Page 3 of 4

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 12:32
by ElJefe
stevedoc wrote:Even Floyd wasn't that well known compared to say the fab four or Tyson yet he got 200 million in his last year , Bruno for instance was a much bigger name/star than AJ is yet but he could well cross over with a couple of appearance's on graham Norton
I've thought this a few times. AJ speaks well on camera, surprised his team haven't tried to get him on TV more. Think Jonathan Ross has had the likes of Froch and Khan on. Even a 5 minute segment and a highlight reel would probably do the trick.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 12:33
by reggaereggae
Just in case posters don't know, Carl Froch knocked out Georges Groves in front of 80,000 people at Wembley :bag: :box:

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 12:45
by expe
mickey1975 wrote:I know for a fact we have bigger audiences for white collar charity boxing here than either York Knights Pro RL or York RU get.
The whole attendance argument doesn't really work anyway, more people attend church each week than football matches. That doesn't mean that religion is more popular than football.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 12:58
by mickey1975
expe wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:I know for a fact we have bigger audiences for white collar charity boxing here than either York Knights Pro RL or York RU get.
The whole attendance argument doesn't really work anyway, more people attend church each week than football matches. That doesn't mean that religion is more popular than football.
Worldwide, it is.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 14:19
by the_doctor
mickey1975 wrote:
expe wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:I know for a fact we have bigger audiences for white collar charity boxing here than either York Knights Pro RL or York RU get.
The whole attendance argument doesn't really work anyway, more people attend church each week than football matches. That doesn't mean that religion is more popular than football.
Worldwide, it is.
And as a Newcastle fan, believe me, religion can be a lot more entertaining too...

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 16:17
by rd350lc
mickey1975 wrote:
rd350lc wrote:
mickey1975 wrote: Like Ricky Hatton and David Beckham?
:clap:

I grant you David Beckham because he courted publicity and loves being a media whore , don't know if too many non boxing fans would know who Ricky Hatton is though.
I must mix in different circles to you. Everybody knows Ricky. He was a true crossover star built exclusively on Sky.
you must do cos most folk I know don't have or never have had Sky tv.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 16:20
by mickey1975
Did you ever watch Hatton box?

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 16:51
by rd350lc
mickey1975 wrote:Did you ever watch Hatton box?
unfortunately as he was on Sky , no I missed most of his career , I heard he was a devastating body puncher .

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 17:05
by mickey1975
rd350lc wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:Did you ever watch Hatton box?
unfortunately as he was on Sky , no I missed most of his career , I heard he was a devastating body puncher .
You've basically missed out on every decent fighter for 20 years? Are there pubs in your area or other people with Sky?

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 20 Mar 2016, 17:16
by rd350lc
mickey1975 wrote:
rd350lc wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:Did you ever watch Hatton box?
unfortunately as he was on Sky , no I missed most of his career , I heard he was a devastating body puncher .
You've basically missed out on every decent fighter for 20 years? Are there pubs in your area or other people with Sky?
I know it really hacked me off at the time, It gutted me that a sport I loved was being lost to mainstream tv , I did actually see him beat Tszyu for the title at a mates ,but that was about it and I would never watch any sport in a pub again, tried it a couple times and there were too many gob$hites for me saying how they would do this and that ,same goes for footy , loads of wannabe world cup winners that have never kicked a ball in their life slating decent players.

just glad there are other ways to watch now

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 21 Mar 2016, 05:25
by Ricky_
Boxerbeetle wrote: Dan Rafael tweeted it out as well. In fact, the figure has been widely quoted across various media streams since the week after the fight, I don't see the need to seek a conspiracy in it.



C'mon mate you don't seriously believe that PPV sold 400k!?

There's only 26,000,000 households in the UK. That's 1.5% of all uk homes from north of Scotland to Cornwall, from Londonderry to Swansea, forked out £20 to Sky for Joshua vs Dillian Whyte!? :lol:

1.5% of households... That would put it on the same per-capita as Mayweather v Canelo in the US which is 1 of the records.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 21 Mar 2016, 14:41
by the_doctor
Ricky_ wrote:
Boxerbeetle wrote: Dan Rafael tweeted it out as well. In fact, the figure has been widely quoted across various media streams since the week after the fight, I don't see the need to seek a conspiracy in it.



C'mon mate you don't seriously believe that PPV sold 400k!?

There's only 26,000,000 households in the UK. That's 1.5% of all uk homes from north of Scotland to Cornwall, from Londonderry to Swansea, forked out £20 to Sky for Joshua vs Dillian Whyte!? :lol:

1.5% of households... That would put it on the same per-capita as Mayweather v Canelo in the US which is 1 of the records.
Presumably those numbers include all the various pubs/bars/clubs who were showing it too

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 21 Mar 2016, 16:26
by bbjc
Its eddie hearn hype. Hes been saying for as long as i remember how big joshua is. Huge numbers etc. Its part of the sales pitch. The more he says it the more people start to buy into it. And the more likely he will become massive eventually.

Good promoting on eddies part. But dont believe hes nearly as big as he likes to make out at the minute tho.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 21 Mar 2016, 16:59
by Oiky
i think passengers on the AJ hype train have been getting off more and more lately

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 21 Mar 2016, 18:41
by whiskey
If sponsors were chocolate bars, AJ would be Willy Wonka.

What next, #StayHumble punchbag & gloves set in Argos ? Next to the weider weight bench range.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 22 Mar 2016, 09:45
by Happy Slapper
Boxing's bigger than most on here make out. The highest paid athlete in the world for the last X amount of years is a welterweight boxer. Ricky Hatton took thousands to Vegas. It'll never have the cult following a team sport has because that's human nature, but it's doing fine.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 22 Mar 2016, 10:57
by asdfjkl
Ricky_ wrote:
Boxerbeetle wrote: Dan Rafael tweeted it out as well. In fact, the figure has been widely quoted across various media streams since the week after the fight, I don't see the need to seek a conspiracy in it.



C'mon mate you don't seriously believe that PPV sold 400k!?

There's only 26,000,000 households in the UK. That's 1.5% of all uk homes from north of Scotland to Cornwall, from Londonderry to Swansea, forked out £20 to Sky for Joshua vs Dillian Whyte!? :lol:

1.5% of households... That would put it on the same per-capita as Mayweather v Canelo in the US which is 1 of the records.
To me that sounds fair, and TBH I can't name at least 70% of the UK footballers who receive over 5 million a year, can you?

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 22 Mar 2016, 18:59
by Sklar
A lot of people don't have Sky and are too busy to give a fornicate about sports. A lot of people are the opposite. So it's perfectly reasonable that a guy can be a huge star and still be a non-entity to billions. I couldn't name a half dozen current premier division soccerers for example.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 22 Mar 2016, 19:07
by Offal
G0mez wrote:StayHumble punchbag & gloves set in Argos ?
:lol:

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 22 Mar 2016, 19:08
by Offal
bbjc wrote:But dont believe hes nearly as big as he likes to make out at the minute tho.
People's champ :TU:

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 24 Mar 2016, 07:29
by mickey1975
AJ had a two part double spread interview over two days in The Sun the week with large photos of him on the back page advertising it. Considering the first interview was mainly about crime, bail, drug dealing whilst on the GB squad and starting training in case he got jail, Steven Howard put an amazingly positive spin on it. The same guy who crucified Fury for one of the best wins ever by a British boxer. I can see me falling out with people acknowledging AJ as a world champ.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 24 Mar 2016, 07:34
by Nightmare Roy
mickey1975 wrote:AJ had a two part double spread interview over two days in The Sun the week with large photos of him on the back page advertising it. Considering the first interview was mainly about crime, bail, drug dealing whilst on the GB squad and starting training in case he got jail, Steven Howard put an amazingly positive spin on it. The same guy who crucified Fury for one of the best wins ever by a British boxer. I can see me falling out with people acknowledging AJ as a world champ.
He's not a champ until he beats either Fury or Wilder IMO. He does that fair play to him.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 24 Mar 2016, 07:35
by SNG
Nightmare Roy wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:AJ had a two part double spread interview over two days in The Sun the week with large photos of him on the back page advertising it. Considering the first interview was mainly about crime, bail, drug dealing whilst on the GB squad and starting training in case he got jail, Steven Howard put an amazingly positive spin on it. The same guy who crucified Fury for one of the best wins ever by a British boxer. I can see me falling out with people acknowledging AJ as a world champ.
He's not a champ until he beats either Fury or Wilder IMO. He does that fair play to him.
Why Wilder? He has the same title as Martin for me.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 24 Mar 2016, 07:39
by crusader
Boxerbeetle wrote:
Ricky_ wrote:
Boxerbeetle wrote:
Hearn confirmed Joshua v Whyte sold around 400k on an IFL interview. He never usually confirms numbers, but he was clearly over the moon with those figures so was happy to talk about them.

And is anyone gullible enough to believe him?

Back in a minute, just got an email from Nigeria. Something about an inheritance.
Dan Rafael tweeted it out as well. In fact, the figure has been widely quoted across various media streams since the week after the fight, I don't see the need to seek a conspiracy in it.
Anyone know Rafael's source (I think he just wrote something like 'Ive been told', and then the claim really seemed to take off)? Could it have been a case of the media largely just rereporting from him?

I wouldn't put it pst someone to fudge numbers when they are hyping someone as the PPV second coming, but then again AJ does seem cut out for stardom.

Re: Anthony Joshua not the big name we are led to believe

Posted: 24 Mar 2016, 12:53
by Nightmare Roy
SNG wrote:
Nightmare Roy wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:AJ had a two part double spread interview over two days in The Sun the week with large photos of him on the back page advertising it. Considering the first interview was mainly about crime, bail, drug dealing whilst on the GB squad and starting training in case he got jail, Steven Howard put an amazingly positive spin on it. The same guy who crucified Fury for one of the best wins ever by a British boxer. I can see me falling out with people acknowledging AJ as a world champ.
He's not a champ until he beats either Fury or Wilder IMO. He does that fair play to him.
Why Wilder? He has the same title as Martin for me.
Kinda but he's had a few defences, to be the daddy though he or anyone else have to beat the Gypsy King!