BoxRec

Terry D wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:It's not an excuse, I agree. But where has all this Witter love come from?
It seems to be rife in the forums but when it comes to getting bums on seats he is one of our most unattractive propositions?

Good fighter, I agree. But so is Ricky Hatton. To many on here he seems to be nothing short of a bum. Rubbish record, terrible attitude, battered by Floyd, disrespected.

Anyone know why? You're right, I'll not comment on this subject again, it's too frustrating.

Its not Witter love, it's British Boxing love (in my case anyway).

I agree that Hatton is an excellent fighter, but his attitude has to come under question considering he continually refuses this fight

Here is the interview Chambers, Witter stuff is at the end. Stuff in quotes is Hatton's, stuff not in quotes is mine, wouldn't want to deliberately mislead anyone just to get a response

Ou est le URL?

Great stuff, and I totally agree with this:

"Certainly, a fight with Witter straight after the KO loss to Floyd would be crazy; instead the onus is on Witter to continue his remarkable run of form. With his next fight a possibility for US TV Junior's profile will be raised to the extent that the fight with Hatton becomes a must for the American, as well as British, networks, and the fans will put out the call."

Terrific interview mate.

Captain Hook wrote:Great stuff, and I totally agree with this:

"Certainly, a fight with Witter straight after the KO loss to Floyd would be crazy; instead the onus is on Witter to continue his remarkable run of form. With his next fight a possibility for US TV Junior's profile will be raised to the extent that the fight with Hatton becomes a must for the American, as well as British, networks, and the fans will put out the call."

Terrific interview mate.

Forget the YANKS!

HATTON MADE $20M

Not as if he needs the money?, Hatton has some die hard fans who accept any old bullocks he says!

$20M?

Hatton has a good $100M in the bank.

You been reading his statements again have you?

STP wrote:$20M?

Hatton has a good $100M in the bank.

No he hasn't. There's no way he's made £50,000,000.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

STP wrote:$20M?

Hatton has a good $100M in the bank.

No he hasn't. There's no way he's made £50,000,000.

I thought he made $35,000,000 to $40,000,000 in total after the PBF. I read this on seconds out I think.

It's believable as the merchanising sold better than DLH v PBF. It was insane. Inxclude inflated Team Hatton tickets, 800,000 US buys and 800,000 UK buys. All adds up.

Didn't he make £6m from his WBU reign as well?

I thought he made 4 million in total prior to fighting Tszyu. Don't remember what the purse was for Tszyu, but it wasn't big, as Tszyu was being given a huge payday.

Let's say what, maybe 10 million for all his fights post that combined?

Actually thinking about it, maybe 50 million dollars isn't far off the mark.

Ricky Hatton wrote:I'm not saying I'll never fight him but he is not on the radar at the minute.

I think Oliverfennel should apologize for this misleading thread.

Horse wrote:

Ricky Hatton wrote:I'm not saying I'll never fight him but he is not on the radar at the minute.

I think Oliverfennel should apologize for this misleading thread.

How is it a misleading thread, Hatton doesn't seem to have much intention of fighting JW from where I'm sitting

Chambers2 wrote:

Horse wrote:

Ricky Hatton wrote:I'm not saying I'll never fight him but he is not on the radar at the minute.

I think Oliverfennel should apologize for this misleading thread.

How is it a misleading thread, Hatton doesn't seem to have much intention of fighting JW from where I'm sitting

I only posted a link. If the article is wrong, then the author should apologise, not me. But as it stands, how can anybody say "Hatton won't fight Witter" and be asked to apologise? Until he DOES fight Witter, then we're right, aren't we?

If Hatton retires having never fought Witter, then I can understand the frustration that might make someone whine on a boxing forum, but the fact of matter is that Hatton is still an active boxer and it's in his best interests to fight Witter sooner rather than later, right?

Terry D wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:

Chambers2 wrote: How is it a misleading thread, Hatton doesn't seem to have much intention of fighting JW from where I'm sitting

I only posted a link. If the article is wrong, then the author should apologise, not me. But as it stands, how can anybody say "Hatton won't fight Witter" and be asked to apologise? Until he DOES fight Witter, then we're right, aren't we?

"Never say never" means it is not "won't (as in ever)" per se. I think he is going with the Bartleby "I prefer not to" line right now

The last time I heard the words "Never say never", it was from the mouth of a fiftysomething Sean Connery. I hope Witter is still a bit younger than that by the time Hatton decides to prove us wrong.

Chambers2 wrote:How is it a misleading thread, Hatton doesn't seem to have much intention of fighting JW from where I'm sitting

It does not matter what his intentions are, the title of this thread stated that Hatton said that he would never fight Witter, which it turns out was not the case.

oliverfennell wrote:I only posted a link. If the article is wrong, then the author should apologise, not me.

You decided to title the thread "Hatton says he will never fight Witter" when there is no quote in the article from Hatton saying such a thing.

oliverfennell wrote:But as it stands, how can anybody say "Hatton won't fight Witter" and be asked to apologise? Until he DOES fight Witter, then we're right, aren't we?

No, you are not right when you start making up quotes and attributing them to others.

Horse wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:How is it a misleading thread, Hatton doesn't seem to have much intention of fighting JW from where I'm sitting

It does not matter what his intentions are, the title of this thread stated that Hatton said that he would never fight Witter, which it turns out was not the case.

oliverfennell wrote:I only posted a link. If the article is wrong, then the author should apologise, not me.

You decided to title the thread "Hatton says he will never fight Witter" when there is no quote in the article from Hatton saying such a thing.

oliverfennell wrote:But as it stands, how can anybody say "Hatton won't fight Witter" and be asked to apologise? Until he DOES fight Witter, then we're right, aren't we?

No, you are not right when you start making up quotes and attributing them to others.

OK, so there weren't SHIFT-2 quote marks, but the ARTICLE said Hatton has "ruled out ever fighting" Witter. While a quote to back it up might be missing - although as I explained earlier I suspect there would have been a quote, but it was cut for space reasons - I'm sure Hatton's not going to be running to his lawyer to sue over the piece. Something is not "ruled out" by saying "never say never". Contrary to popular belief, journalists are not allowed to simply make up what they write. There will be evidence somewhere to back up the line, trust me.

If hatton had stated directly in interview that he would never fight Witter, then any jouro worth his salt would have put in quotation marks, simple as.

The use of the past tense would indicate they were inferring other interviews, otherwise they would have said.....

Ricky Hatton also ruled out, rather than 'had' or 'has' ruled out.

oliverfennell wrote:Not he won't fight him YET, as all the Hatton fanboys are so quick to point out. He will NEVER fight Witter. It's in the last sentence of this article:

Wrong!

No cookies for you

jamesmcdonnell wrote:If hatton had stated directly in interview that he would never fight Witter, then any jouro worth his salt would have put in quotation marks, simple as.

The use of the past tense would indicate they were inferring other interviews, otherwise they would have said.....

Ricky Hatton also ruled out, rather than 'had' or 'has' ruled out.

The journo worth his salt would have written the quote; it is the sub-editor who would have cut it out for space reasons.

Of course this is all speculation, but that's just what I think as someone in the business.

Goz wrote:

StepinFetchit wrote:

JDC wrote: Bag of dog shit

I think Goznold & Captain Cook are the same people, both knoobs.

Actually not, we roasted your mother so how can we be the same person?

There were 7 or 8 there James.....

That woman (animal) loves it up the nostril, it's like a blunderbuss now :)

Terry D wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:

Chambers2 wrote: How is it a misleading thread, Hatton doesn't seem to have much intention of fighting JW from where I'm sitting

I only posted a link. If the article is wrong, then the author should apologise, not me. But as it stands, how can anybody say "Hatton won't fight Witter" and be asked to apologise? Until he DOES fight Witter, then we're right, aren't we?

"Never say never" means it is not "won't (as in ever)" per se. I think he is going with the Bartleby "I prefer not to" line right now

LOL. Good one. It must be 20 years since I saw 'Bartleby'.