BoxRec

thechump wrote:I cant stand him,hate the way he starts going on about fights from the past halfway through a fight that has nothing in common with the fight from the past,he is a blurt

NAILED IT!!!! That's what he does. rather than FFUCKING comment on the action in front of him, the lazy no mark, as soon as the fight starts starts growling, and forcing the name of a fighter while talking about fights from the past......than at the end of a fight for an encore it is "its a great night for boxing".

The ffucking name forcing is so annoying I want to kick him in the face. Chisora becomes CHISOOOOARAAAA........Badou jack became BADOOOOO Jack.......awful and with froch next to him its twice as awful..........now jim watt has gone.........sky boxing commentary is the worst sports commentary in history

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:
He's awful. Knowledge is not enough - as a presenter you need presenting skills, not talk like uncle Paulie's robot in Rocky 4. And sky sports is not for the hardcore fan anyway, more the casual.

Ed Robinson is top quality

The trouble with modern day sports presenters is they're all style and no substance. Ed brings gravitas, knowledge and passion to the role. His delivery style may be low key but that's what most people want, not the screeching, vacuous, fish out of water horror show delivered by that bint on Saturday night.

Yes he is. If there was any credibility to SKY ed robinson would be running it. He is knowledgable, professional, a trained journalist.......and he has actually boxed in the ring........his delivery is great . Clear and concise. Unlike the growling,name forcing, face pulling Mr Bean of boxing Adam Smith

love is better than hate

Bricks wrote:

thechump wrote:I cant stand him,hate the way he starts going on about fights from the past halfway through a fight that has nothing in common with the fight from the past,he is a blurt

NAILED IT!!!! That's what he does. rather than FFUCKING comment on the action in front of him, the lazy no mark, as soon as the fight starts starts growling, and forcing the name of a fighter while talking about fights from the past......than at the end of a fight for an encore it is "its a great night for boxing".

The ffucking name forcing is so annoying I want to kick him in the face. Chisora becomes CHISOOOOARAAAA........Badou jack became BADOOOOO Jack.......awful and with froch next to him its twice as awful..........now jim watt has gone.........sky boxing commentary is the worst sports commentary in history

I hate the way he says jab as jaaaaaab

boxingknockout wrote:

Bricks wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:
Ed Robinson is top quality

The trouble with modern day sports presenters is they're all style and no substance. Ed brings gravitas, knowledge and passion to the role. His delivery style may be low key but that's what most people want, not the screeching, vacuous, fish out of water horror show delivered by that bint on Saturday night.

Yes he is. If there was any credibility to SKY ed robinson would be running it. He is knowledgable, professional, a trained journalist.......and he has actually boxed in the ring........his delivery is great . Clear and concise. Unlike the growling,name forcing, face pulling Mr Bean of boxing Adam Smith

You are either his pal or his PR rep. Clear and concise? A high pitch monotone and unnatural Affected body language. Just awful. And he is not a trained journalist.i think I might even prefer Geand National favourite Ron Macintosh

Ron does it with enthusiasm. Robinson is so poor as a presenter that it's unbelievable.

Ronald Macintosh is also top class. He knows the game and I find his eccentric style quite entertaining.

I could happily while away an hour listening to Ed and Ronald talk boxing.

love is better than hate

Kro wrote:

I must admit that Adam Smith's mannerisms often made me think of Kenneth Williams. If only there was a boxer with the surname of Matron who then produced a stunning ko of the year punch whilst Smith was commentating....Ohhh Matronnn!

I agree with others that Ed Robinson is an asset for Sky.

boxingknockout wrote:

Bricks wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:
Ed Robinson is top quality

The trouble with modern day sports presenters is they're all style and no substance. Ed brings gravitas, knowledge and passion to the role. His delivery style may be low key but that's what most people want, not the screeching, vacuous, fish out of water horror show delivered by that bint on Saturday night.

Yes he is. If there was any credibility to SKY ed robinson would be running it. He is knowledgable, professional, a trained journalist.......and he has actually boxed in the ring........his delivery is great . Clear and concise. Unlike the growling,name forcing, face pulling Mr Bean of boxing Adam Smith

You are either his pal or his PR rep. Clear and concise? A high pitch monotone and unnatural Affected body language. Just awful. And he is not a trained journalist.i think I might even prefer Geand National favourite Ron Macintosh

Hey pal get your mouth off Adam smiths knob and wake up and smell the coffee

love is better than hate

TheLeprechaun wrote:Anyone else find his facial expressions extremely cringworthy and creepy?

Nicky Piper's were worse when he filled in as main presenter

Always liked it with Jim Rosenthal, Reg Gutteridge and Jim Watt covering the boxing. And then Paul Dempsey, Ian Darke and Jim Watt. Everything seemed more professional, relaxed and without affectation.

Got used to these guys and therefore found it hard to accept the over the top delivery by HBO and Showtime, the egos on display, the overload of information, the eccentricities, the endless references to something called rock em sock em robots and beards and colour commentators speaking gibberish - when I started collecting tapes of fights.

(There was a wonderful moment when ITV were using either an HBO or Showtime broadcast, with captions saying fighter A must "use the jab", "build points" and "set up the right hand" and Reg laughed it off saying "well, that's a bit obvious isn't it?")


I'm not offended by Smith and co the way others are. Rawling and his positivity towards FW fighters always turned me straight off. Back to Smith, the growling thing has been an issue since around 2008 and Glyn Leach was the first to write about it in his editorial for Boxing Monthly. We know the world has changed and obviously the worst of it is in the last ten years what they're saying is clearly filtered, they're projecting a certain image more than ever, they're using more key words, they're far less inclined to say something honest or negative. Just more more positive, careful and euphemistic.

I wanted to smash my telly the other night when he started listing past trilogies but inexplicably making them plural, "your gatti wards, morales barreras, marquezes pacquiaos..."

Does Adam read this? So everyone knows he is a turd...

Supremo wrote:I wanted to smash my telly the other night when he started listing past trilogies but inexplicably making them plural, "your gatti wards, morales barreras, marquezes pacquiaos..."

That's kind of how Naz used to talk, "yer 'aglers, yer Leonards "

I hate horrible grammar

Autobarn wrote:

Supremo wrote:I wanted to smash my telly the other night when he started listing past trilogies but inexplicably making them plural, "your gatti wards, morales barreras, marquezes pacquiaos..."

That's kind of how Naz used to talk, "yer 'aglers, yer Leonards "

I hate horrible grammar

At least Naz has an excuse- he's an ill educated young man from Sheffield. Smith probably had a £20k a year private schooling and still talks like an utter bellend.

boxingknockout wrote:

Bricks wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:

You are either his pal or his PR rep. Clear and concise? A high pitch monotone and unnatural Affected body language. Just awful. And he is not a trained journalist.i think I might even prefer Geand National favourite Ron Macintosh

Hey pal get your mouth off Adam smiths knob and wake up and smell the coffee

Bizarre post - are you Ed's wife??! If you looked at my earlier posts you would see what I think about the sperm-gargling smith. Your obsession with Robinson in numerous posts leads me to be very suspicious

I don't think you will find many who think poorly of Ed Robinson, Adam Smith on the other hand........

Love is better than hate

TheLeprechaun wrote:Anyone else find his facial expressions extremely cringworthy and creepy?

The man basically looks like he suffered many strokes and has a facial expression like a melting candle pretty much 24/https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl= ... mrc&uact=8

boxingknockout wrote:

Bricks wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:

You are either his pal or his PR rep. Clear and concise? A high pitch monotone and unnatural Affected body language. Just awful. And he is not a trained journalist.i think I might even prefer Geand National favourite Ron Macintosh

Hey pal get your mouth off Adam smiths knob and wake up and smell the coffee

Bizarre post - are you Ed's wife??! If you looked at my earlier posts you would see what I think about the sperm-gargling smith. Your obsession with Robinson in numerous posts leads me to be very suspicious

nice comeback mate bought a smile to my face

being totally honest? i like eds presenting style,hes almkst an old school bbc journalist,he boxed whats not to like ?.....more than that a few years ago he sent me some free boxong memorabilia for a sick relative...so yes i think hes an all round good guy....not saying your girlfriend smith isnt....but he stinks as a commentaor and boxing head guy....i actually like smiths style as,a man...hes climbed to the top and hes probably left bodies along the way...he showed real balls standing up to chisora and taking the table on the head

some great posts here on page 3

i had no idea glyn leach started the bringing up smiths growling....i thought it were me who started it!!!? only it was mcrory i highlighted as being the growling forced delivery pioneer bavk in the 90s than smith and johhny bellson took it to a new level....and frochs a bit of a growler too now

It amuses me that they hired Froch as a pundit, this is the same bloke a few years back who admitted on a Sky Sports interview that he isn't a boxing fan and rarely watches it, so Sky hire him as an expert.

For me Alex Steedman is the best around at the minute. Knows his stuff and doesn't say to much. Also his enthusiasm and excitement shine through. He seems to appreciate every fight he's ringside for.
Andy Clarke is class aswell and under-used. His knowledge is the best around and he has zero byism. Talks about BN fighters during sky fights and vice-versa.

Steedman is a proper journalist like a Rosenthal.

He doesn't answer his own questions or put words in the interviewees mouths like the nauseating Smith and his" our world champions" drivel that ensures no critical question will ever be asked and the company line will be towed.....so that we get fed shhiiite like Harrison-haye or haye-bellew is a competitive superfight.......

i dont like steedman, he smiles too much and he's a bit too golf club for me.