BoxRec

Isn't FW notoriously litigious, not to mention spiteful? I believe he had the Secondsout forum closed down and put a lot of pressure on this forum with the whole 'Allegedly' scenario.

I concur that BN are worried to criticize him, and are acting like a bullied child.

Didn't warren bar them from ringside at a show some years ago?

And Warren's column in the NOTW / now Sun is just propangada and criticism of any other fighters who are not with him.

I supsect with Warren so powerful, BN have to stayt on the right side of him

PS did anyone read Ernie Draper's butt-kissing 'interview' (Sports Network PR release....) in BN?
According to him, when asked who is the best P4P in the world, is it Joe - he answers "I don't think there's a promoter in the world who would have done as well for Joe as Frank. And without Ernie's (Fossey)early matchmaking he wouldn't be around."

Excellent...so now Joe's left SN we find out that if it wasn't for SN Joe would never have done anything in b oxing and would never have been heard about.

What dogshite.

DavidPayne wrote:I know fans dont care about business Ian. I'm justing saying, fans can bleat all they like, but they're working on an agenda almost entirely contrary to Warren. The only way to affect that agenda is not to watch, not to attend. And in the hands of fans Hatton would have been mauled in 2 rounds by Kostya Tszyu in 2001, I was making the point on padding a record. Can you really argue he got it wrong there?

F**k yeah! You must have a short term memory, because you wouldn't have said that if you didn't. It was unbelievably frustrating watching Hatton's fights for two or so years before he stepped in with Tszyu. It was a complete joke in fact. Anti-Hatton threads were a daily occurance on every boxing forum on the net, because people were so annoyed. Just because in hindsight Hatton beat Tszyu and has now gone on to make millions, it doesn't change the fact that FW and Team Hatton milked the dumb twats who were stupid enough to buy tickets to the crap that was being served up for all they could. allegedly is a boxing fans worst nightmare.

E wrote:PS did anyone read Ernie Draper's butt-kissing 'interview' (Sports Network PR release....) in BN?

Aye, what was all that about?!

Made me chuckle when Danny Flexen asked for a prospect and added..."not just Sports Network fighters though."

E wrote:Isn't FW notoriously litigious, not to mention spiteful? I believe he had the Secondsout forum closed down and put a lot of pressure on this forum with the whole 'Allegedly' scenario.

I concur that BN are worried to criticize him, and are acting like a bullied child.

Didn't warren bar them from ringside at a show some years ago?

Ok, come on now....

Have a think about those 3 sentences and see if you understand why its not unreasonable that Boxing News (A professional, commercial publication might not want to get sued by a vastly wealthy and litigious man, and have its ringside privileges taken away.

fornicate me, what is it with people on here these days, talk about a lack of perspective..

Are all you lot just aliases of Spud?

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

E wrote:Isn't FW notoriously litigious, not to mention spiteful? I believe he had the Secondsout forum closed down and put a lot of pressure on this forum with the whole 'Allegedly' scenario.

I concur that BN are worried to criticize him, and are acting like a bullied child.

Didn't warren bar them from ringside at a show some years ago?

Ok, come on now....

Have a think about those 3 sentences and see if you understand why its not unreasonable that Boxing News (A professional, commercial publication might not want to get sued by a vastly wealthy and litigious man, and have its ringside privileges taken away.

eff me, what is it with people on here these days, talk about a lack of perspective..

Are all you lot just aliases of Spud?

Somebody wanna shut this ladyboy up?

He used to be funny, now he's turned into a pudendum.

Harry Mullan @ BN used to let Duff and co have both barrels anytime they tried to take the piss with a prime time Bruno mismatch - ringside passes were duly taken away, and Mullan would fire off another editor's broadside, showing up Duff + co to be the spoiled brats they really were.
They soon backed down, and BN were back ringside, and all the better in the fan's eyes for it.
This bunch have their balls stuffed and hung over Frank's fireplace, like the good little PR boys they are.
They know their place, not much more than SN fanboys really.
Pathetic, no wonder their loyal readers go elsewhere, in the hope of actually reading a real opinion on the state of Brit boxing.

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

E wrote:Isn't FW notoriously litigious, not to mention spiteful? I believe he had the Secondsout forum closed down and put a lot of pressure on this forum with the whole 'Allegedly' scenario.

I concur that BN are worried to criticize him, and are acting like a bullied child.

Didn't warren bar them from ringside at a show some years ago?

Ok, come on now....

Have a think about those 3 sentences and see if you understand why its not unreasonable that Boxing News (A professional, commercial publication might not want to get sued by a vastly wealthy and litigious man, and have its ringside privileges taken away.

eff me, what is it with people on here these days, talk about a lack of perspective..

Are all you lot just aliases of Spud?

But a commercial organisation serves the people who buy its products not other operators in their industry who happen to be wealthy & litigious. As long as what is written is checked as being fair comment what's the problem?

If BN have already decided that it is of more commercial benefit to serve the interests of SN over their readers than vice versa they should either let Frank buy them out as a PR company (a la GBP & the Ring) or recognise they're on a downward spiral to obselescence.
If Claude doesn't believe that BN is important enough to stand up to industry figures and make the case for the readers it's no surprise that big companies will take the piss.

I should state that i haven't read the article as i stopped buying the magazine a few months ago because it's becoming less and less relevant.

Well my friday bathtime wouldn't be the same without reading BN, although i agree that Frank should of been challenged on the PPV , i also think that BN has steadily improved over the last year.
They have got some new faces in doing reports and features, which on the whole are usually well written and researched.

I cant get worked up about this issue because 1) i'm sober and 2) i have never held BN to be in particularly high esteem..

It is what it is, it reports the fights, reports out of date news and gives its mild opinions without ever wanting to offend anyone in boxing


If you want firebrand, Arthur Scargill, Ian effing Paisley "ITS A DISGRACE" style opinions, we have a whole internet dedicated (seemingly) to just that. Dont expect a commercial enterprise, with a lot to lose to be that was inclined

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:If you want firebrand, Arthur Scargill, Ian effing Paisley "ITS A DISGRACE" style opinions, we have a whole internet dedicated (seemingly) to just that. Dont expect a commercial enterprise, with a lot to lose to be that was inclined

Well, you've been worked up enough to post fairly frequently on the subject KG . As for opinion columns, they're a device used by everyone in publishing from the Daily Mail and The Economist through to Boxing Monthly and 4-4-2, all of whom, the last time I checked, were commercial enterprises with a lot to lose. I don't understand your point.

Ant Evans wrote:I look forward to my BN every Friday, but a little more bottle from some of the writers would be nice. In Feb as a sidebar to their coverage of the Haye v Enzo jailrape, they wrote that the o2 Arena (which is awesome and regarded as best venue in the world by everyone in the arena business) wasn't that great because there are no "big screens". I wrote in and pointed out it is the promoter, not to venue, who provide big screens and while Wazza doesn't go this extra mile for paying fans, other promoters do. I let them know UFC has SIX big screens when we go to the o2.

You'd think they would made a correction the week after, but they didn't.

I wouldn't worry too much about it Ant. I remember writing a personal mail to Claude at the time that Frank's 'big guns' were taking aim at the Seconds Out team over their forum content and subsequently getting it shut down. I tried to point out that I was in the same profession so recognised the legal and commercial pressures involved in covering the topic but nonetheless felt it newsworthy as genuine boxing fans were being silenced, but didn't even get an acknowledgement. I then sent a second mail pointing out that while I recognised it was a sensitive subject matter the least I'd expect from an editor is an acknowledgement, even if it contained a brief reason for not being able/prepared to cover it, especially as I was a BN subscriber at the time. Again, nothing. Unsurprisingly, I cancelled my subscription at that point.

I wouldn't worry too much about it Ant. I remember writing a personal mail to Claude at the time that Frank's 'big guns' were taking aim at the Seconds Out team over their forum content and subsequently getting it shut down. I tried to point out that I was in the same profession so recognised the legal and commercial pressures involved in covering the topic but nonetheless felt it newsworthy as genuine boxing fans were being silenced, but didn't even get an acknowledgement. I then sent a second mail pointing out that while I recognised it was a sensitive subject matter the least I'd expect from an editor is an acknowledgement, even if it contained a brief reason for not being able/prepared to cover it, especially as I was a BN subscriber at the time. Again, nothing. Unsurprisingly, I cancelled my subscription at that point.

Claude has a somewhat snobbish attitude to internet forums (as a lot of so called "real" journalists do), so I’m not surprised he didn’t reply, probably thought it was too insignificant.

On the subject of the Khan PPV, Daniel Herbert did the editorial last week, so if Abrams is back on Friday maybe he will comment on this VERY, VERY IMPORTANT issue, but I won’t hold my breath..............

Yes, all credit due to Mr Flexen for coming on, etc but even if I had time to work my way through the predominantly lame justifications, I couldn't be arsed. Lack of space, lack of time...it was a completely uncritical SIX page puff piece on Warren - and whether it was penned before the PPV doesn't stop other questions being asked. And if they were asked but avoided, the readership needs telling.

And Deserter has made almost all of my points for me, thank goodness. A PR piece of this nature has no place in BN - nothing does unless it's balanced and if anyone makes an argument that that piece was balanced, they are just plainly wrong.

As MW says, if BN are prepared to criticise FW, let's see it when it's warranted. The publication is obviously completely wary of them.

I know it's a pain in the arse having to deal with the unjustified phone calls from some people claiming unfairness or perhaps even threatening (usually) unjustified court action but that shouldn't mean the trade paper doesn't go in hard when it needs to.

As for the piece on BBN being 'rather tame', as Twinkle Toes said - I could have gone in much harder but I do have to be careful (as do BN but complete surrender isn't the way forward).

If I wrote 'Mr X is shite and has no chance of winning' one could argue it's fair comment but the promoter who brings said opponent over might argue that the statement implies he is ripping off the public, etc - and I would have to PROVE my statement was correct. This is very tenuous but it's a pain in the arse and occasionally costly.

Go and find something in the print media more scathing - that Birmingham Mail opinion piece was interesting, mind.

And has anyone noticed how BN uses its letters page to bring up the issues they editorially skirt around? Clever? Weak? YOU decide!

Credit young Mr Flexen however your arguments smack of someone recently employed who will argue black is white because it suits the boss - don't get me wrong totally understandable.

The FW article looked like a kiss arse job no more no less - people may have more respect if BN said so.

Contrast BN to BM where Glyn Leach seems to tell it like it is (Golden Boy article springs to mind) and there is no comparison

Regards

Kevin (Wrists)

Wrists: I stick up for what I believe is the truth, I doubt the "boss" even reads the forum and if he did, I'd be in no danger of the chop for giving my opinion. But I cannot make you agree with me so I simply state what I think as eloquently as I can.
As for the letters page, we print every letter we recieve unless the subject has been done to death or it's profane or possibly litigious. We reflect what the readers think in that sense, which is what you want us to do, there is no hidden stack of letters we do not publish.

MightyWarrior wrote:Pathetic, no wonder their loyal readers go elsewhere, in the hope of actually reading a real opinion on the state of Brit boxing.

Please tell me, where is this hallowed place?

Flexen -any ideas if Boxing News be commenting on the Khan PPV issue in their next (errr) issue?

Chambers, call me Danny, I don't mind. Not this Friday, no, but Claude may have something to say about it the following week. he's only just got back from leave so is not doing the column this week. Besides Degale's gold is a natural for the column this week.

dbflex wrote:Besides Degale's gold is a natural for the column this week.

How can you say that when (feel free to insert random name here), the great (insert random country here) fighter from (insert random bygone era here) has sadly passed away?

Lol, wait till you see the second page lead. You'll love it. A former European... wait, I don't want toi spoil it for you.

Deserter wrote:

dbflex wrote:Besides Degale's gold is a natural for the column this week.

How can you say that when (feel free to insert random name here), the great (insert random country here) fighter from (insert random bygone era here) has sadly passed away?

Funny you should say that:

http://www.fightnews.com/fightnews_2/he ... XpVec.html

dbflex wrote:Lol, wait till you see the second page lead. You'll love it. A former European... wait, I don't want toi spoil it for you.

oliverfennell wrote:

Deserter wrote:

dbflex wrote:Besides Degale's gold is a natural for the column this week.

How can you say that when (feel free to insert random name here), the great (insert random country here) fighter from (insert random bygone era here) has sadly passed away?

Funny you should say that:

http://www.fightviews.com/fightviews/he ... XpVec.html

Just tried the link but it's taking me to a holding page?

oliverfennell wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Pathetic, no wonder their loyal readers go elsewhere, in the hope of actually reading a real opinion on the state of Brit boxing.

Please tell me, where is this hallowed place?

The boxrec forums, of course! the new home of British boxing (and joyless, whinging, old women)

It's the damn software changing fight NEWS to fight VIEWS

Try this, but delete the spaces between fight and news

http://www.fight news.com/fight news_2/headlines//EkEAZVAVVZYdWXpVec.html