BoxRec

I think Rawling is OK. A bit monotone at times but not last night. I think he wanted JC to win don't you know.

The 'there are many Dutch fans here to tonight', made me laugh out loud.

Buncey - well don't get me started on that plank.

Perhaps if someone told him punches that land on the gloves or arms are not scoring shots he might improve?

nickd wrote:Perhaps if someone told him punches that land on the gloves or arms are not scoring shots he might improve?

I think that should have been Woodhall's job to be honest. Rawling calling the action as he sees it and Woodhall giving clarification.

SticknMove wrote:

nickd wrote:Perhaps if someone told him punches that land on the gloves or arms are not scoring shots he might improve?

I think that should have been Woodhall's job to be honest. Rawling calling the action as he sees it and Woodhall giving clarification.

Woodhall wasn't great last night either, not up to his usual standard. As he and Calzaghe are friends I have to assume that affected him?

nickd wrote:

SticknMove wrote:

nickd wrote:Perhaps if someone told him punches that land on the gloves or arms are not scoring shots he might improve?

I think that should have been Woodhall's job to be honest. Rawling calling the action as he sees it and Woodhall giving clarification.

Woodhall wasn't great last night either, not up to his usual standard. As he and Calzaghe are friends I have to assume that affected him?

I agree. There's a downside in having a partisan commentary team whose emotions are obviously with the home fighter. But all in all, I thought they called the rounds correctly.

Rawling boxings Murray Walker!!!

i thought the same. By the time the fight was about to start I thought they were going to neglect to mention Kessler at all....it was a pleasant surprise when they did, but it was way too late.
should have been more balanced from the off, i mean it's nauseating if not plain boring listening to them rambling on about Calzaghe's greatness for 4 hours....and I say that as a big fan.

I wasn't impressed by the undrcard........no disrespect but the biggest fight at SM in ages .....unification the lot, is immediately preceded by, wait for it....David Kirk, and before that Silence Saheed and a Welsh novice. No disrespect intended but something higher profile would have been better, bit like they do in the states.

I also reckon the competition in Macarinelli's division must be pretty poor at the moment, although I rate him highly as a fighter. Think he'd give David Haye all he could handle.

You would have thought it would have been in their interests to build Kessler up more. It makes a Calzaghe win more impressive to the general sports fan who won't have heard of him.

Maccarinelli needs big fights. Haye has left him well behind IMO. Fights like last night's can't do him any good at all.

I think it will be Calzaghe against Clinton Woods next.

Calzaghe moves up in weight, fights a big all British fight in a sell out arena, it's big bucks all round and he wins a world title to become a two weight world champion. On the showing last night i don't think Woods has the tools to beat him. It makes perfect sense to me.

I think Clinton could be a hard fight. Clinton is less mechanical than Kessler, he used angles and short punches a lot more, has an iron chin, and will have power that can trouble Joe.

I actually think it would be a great fight.

Indeed i agree it would be, i wasn't trying to make Clinton sound like easy pickings but i think with Calzaghe's adaptability and arsenal of punches it's a fight he would fancy and could win.

Calzaghe impressed me the way he boxed clever last night, only very occasionally did he back Kessler up and throw those slapping flurries we all associate with him. He stood off, used his brain and oft neglected Boxing skills to defuse his man.

Calzaghe would beat Woods with plenty to spare. As would Kessler.

Woods is a good operator but not on that level IMO.

GreedyG wrote:Rawling is a clown and actually spoil the coverage for me.

He doesn't know a thing and calls shots that don't land while at other times not calling good shots that do land. The "Dutch" thing was comical.

Wasn't he an athletics commentator or something at the Beeb back in the days?

Why don't they get Steve Holdsworth from Eurosport? He's not as good as Darkie but he's way better than Rawling.

Also the coverage was very one-sided, they gave Kessler about 20 minutes coverage before the actual fight and that was it.

Got to disagree here. I actually think Rawling is excellent. Way better than Holdsworth. I'd much rather have Rawling's enthusiasm than Holdsworth's disinterested style. I have one of the Arguello-Pryor fights in my collection with commentary by Holdsworth. An amazing fight between two ATGs, but, to hear the commentary, you'd think you were watching a boring fight between a couple of club fighters.

As for Bunce, I'm also a fan and pleased he's got a regular slot on Setanta. Would rather have him than McGuigan any day, especially after McGuigan's one and only appearance on Setanta for Hatton-Castillo when he seemed rather out of sorts. Leave him on ITV as Khan's number one cheerleader.

nickd wrote:I think the consensus is Rawling is diabolical. He doesn't know what he's watching half the time.

Words escape me where Bunce is concerned, why on earth is he so highly thought of? I've never seen it myself and never will.

Bunce works hard, knows his stuff and is an enthusiast, he is not consumed by cynicism like so many around here seem to be. It was a really good fight with an exciting presentation. A few knockers on here is hardly a consensus.

first of all i thought this was a brilliant fight between two well matched opponents at the top of their games. Joe's always been an excellent boxer but after this one he is certainly an ATG. I thought Kessler gave him a great fight but just found the pace a bit difficult after the fifth, and relied a bit much on his power from there on. if he would have stuck to his more relaxed style of the first four rounds, who knows. But joe's top quality and the way he adapted to the style of kessler was quite remarkable. kessler will definitely rule this division once joe is gone.

As for rawlings, the way he was hyping joe's attacks in the latter stages of the fight, you would think that you were watching joe -lacy.

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:i thought the same. By the time the fight was about to start I thought they were going to neglect to mention Kessler at all....it was a pleasant surprise when they did, but it was way too late.
should have been more balanced from the off, i mean it's nauseating if not plain boring listening to them rambling on about Calzaghe's greatness for 4 hours....and I say that as a big fan.

I wasn't impressed by the undrcard........no disrespect but the biggest fight at SM in ages .....unification the lot, is immediately preceded by, wait for it....David Kirk, and before that Silence Saheed and a Welsh novice. No disrespect intended but something higher profile would have been better, bit like they do in the states.

I also reckon the competition in Macarinelli's division must be pretty poor at the moment, although I rate him highly as a fighter. Think he'd give David Haye all he could handle.

The point about the undercard is odd. Hardly the fault of a tv company who merely screen what is available.

chesh wrote:

GreedyG wrote:Rawling is a clown and actually spoil the coverage for me.

He doesn't know a thing and calls shots that don't land while at other times not calling good shots that do land. The "Dutch" thing was comical.

Wasn't he an athletics commentator or something at the Beeb back in the days?

Why don't they get Steve Holdsworth from Eurosport? He's not as good as Darkie but he's way better than Rawling.

Also the coverage was very one-sided, they gave Kessler about 20 minutes coverage before the actual fight and that was it.

Got to disagree here. I actually think Rawling is excellent. Way better than Holdsworth. I'd much rather have Rawling's enthusiasm than Holdsworth's disinterested style. I have one of the Arguello-Pryor fights in my collection with commentary by Holdsworth. An amazing fight between two ATGs, but, to hear the commentary, you'd think you were watching a boring fight between a couple of club fighters.

As for Bunce, I'm also a fan and pleased he's got a regular slot on Setanta. Would rather have him than McGuigan any day, especially after McGuigan's one and only appearance on Setanta for Hatton-Castillo when he seemed rather out of sorts. Leave him on ITV as Khan's number one cheerleader.

Yes I have to agree Chesh, Holdsworth has no enthusiasm whatsoever - I heard him once saying how awfull the fights were that he had to commentate on - I mean you shouldnt tell a TV audience how bored you are - Buncey is fun and the complete opposite of Holdsworth but some of what he says is very questionable.

WildWaylon wrote:

chesh wrote:

GreedyG wrote:Rawling is a clown and actually spoil the coverage for me.

He doesn't know a thing and calls shots that don't land while at other times not calling good shots that do land. The "Dutch" thing was comical.

Wasn't he an athletics commentator or something at the Beeb back in the days?

Why don't they get Steve Holdsworth from Eurosport? He's not as good as Darkie but he's way better than Rawling.

Also the coverage was very one-sided, they gave Kessler about 20 minutes coverage before the actual fight and that was it.

Got to disagree here. I actually think Rawling is excellent. Way better than Holdsworth. I'd much rather have Rawling's enthusiasm than Holdsworth's disinterested style. I have one of the Arguello-Pryor fights in my collection with commentary by Holdsworth. An amazing fight between two ATGs, but, to hear the commentary, you'd think you were watching a boring fight between a couple of club fighters.

As for Bunce, I'm also a fan and pleased he's got a regular slot on Setanta. Would rather have him than McGuigan any day, especially after McGuigan's one and only appearance on Setanta for Hatton-Castillo when he seemed rather out of sorts. Leave him on ITV as Khan's number one cheerleader.

Yes I have to agree Chesh, Holdsworth has no enthusiasm whatsoever - I heard him once saying how awfull the fights were that he had to commentate on - I mean you shouldnt tell a TV audience how bored you are - Buncey is fun and the complete opposite of Holdsworth but some of what he says is very questionable.

you should get on famously then

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I think Clinton could be a hard fight. Clinton is less mechanical than Kessler, he used angles and short punches a lot more, has an iron chin, and will have power that can trouble Joe.

I actually think it would be a great fight.

How the tables have turned from the last time team woods were offered Calzaghe - "No, no, no - we can draw in bigger fighters etc.." now "In the ring with me (please)"

Me and my girlfriend decided a few weeks back that were gonna go to New York on holiday next year and shes even agreed to go to a fight at MSG with me as long as we spend 1 full day shopping so im just praying Hopkins - Calzaghe is made for sometime between June and September now!

Calzaghe is an ATG now, but there's still a spectre over him: Chris Eubank. (Plus all the '80s and early-'90s middles and SMs.) While it takes a brave man to force Joe back, he is less capable on the backfoot so long as you don't chase him in a straight line. Do that and he's majestic, as the Lacy fight shows.

A guy with Tyson's early style has the best chance. And maybe that was a prime Eubank? A good tactic against Joe is to push him back, and roll/slip to his right, since the lead hook has never been his favoured punch; he prefers to step aside and bring the straight-left over. He's just so, so quick. He can afford the mistakes because of that supreme agility.

steve689 wrote:It's a joke, how does this kind of fight enforce Enzo Macarinelli as the number one? He stood up and battered an inept "challenger" into submission. I'm not knocking Enzo, he's a talent but his matchmaking leaves a lot to be desired. One step forward, two (or sometimes 3!) steps back.

He wasn't fighting Cunningham, Bell, Mormceck, Haye, Huck, Wlodarcyzk, Adamek or even Wilson in there. He was in with Mohammed Azzaoui. Must be one of the only world champions around today with such a string of none world class names (Braithwaite aside) on his recent ledger.

Don't forget Matt Godfrey - conceivably the best of the lot.

Enzo will fight fellas like this and some better names(but over the hill) for another 3 years.

In that time he will make himself and FW a few million, only at that point(also when the next star is coming through) will he have any 'defining' fights

MightyWarrior wrote:No arguments now, Joe is a legend.

An all time great and the best fighter we've seen out of the UK in years. Maybe ever.

And please don't mention the great pretender Sven Ottke anymore. It's getting embarassing.

Sven Ottke, Sven Ottke, Sven Ottke

No, in all seriousness, I do think Joe HAS to move up to #2 in the modern era (last 30 years) - and top #5 of all time in the UK (at least). Hatton could pass him in December mind.

However, I don't know why the talk of the "pretender" is embarressing. As Joe has shown, no harm in fighting guys on your home turf - if its okay for Joe then why not Sven. Sven had a decent resume with more good defences than Joe (before he retired) - their 3 common names were dealt with in similar fashion (close but clear over Starie, Controvesial over Reid, clinical vs Mitchell) - of the three Starie and Mitchell said it would be a tough fight to call, Reid didn't.

It will always be the glaring ommition, always. Just like Roy missed out on Dariusz, Hamed missed out on Norwood. It was his Natural rival - it will always damage his legacy. Just like Roy missing out on DM has done also.