly allegedly allegedly allegedly is a boxing promoter right?

He uses his article to Promote his fights and fighters. His article isnt the Quran, its a medium for him to go about his busines of Promoting boxing


The fact that Warren can get away with his "article" every week proves his is indeed Britains number 1....

allegedly allegedly allegedly is not a 'BOXING' Promoter.

He is a allegedly allegedly allegedly/Sports Networks Promoter.

He promotes HIS INTERESTS not the interests of the sport.

ps - he is also a bitch.

well said that man

It is written is stone that DG must tell the truth.

banjo wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

banjo wrote:I think the fact that this column appears in The S*n puts serious doubts of its credibility straight away as it seems only the unemployed read it.

One of the best times in my life was when i was unemployed and used to go to the library to read the SUN with the other wretches

The other best time was when i was elected President of France, for a week back in 2003

Why did you only last a week?

I got drunk and set fire to Paris Peace Accords, meaning, technically the USA is still at war with North Vietnam...

Des1 wrote:

banjo wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:His article isnt the Quran

No but it's just as full of nonsense

No, the Quran isn't, maybe you are Khaosai- Galaxy

Well, the Qu'ran is based upon believing in a supernatural being called 'Allah' so it is clearly horseshit.

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

Autobarn wrote:I think they should put a disclaimer with each article.

"FW is a boxing promoter, etc etc, please take this with a pinch of salt".

I think most people of sound mind and body would know full well that Fwanks column is more than a touch shall we say "one eyed"

Shouldn't that be 'Frog eyed'!!!!

Why does people think that this is actually Warrens real opinion, this is Warren the promoter. Remember how wonderful Audley was before he started A force promotions and signed for the Beeb. Warren is not going to commend Froch, Haye etc - although do I think he doesn't think they have talent... nope, of course he does.

Anyway, there are ALOT more people I would listen to before Warren when it comes about talking about boxing and boxers. I think Mr Warrens' boxing knowledge was shown with the Haye vs Maccarinelli debarcle.

Just because some British guys from the street can recognise Warren, not that many I would think - what does that have to do with about how good he is at his job, and how many tickets he can sell.

How many non fight fans Americans could recognise Bob Arum?

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Ok fella, ill spell it out for you


allegedly allegedly is a boxing promoter right?

He uses his article to Promote his fights and fighters. His article isnt the Quran, its a medium for him to go about his busines of Promoting boxing


The fact that Warren can get away with his "article" every week proves his is indeed Britains number 1....

I understand the purpose of "name value". Certainly the average newspaper reader will sooner read a allegedly column than an Oliver Fennell column. But isn't it better that the space is given to somebody who doesn't have an agenda or a business to promote?

Warren can by all means say these things on his website or in his fight programmes; these are his products, which he pays for production of. But he is basically getting free advertising in the country's biggest-selling newspaper.

What if Bill Gates was given an IT column? He may well be the biggest name in the industry, but he's hardly going to say "Firefox is better than IE and MacOS are better than Windows", is he?

oliverfennell wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Ok fella, ill spell it out for you


allegedly allegedly allegedly is a boxing promoter right?

He uses his article to Promote his fights and fighters. His article isnt the Quran, its a medium for him to go about his busines of Promoting boxing


The fact that Warren can get away with his "article" every week proves his is indeed Britains number 1....

I understand the purpose of "name value". Certainly the average newspaper reader will sooner read a allegedly allegedly column than an Oliver Fennell column. But isn't it better that the space is given to somebody who doesn't have an agenda or a business to promote?

Warren can by all means say these things on his website or in his fight programmes; these are his products, which he pays for production of. But he is basically getting free advertising in the country's biggest-selling newspaper.

What if Bill Gates was given an IT column? He may well be the biggest name in the industry, but he's hardly going to say "Firefox is better than IE and MacOS are better than Windows", is he?

Well he might do, if he was drunk


Yes he NoTW should probably not let Fwank get away with his "column "if they had any sort of journalistuc credibilty, but they dont.

Come on, you're and experienced journalist, what do the papers look for in a columnist?

Well reasoned debate, or some famous mug spouting half arsed self promotional bollocks?

See "punchlines" in the Bangkok Post for example! (except the author isnt famous)

ho ho ho

i kid, i kid.....


x

NOTW have no jounalistic credibility?
Quite the opposite I would imagine.

They are the best at what they do, and this is proved by the amount of rags they shift.
I would imagine they are just as respected in the "journo world" as The Times or Independent.

It would be good if a rival rag gave another promoter like the Haye the chance to tear apart Warren's bile.

Why don't the Mirror or someone do that?

Goz wrote:It would be good if a rival rag gave another promoter like the Haye the chance to tear apart Warren's bile.

Why don't the Mirror or someone do that?

The Mirror used to have someone ghostwriting a Mcguigan column. Not sure if this is still around.
None of the UK papers cover boxing well anymore so they?
The ones pieces I really take an interest on are Donald mcrae's writing in the Guardian.
Colin Hart was often worth reading but that means buying the Sun.

Mcuigan or Bunce wouldn't get stuck into Warren though and expose his 'article' for the drivel that it is.

It would need to be a rival promoter really, Haye or Hennessey, maybe Maloney.

yiddo14 wrote:NOTW have no jounalistic credibility?
Quite the opposite I would imagine.

They are the best at what they do, and this is proved by the amount of rags they shift.
I would imagine they are just as respected in the "journo world" as The Times or Independent.

a very fair point

He seems a very bitter man from his articles!!

yiddo14 wrote:NOTW have no jounalistic credibility?
Quite the opposite I would imagine.

They are the best at what they do, and this is proved by the amount of rags they shift.
I would imagine they are just as respected in the "journo world" as The Times or Independent.

I think it's different personally.

It's like saying the X factor or whatever winners have no musical credibility. Record sales probably say they do as do viewing figures of the tv show they are on but anyone with an ounce of musical taste knows they are shite, like the difference between a fine steak and a Mcdonalds or a fine wine and Lambrusco.

The 'journos' that write for the Currant Bun are clever no doubt but not good quality respected journalists which ultimately is a sad reflection on the majority of the population who put their rag at the top of the market.

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

yiddo14 wrote:NOTW have no jounalistic credibility?
Quite the opposite I would imagine.

They are the best at what they do, and this is proved by the amount of rags they shift.
I would imagine they are just as respected in the "journo world" as The Times or Independent.

a very fair point

A nonsense point.

It's like saying that Deal or no Deal is the best quality TV show because it has more viewers than a panorama documentary. Pandering to the lowest common denominator requires little skill, and the main pre-requisite is a moral and ethical vacuum, and a detachment from the importance of fact.

Just because a tabloid newspaper peddles the filth and banal nonsense that keeps people content, doesn't mean the journalists are responsible or more to the point, talented.

Kelvin McKenzie might have been a very successful journalist, but he is also a fat ignoramus.

Popularity and/or notoriety, should not be confused for being respected or able.

leforge wrote:He seems a very bitter man from his articles!!

You noticed that too?

It just occured to me, will your average Sun reader even know that Warren is a promoter? I would never pick up that rag so i don't if that's made obvious. He isn't presented as a neutral boxing expert is he?