Groves set to leave Warren for Hearn

[gobbles]

So what is Groves going to do about tickets for his fans if he gets a big name on the Froch bill? George is a good seller, he must have sold thousands when he fought DeGale at the same venue.

Don't worry, I'm sure he'll be tweeting the Sky Box Office number

[greenyox3]

Worren is pretty civil about it on the Sky Sports website. Must mean Groves was well within his rights to move away.

[whiskey]

I don't think Hearn is a poacher.

I suspect the one and only reason a fighter goes from headlining shows, to walking away is pretty obvious here.

Adam Booth is pretty savvy and would have George's back, where contractual matters are concerned. I bet a deadline was set for matters to be resolved by between the interested parties, before calling time on the situation after the deadline ended.

Until that deadline expired, then George will play ball and aid the show in good faith where he could of. In the likely hope matters would be resolved.

To criticise George for doing that, is a bit mean spirited. I can't think for a second he'd want his fans buying tickets for a show, that he had zero intention of fulfilling.

My sympathy is not so much for local Groves fans, but for the scores of Scottish travelling fans whom have already had their fingers burned on that cancelled Filipino / Walsh bout.

[Dan Dares]

My sympathy is not so much for local Groves fans, but for the scores of Scottish travelling fans whom have already had their fingers burned on that cancelled Filipino / Walsh bout.

x 2

[gobbles]

I don't think Hearn is a poacher.

I suspect the one and only reason a fighter goes from headlining shows, to walking away is pretty obvious here.

Adam Booth is pretty savvy and would have George's back, where contractual matters are concerned. I bet a deadline was set for matters to be resolved by between the interested parties, before calling time on the situation after the deadline ended.

Until that deadline expired, then George will play ball and aid the show in good faith where he could of. In the likely hope matters would be resolved.

To criticise George for doing that, is a bit mean spirited. I can't think for a second he'd want his fans buying tickets for a show, that he had zero intention of fulfilling.

My sympathy is not so much for local Groves fans, but for the scores of Scottish travelling fans whom have already had their fingers burned on that cancelled Filipino / Walsh bout.

That's a very generous view of matters.

This is Eddie Hearn's comment to Kevin Mitchell last week, essentially about this: "It's such a shit business and it's so dog-eat-dog for a pound note that you have to pull strokes and you have to make moves."

Certainly sounds like him admitting he's poached Groves.

My sympathy is very much with the Groves fans, they've been totally stitched up.

[Parson Cross]

mmmm Adam Booth so savvy her persuaded Geogre to sign for Wazza instead of Hearn in the first place, Gomez.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but would you say that was a savvy decision ?

[whiskey]

Gobbles, do you have sort of alignment with FW, because you seem to jump on the grenade to defend their honour in every discussion of this type.

I'm not entirely sure how you can say one sentence on Hearn is 'generous' before plucking any old junk out of thin air and spinning it into a bunch of paragraphs to discredit him is beyond me.

The reality is I'm not remotely interested in winning or losing an argument, I'm just discussing the topic in hand.

Instead of rubbishing my opinion, why not offer up your own instead of trying to shoot down those that don't sit with your own personal agenda.

The reasons I'm hearing why Groves moved on are 200% justified. Unless other facts surface.

mmmm Adam Booth so savvy her persuaded Geogre to sign for Wazza instead of Hearn in the first place, Gomez.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but would you say that was a savvy decision ?

I thought it was a peculiar fit, given Frank's alignment with Degale and his stance Groves clearly did NOT beat james in his opinion.

That aside, from what I recall, I think Hearn and other promoters were keen until it transpired GBP has some of options on him. It wasn't a clean deal.

I assume that arrangement with GBP has expired over time or whatever now, or has been relaxed.

[Finch]

Outrageous by Groves.
He was happy to promote the March 16 fight, did press conference, posed for pictures, encouraged his Twitter followers to buy tickets, then he backs out like this at two weeks' notice, leaving his fans with their pants down. I wonder how many will be keen to cough up big money for tickets again.
He has also totally dumped on the opponent who has been in training for a European title fight.
It may be all right for those in the Hearn camp to smirk, but this is a classic example of why so few people buy tickets to watch boxing any more.

Whilst generally i am not against the move from FW to EH, it does seem rather strange timing. Why not wait a couple of weeks and get the Euro title under your belt first as opposed to fighting a meaningless fight in two weeks and then probably a non-title fight in May.

If, as is being rumoured, contractual payments were not received, should Groves risk his health by getting into the ring against a decent opponent for free? Surely if he's walked out for a contractually acceptable reason then the blame lies with those outside the ring who failed to fulfil their side of the bargain and not with the fighter who has done all expected of him and is expected to risk his future health, career and earning potential?

I hadn't heard the rumours of non-payment. Thanks for the clarification and that explains the answer to my question.

[Parson Cross]

So maybe a tie up with Golden Boy UK might have been a good fit ?
I just get worried about monopolies and if rumours are right Eddie has a queue forming at his door to defect to him.
I can't see that this is good for UK boxing.
It's not just Wazza.
How much more patience will the likes of Quigg and Murray have with Hatton if he can't pull a tv deal off ?
Will Fury stay loyal to Mick ?
Maybe an over reaction I know but Promotional competition is healthy.

Finch - the non payment is just that - rumour until someone close to the fire states it.
I hear loads of this stuff, but for every rumour of a non payment, its turned out to be a late payment.
Still unacceptable I appreciate that, but there is a difference.

[whiskey]

So maybe a tie up with Golden Boy UK might have been a good fit ?
I just get worried about monopolies and if rumours are right Eddie has a queue forming at his door to defect to him.
I can't see that this is good for UK boxing.
It's not just Wazza.
.

What isn't good for UK boxing, is when promoters ring fence their stable and refuse to do business with their promotional competitors.

People criticise Hennessy for their approach with Tyson Fury - when the reality is bouts were there to be made between Khan and John Murray / Jon Thaxton but they elected to withdraw from BBBoC purse bids to fight for some international trinket against Gary St Clair.

Same goes for when Mick put a sky backed £2m package together for Calzaghe v Froch and Bika / Manfredo got brought in instead.

With regards Sky- several walked away under their own steam for Setanta, ITV and ch437 etc.

The rest were cut loose after too many Harvey Hadden stadium bouts with some EBU fight with some Italian , and an undercard packed with Latvians.

When the shell of Carl Johanesson is being passed off as headline Saturday night Sky material, something had to give.

'Theres not enough money' they shout from their Bentley window.

Funny how David Coldwell puts on a packed night in Manc without a TV deal, with fights that put some of the televised dross to shame.

[Parson Cross]

You'll not get a great deal of a fight from me with what you say mate.
However if we reach the point when ALL the best fighters are under one roof, there won't be a need for ring fencing - but tell you what there wont be many facing each other.
I cant imagine for one moment Eddie - should he sign Quigg for example - sticking him in with Frampton.
Neither would he put Barker in with Murray.
Maybe its just me mate - Im getting old.

[gobbles]

Gobbles, do you have sort of alignment with FW, because you seem to jump on the grenade to defend their honour in every discussion of this type.

I'm not entirely sure how you can say one sentence on Hearn is 'generous' before plucking any old junk out of thin air and spinning it into a bunch of paragraphs to discredit him is beyond me.

The reality is I'm not remotely interested in winning or losing an argument, I'm just discussing the topic in hand.

Instead of rubbishing my opinion, why not offer up your own instead of trying to shoot down those that don't sit with your own personal agenda.

The reasons I'm hearing why Groves moved on are 200% justified. Unless other facts surface.

mmmm Adam Booth so savvy her persuaded Geogre to sign for Wazza instead of Hearn in the first place, Gomez.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but would you say that was a savvy decision ?

I thought it was a peculiar fit, given Frank's alignment with Degale and his stance Groves clearly did NOT beat james in his opinion.

That aside, from what I recall, I think Hearn and other promoters were keen until it transpired GBP has some of options on him. It wasn't a clean deal.

I assume that arrangement with GBP has expired over time or whatever now, or has been relaxed.

The "any old junk out of thin air" was an article in the Guardian on Friday entitled "Eddie Hearn looks likely to sign boxer from allegedly's stable". My criticism is also of Groves, not Hearn.

I don't have a personal agenda and I certainly don't have an allegiance to FW. I am shocked that you seem to not think it is an issue for a boxer to sign for a different fight, leaving his own fans in the lurch.

If you read the thread you will see that I do offer an opinion and it's not one coded with lines like "unless other facts come out" when no facts at all have come out yet, other than he's off the bill on March 16.

Hearn was going to announce the signing of Groves at a media day in 2011, but Booth did a deal with Warren the morning he was going to sign with Hearn, nothing to do with Golden Boy US deal, which was only really an offshoot of Haye's deal with Golden Boy.

[Lenny Cravats]

I don't blame him.

[Yes We Can]

I have no problem with Matchroom monopolising the promotional market in the UK, the problem we have had domestically for some time is when the promoter is also managing the fighters career effectively meaning they are unlikely to take the risks neccessary to appease the fans.

With George Groves its clear Booth is the manager, and it's Eddie Hearns job to sell him to the wider audience. Is he likely to be quite as worried about Groves suffering a loss aiming against high competition, no. is he likely to be happy with Groves plodding along beating average standard euro fighters, no... so they work to find a happy middle = better for the fans on paper.

e.g Quigg - Frampton

Frampton is not managed by Eddie Hearn, solely promoted.
Quigg managed by Hatton?

so if he Quigg were to join Matchroom is Eddie going to suffer with a loss to either fighter? not likely as much as if the 2 were to continue to avoid each other in my opinion.

Promoters should promote and managers manage, not a combination of the 2. Will this happen... or was this just a fantasy rambling post .... maybe.

[jameswilson]

I haven't read through the rest of the thread but this surely confirms that when Froch eventually does retire that his last fight will be against George Groves.

[Yes We Can]

I haven't read through the rest of the thread but this surely confirms that when Froch eventually does retire that his last fight will be against George Groves.

If this does occur, And Froch does retire....

Win, Lose or Draw

We will all simply blame George Groves

[Chris W 1982]

Do you think Warren mighta thought that the only way he could make serious wedge out of Groves is through fights wiuth DeGale and Froch and that there's zero chance of them happening?

[Parson Cross]

Funtime,
Hatton does not manage Quigg.

[dondada]

That's a very generous view of matters.

This is Eddie Hearn's comment to Kevin Mitchell last week, essentially about this: "It's such a shit business and it's so dog-eat-dog for a pound note that you have to pull strokes and you have to make moves."

Certainly sounds like him admitting he's poached Groves.

My sympathy is very much with the Groves fans, they've been totally stitched up.

No, I don't think it sounds like he's admitting 'poaching' Groves. He could have been talking generally. It surely can't count as poaching (not in my view anyway) if someone of their own volition goes to party A and says he would like to work with him and feels he has a legal basis to do so because of X, Y and Z.

Hearn has no need to poach - he's fishing with dynamite at the moment. He might be 'making moves' though

[Final round]

A statement from Warren Promotions confirmed: 'George Groves has withdrawn from the Wembley Arena show promoted by allegedly on Saturday March 16. George Groves has left allegedly to join Matchroom
'Groves was due to challenge for the vacant European super-middleweight title against Mohamed Ali Ndiaye that Mr. Warren won the purse bid for on January 11.
'Groves has stated that he is not interested in boxing for the EBU title at this moment and would like to take his choice of fights in another direction.
'Mr Warren would like to wish George all the best with his career and looks forward to working again with him in the near future.'

[earsjohn]

That's a very generous view of matters.

This is Eddie Hearn's comment to Kevin Mitchell last week, essentially about this: "It's such a shit business and it's so dog-eat-dog for a pound note that you have to pull strokes and you have to make moves."

Certainly sounds like him admitting he's poached Groves.

My sympathy is very much with the Groves fans, they've been totally stitched up.

No, I don't think it sounds like he's admitting 'poaching' Groves. He could have been talking generally. It surely can't count as poaching (not in my view anyway) if someone of their own volition goes to party A and says he would like to work with him and feels he has a legal basis to do so because of X, Y and Z.

Hearn has no need to poach - he's fishing with dynamite at the moment. He might be 'making moves' though

Matchrooms next big money spinner for Sky?

[metchampion]

I have no problem with Matchroom monopolising the promotional market in the UK, the problem we have had domestically for some time is when the promoter is also managing the fighters career effectively meaning they are unlikely to take the risks neccessary to appease the fans.

With George Groves its clear Booth is the manager, and it's Eddie Hearns job to sell him to the wider audience. Is he likely to be quite as worried about Groves suffering a loss aiming against high competition, no. is he likely to be happy with Groves plodding along beating average standard euro fighters, no... so they work to find a happy middle = better for the fans on paper.

e.g Quigg - Frampton

Frampton is not managed by Eddie Hearn, solely promoted.
Quigg managed by Hatton?

so if he Quigg were to join Matchroom is Eddie going to suffer with a loss to either fighter? not likely as much as if the 2 were to continue to avoid each other in my opinion.

Promoters should promote and managers manage, not a combination of the 2. Will this happen... or was this just a fantasy rambling post .... maybe.

[whiskey]

The "any old junk out of thin air" was an article in the Guardian on Friday entitled "Eddie Hearn looks likely to sign boxer from allegedly's stable". My criticism is also of Groves, not Hearn.

I don't have a personal agenda and I certainly don't have an allegiance to FW. I am shocked that you seem to not think it is an issue for a boxer to sign for a different fight, leaving his own fans in the lurch.

If you read the thread you will see that I do offer an opinion and it's not one coded with lines like "unless other facts come out" when no facts at all have come out yet, other than he's off the bill on March 16.

Hearn was going to announce the signing of Groves at a media day in 2011, but Booth did a deal with Warren the morning he was going to sign with Hearn, nothing to do with Golden Boy US deal, which was only really an offshoot of Haye's deal with Golden Boy.

Well fair enough then Gobbles.

On a seperate note , but entirely relevant, is that apparently Vasquez is 100% off and either Walsh will get the nod or he shall be pulled altogether.

Now the office is open, hopefully their PR address the punters who are wondering if its even on or not - and to address these rumours as either myth or fact.

[SamWise72]

Leaving the promotional stable issues out of it, this is the second time Groves has welshed on a fairly big fight (the last one being the fake back injury when he hoped he could get a Sturm fight). What it tells us as fans, and presumably potential future opponents and I would imagine promoters is that Groves' signature on something only indicates that he's reasonably willing to participate if he doesn't get a better offer. This tarnishes him quite a lot for me.

[gobbles]

The "any old junk out of thin air" was an article in the Guardian on Friday entitled "Eddie Hearn looks likely to sign boxer from allegedly's stable". My criticism is also of Groves, not Hearn.

I don't have a personal agenda and I certainly don't have an allegiance to FW. I am shocked that you seem to not think it is an issue for a boxer to sign for a different fight, leaving his own fans in the lurch.

If you read the thread you will see that I do offer an opinion and it's not one coded with lines like "unless other facts come out" when no facts at all have come out yet, other than he's off the bill on March 16.

Hearn was going to announce the signing of Groves at a media day in 2011, but Booth did a deal with Warren the morning he was going to sign with Hearn, nothing to do with Golden Boy US deal, which was only really an offshoot of Haye's deal with Golden Boy.

Well fair enough then Gobbles.

On a seperate note , but entirely relevant, is that apparently Vasquez is 100% off and either Walsh will get the nod or he shall be pulled altogether.

Now the office is open, hopefully their PR address the punters who are wondering if its even on or not - and to address these rumours as either myth or fact.

If they knew Burns-Vazquez was off, then fair enough, because he has every right to work. Obviously when all this came out, that wasn't widely known.