Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 05:58
How come Williams v Sexton fight and olympians are on a Saturday? The Fry v Cleverly undercard was woeful!
BoxRec
To Frank Maloney and Sky
Page 4 of 4
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 06:17
does the BBBofC have a mandate to make 'interesting' or 'good' fights? or is it to match the best qualified contender for the title? Not that Im saying that happens every time, but to exclude someone who has fought hard to get noticed, just because they dont mesh well with the champion... bit harsh IMO. As for Sky, if the fight is for the British or Commonwealth, bit hard not to show it... its a bit like saying 'this years FA Cup final wont be shown as we reckon its going to be a sh1t game'
Re: SKY - Who is responsible for screening this dross
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 07:12
This a very interesting post. I am not sure who boxingchat is but if I belive some of the so-called boxing experts on here you would have to belive that he is a mouthpiece of a major promoter and it cannot be Maloneys as we know he comes in under his own name as Hennessey Sports does. So we will leave it as a guessing game. As much as I might agree with soe of the comments on this post it stinks of a promotional team with sour grapes who would like to see nothing more than just themselves having all the action. But this is not good for boxing as we had this during the time of the Duff Monopoly and their operation folded when new kids came on the block. Fridays nights show was not one of the best but it was not the worst we have seen.boxingchat wrote:Am I alone in thinking that the quality of FFN has significantly diminished this season with
some of the most boring fights and poor quality undercards ever seen? In the last few FFN offerings we have suffered 36 rounds of complete dross, like being told Matthew Hatton and Lovemore N'dou was a world title fight and then on the 100th anniversary of the Lonsdale belt seeing two of the worst British title fights in living memory in Small/McDonagh and last nights hug-a-thon between Haskins and Broadhurst.
With the halls looking emptier by the week and the atmoshere likening a wake, can we as boxing fans really be satisfied with these shows? Are we getting our monies worth or are we being fed poor quality fights because Sky are giving OUR money to things like American Pool and the like? It seems to me that Prizefighter, which IMO has now been done to death and has become boring, is taking over from the real sport we love and the developement of tomorrows stars. I've said before that PF is entertaining but it is not real boxing. Would Sky put the Masters Football Tournamants in place of Super-Sunday Premier League Football, of course not so why are they messing with the boxing? Not one Prizefighter has matched up to the first one as now the fighters are tactically aware and as a result its just become dull. Has this polished up tough-man tournamant taken up all the FFN budget and/or made middle-league and has-been fighters inactive whilst awaiting a call from Mr Hearn for a shot at £32k.
Is there inactivity the cause of the poor foreigners we've seen? Has PF stopped fighters fighting their way back into contention or just packing it in, as many of them should? Either way the serious side of the sport is suffering as a result in my opinion.
There are lots of other factors to the demise of FFN and maybe all should be expalined buy the suits at Sky. Bring back Ringside too!
The introduction of Ricky Hatton as a promoter has been a farce and so far his first three shows have been less than up to scratch. After poor main events, we've had piss poor back up fights to fill a two-hour shot. Macklin went in one round, fair enough, but aren't we entitled to be entertained for the remaining 110 minutes as well? Last night for instance, God bless Martin Power, was equaly as dull. Whilst it's commendable that Frank Maloney has apologised for picking, not one but two, diabolical foreigners to be knocked over by his Olympians, please don't take this as a sincere sorry, after all aren't the records avaibable to study and cross reference on the very site he has chosen to hold his hands up on, this one!
One of his closest allies, Phillip Fondu no doubt got these bodies over and was asked by the Promoter for 'easy jobs' for his Olympic prospects. Didn't he check what he was getting for his money or, in reality, did he get exactly what he wanted and exactly what he paid for? Both the BBBC and the people at Sky could and should have checked these bums as well and said 'no thanks.' They have a responsibility to the sport and to us the fans too don't they. I hear the Newport show was poor and the main event was again supported by a flimsy undercard throughout Even in the front row people were talking, texting and sharing jokes, in fact doing anything but watch the boxing. If they don't want to watch it, what makes Sky think we do? For me, Maloney's apology was about as sincere as George Graham's. They both only apologised after they'd been caught out.
I can't work out just who is making the decisions at Sky and just who is vetting these fights.
Why has the policy changes and the quality suffered? Sure enough Haskins and Broadhurst was ordered by the Board so maybe Maloney can hide behind that fact, but he wanted the fight and he paid to promote it, did he really expect Benn V Eubank? Did Ricky Hatton not know that Small V McDonagh was probably the worst match that could possible be made in the whole of British Boxing, if not then perhaps Sky should seriously question if he knows what he is doing and also seriously question their own quality controller, if indeed such a person exists. Hatton might be a great fighter but outside the ropes he has alot to learn and his shows have been poor at best.
allegedly has been slaughtered on here for years, in fact it's become national pastime on Boxrec, but I feel sure a fight like HaskinsV Broadhurst would have been on a big show and surrounded by other championships or at the very least on a show with some depth, in the home town or at least one of the fighers to ensure an atmosphere, that's what promoting is all about. Last weeks PPV in Newcastle was good, sure Khan went in a round but no one expected it to, but the rest of the show was decent an Mitchell V Prescott was worthy of a FFN slot on it's own - so why did we have to pay extra for it?
Going back to my original question, someone, somewhere at Sky Sports needs to get a grip of
the Boxing programming as for the first time in a long time they have a monopoly on the sport, so why not build on it, who knows more people might turn on. There's lots of great prospects out there so why oh why do we want to watch PF tournaments every few weeks featuring guys who are past it or never acheived anything at their peak, it's a joke.
To their credit they do a great job of covering the sport and their production and preview stuff is second to none. Whilst Adam Smith can 'polish' many a turd the fact is most boxing fans know the turd is a turd long before the first bell, don't fool us we know more than you do!
Let's go back some years and we had many stars and many great fights and the PPV fights were special occasions with massive bills full of top quaity fights, remember Naz, Eubank and Calzaghe on the same bill?. So what's changed at Sky, the personnnel, the budget or are some promoters just not up to the job. How can super-shows work one day and not the next? Maybe fighters are being vastly overpaid now, I don't know but somethings gone wrong.
I agree that you get what you pay for and promoters are no doubt struggling, as are all business people and if the reason is that Sky have seriously cut budgets then I sympatjie with them all. However, the fact remains that my bill has not gone down and your bill hasn't gone down either so I am entitled to get the same quality that my money used to buy me, am I wrong?
Frank Maloney's apology adds insult to injury and only last week he was telling Anthony Small to refund the crowd at Wigan, as the Wigan football team did after their 9-1 humping, for his disgusting display against the equally disgusting Thomas McDonagh. Well Frank, the tables have now turned 360 so if your apology is sincere and you are a man of principle then perhaps YOU should refund the crowd at Newport for your sub-standard offering and give your fee back to Sky who could then re-invest it by buying some decent boxing to show to us long suffering fans.
I would like to find out just who at Sky is buying such poor fights and sanctioning so many weak supporting contests. I have read elsewhere on this forum a post by 26 who says that budgets have been cut and this is the reason for the declining quality but I can't help thinking that if his is the case then surely it is a false economy. I am sure like many of you that without boxing I probably wouldn't bother with Sky Sports and would rely on the pub or MOTD for my weekly football fix.
So let's hear from someone at Sky as to what the reason os for this. and if we get know explaantion then let's at least hope that the quality improves in 2010 and we can get back to the old days and looking forward to FFN.
We can only hope!
Merry Christmas and Adios!
I am sure the firm that this poster works for has delivered some bad shows. If we are to believe the rumours a certain promotional company no longer have a signed contract at Sky and have to go to Sky on a quality controlled show by show basis. Also rumours are that a certain promotional firm no longer have their Golden Goose Khan under contract if we believe in the write ups in the build up to his last fight so maybe this poster has an alternative motive to come on here attacking the promoters who have contracts with Sky for Friday Fight Night.
Out of Matchroom, Hennessey, Hatton, Sports Network and Maloney who would you say has delivered the worst shows over the last few years. If it is right that TV exercise quality control the winners of this can only be us the boxing fans and if boxing promoters fail to deliver TV should dump them. People who live in glass houses should not throw stones, things have a way of coming back and biting you.
Remember the Duff days and the days of the Mexican Road Sweepers .
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 07:45
Earlier on in this thread somebody put the boot in on Steve Bunce's live tour. As somebody who attended the one at the Irish centre in Leeds last month I have to respond...
It was a unique event and I'd definitely attend another. I took my dad and my girlfriend, and they loved it too - and my girlfriend knows absolutely nothing about the sport. The audience appeared to thoroughly enjoy it. We stayed until the very end, and I'm pretty certain that most if not all of the audience really enjoyed it too.
Yes, there was plenty of industrious language.
With regard to the personal attack on Bunce, along the lines of him believing he's the centre of attention etc, I'd say the following...
1. He took the pxxs out of himself pretty much all the night. Some of the funniest annecdotes were at his own expense.
2. The show had a lot of audience participation - he was chatting with the fans beforehand, during the break, and at several points in the show he had audience members up on stage for autographs, photo's etc.
3. The way he "bigged up" some local boxers, both amateur and pro, was something to be admired and I came away knowing more about the local fighters, in fact the first thing I did when I got back was get onto youtube to look up a local amateur's brilliant win over a lauded opponent. Bunce had them all up on stage, doing 1-2-1's with them. It was excellent stuff.
4. Having never been to the Irish centre before (it has several large rooms and it wasn't clear which one the event was taking place in), me and a few other fans wandered around the outside, trying to find out what was going on, as nothing was happening by the supposed start time. We bumped into Bunce who was round a corner, maybe ironing out one or two backstage issues. He took the time to chat to us, to explain what was going on, and that if we all waited in the bar area (out of the cold), he'd personally come over and lead us into the room where the event was to happen, so we'd know exactly where to go, and wouldn't miss anything, or spend half an hour wandering around. That day, my dad had been into hospital for an operation on his foot, and was on crutches, so the last thing I needed was to be wondering where we're meant to be. We got a drink in the bar and on cue, Bunce called everyone in. Okay its not the biggest, grandest gesture of goodwill ever, but I'd never been to the Irish centre before and its not bad going, when the host of the event himself says, "go sit in the bar lads, I'll come and get you myself so you don't miss anything".
5. During the event, when he found out that some people had to leave early to get a train back, he gave them some stuff (might have been DVDs) for free, to make up for them missing the end.
This was a unique event and it was more informative and revealing that a hundred after dinner speeches. I suppose to some people who've not attended, it might be considered a bit of an ego trip to take his show on the road but as far as I could tell everyone really enjoyed it from start to finish. He was down to earth, very, very funny and in no way did he come across as being full of his own self-importance. I loved it and would attend another
It was a unique event and I'd definitely attend another. I took my dad and my girlfriend, and they loved it too - and my girlfriend knows absolutely nothing about the sport. The audience appeared to thoroughly enjoy it. We stayed until the very end, and I'm pretty certain that most if not all of the audience really enjoyed it too.
Yes, there was plenty of industrious language.
With regard to the personal attack on Bunce, along the lines of him believing he's the centre of attention etc, I'd say the following...
1. He took the pxxs out of himself pretty much all the night. Some of the funniest annecdotes were at his own expense.
2. The show had a lot of audience participation - he was chatting with the fans beforehand, during the break, and at several points in the show he had audience members up on stage for autographs, photo's etc.
3. The way he "bigged up" some local boxers, both amateur and pro, was something to be admired and I came away knowing more about the local fighters, in fact the first thing I did when I got back was get onto youtube to look up a local amateur's brilliant win over a lauded opponent. Bunce had them all up on stage, doing 1-2-1's with them. It was excellent stuff.
4. Having never been to the Irish centre before (it has several large rooms and it wasn't clear which one the event was taking place in), me and a few other fans wandered around the outside, trying to find out what was going on, as nothing was happening by the supposed start time. We bumped into Bunce who was round a corner, maybe ironing out one or two backstage issues. He took the time to chat to us, to explain what was going on, and that if we all waited in the bar area (out of the cold), he'd personally come over and lead us into the room where the event was to happen, so we'd know exactly where to go, and wouldn't miss anything, or spend half an hour wandering around. That day, my dad had been into hospital for an operation on his foot, and was on crutches, so the last thing I needed was to be wondering where we're meant to be. We got a drink in the bar and on cue, Bunce called everyone in. Okay its not the biggest, grandest gesture of goodwill ever, but I'd never been to the Irish centre before and its not bad going, when the host of the event himself says, "go sit in the bar lads, I'll come and get you myself so you don't miss anything".
5. During the event, when he found out that some people had to leave early to get a train back, he gave them some stuff (might have been DVDs) for free, to make up for them missing the end.
This was a unique event and it was more informative and revealing that a hundred after dinner speeches. I suppose to some people who've not attended, it might be considered a bit of an ego trip to take his show on the road but as far as I could tell everyone really enjoyed it from start to finish. He was down to earth, very, very funny and in no way did he come across as being full of his own self-importance. I loved it and would attend another
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 07:46
Duff would match his fighters hard, when he needed to, to see what they had.
The Olympians will all win there next 15-20 bouts, probably mostly by stoppage. looks good on paper, but does it actually mean anything.
Atleast Frank M, had the courage to post here and front up his opinions, so credit him for that. Whether he is sincere or not, only time will tell. I think his resume, in taking risky fights, is by far and away far superior to Warren's. Promotors cant always get it right, to be fair. Although Maloney, is willing to go for it, every now and then.
Warren's approach to boxing is much more cynical, devious and motivated by totally the wrong reasons, hence why he gets so much stick, and rightly so.
The Olympians will all win there next 15-20 bouts, probably mostly by stoppage. looks good on paper, but does it actually mean anything.
Atleast Frank M, had the courage to post here and front up his opinions, so credit him for that. Whether he is sincere or not, only time will tell. I think his resume, in taking risky fights, is by far and away far superior to Warren's. Promotors cant always get it right, to be fair. Although Maloney, is willing to go for it, every now and then.
Warren's approach to boxing is much more cynical, devious and motivated by totally the wrong reasons, hence why he gets so much stick, and rightly so.
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 07:49
It's quite simple.bfchunk wrote:Props to FTMpress for responding throughout this topic. I feel a little more sympathy to the promotors from a budget point of view having read this.
I have no qualms at all for the Haskins - Broadhurst fight as it looked the right domestic fight to have in this division on paper.
I agree the format for Friday was good too. A lot of the interesting undercard fights though are missed. Those who subscribe sky could at least expect some "red button" service to see these.
I don't understand the digs to Hatton, I have found his bills to be pretty good in the main.
boxingchat is associated with Warren, Hatton had the cheek to leave Warren, Hatton = The spawn of the Devil.
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 08:11
This 'dapug' fella is a bit touchy! Ouch, raw nerve or what! I clearly pissed on his chips.
JimJim2009 thanks for the kind words.
The tour will be back next year with the complete history of the World Heavyweight title in 90 minutes - every champion since 1899 and every single challenger. It will start in March.
Adios.
JimJim2009 thanks for the kind words.
The tour will be back next year with the complete history of the World Heavyweight title in 90 minutes - every champion since 1899 and every single challenger. It will start in March.
Adios.
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 08:15
any chance of liverpool buncey
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 08:19
boxingchat is andy 'pandy' ayling. FW's glove puppet and FW's boxrec/internet voicebox. hiding under the umbrella of old piggy eyes himself.
boxingchat diss's hatton because he walked from FW, diss's maloney because he walked from FW, im surprised calzaghe and his lack of dance skills did not get a slating too !!
frank maloney has proven on this forum, in more ways thaan one, that he is a decent man of the people, he knows what the public want but realises its not easy to juggle that with being a pro boxing promoter and trying to look after the interests of his fighters whilst also ensuring that his own mortgage is paid. maloney effed up on friday, but he was man enough to take the rap and admit his shortcomings.
frank maloney will learn from it and so will we.
boxingchat diss's hatton because he walked from FW, diss's maloney because he walked from FW, im surprised calzaghe and his lack of dance skills did not get a slating too !!
frank maloney has proven on this forum, in more ways thaan one, that he is a decent man of the people, he knows what the public want but realises its not easy to juggle that with being a pro boxing promoter and trying to look after the interests of his fighters whilst also ensuring that his own mortgage is paid. maloney effed up on friday, but he was man enough to take the rap and admit his shortcomings.
frank maloney will learn from it and so will we.
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 09:51
I will state again props to Mr Maloney - tell me the last time a promoter was humble enough to go on record to take the rap like Maloney has - its rare indeed and Maloney needs to be applauded for it.
As for Jaffa - good performance and as the phrase goes all the lad can do is beat who is put in front of him.
With regards to the quality of Jaffa's opponents - I will ask the question - how confident is Maloney in Jaffa? - if he thinks he is going places we will see in the not too distant future him being appropriately matched!!!
As for Jaffa - good performance and as the phrase goes all the lad can do is beat who is put in front of him.
With regards to the quality of Jaffa's opponents - I will ask the question - how confident is Maloney in Jaffa? - if he thinks he is going places we will see in the not too distant future him being appropriately matched!!!
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 10:05
FtmPress wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKo3h6kDLBs
Is the main event fight going to be up loaded? Also did you record any of the undercard that was not shown?
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 11:40
Highlights on Sportsnight was much bigger profile than live on Sky
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 12:11
x2 also listened to glen mcorys comments thought i would look on box rec on his 13th fight he boxed some one who had 2 fights and won one glen ko in the firstSpud wrote:I will state again props to Mr Maloney - tell me the last time a promoter was humble enough to go on record to take the rap like Maloney has - its rare indeed and Maloney needs to be applauded for it.
As for Jaffa - good performance and as the phrase goes all the lad can do is beat who is put in front of him.
With regards to the quality of Jaffa's opponents - I will ask the question - how confident is Maloney in Jaffa? - if he thinks he is going places we will see in the not too distant future him being appropriately matched!!!
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 12:27
Agreedrhino222 wrote:
frank maloney has proven on this forum, in more ways thaan one, that he is a decent man of the people, he knows what the public want but realises its not easy to juggle that with being a pro boxing promoter and trying to look after the interests of his fighters whilst also ensuring that his own mortgage is paid.
.
Re: SKY - Who is responsible for screening this dross
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 12:44
Oh how dreadfully ironic...boxingchat wrote:Are we getting our monies worth or are we being fed poor quality fights
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 12:54
Fights will be up later this week on our sitetaffytoon wrote:FtmPress wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKo3h6kDLBs
Is the main event fight going to be up loaded? Also did you record any of the undercard that was not shown?
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 15:43
FtmPress wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKo3h6kDLBs
Fair play to frank which other promoters do you no would come out and say his made a mistake,
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 16:04
Boxingchat aka Andy Ayling is talked about here: http://www.teampalle.dk/composite-1517.htm
I can’t say too much more about Ayling except that he repeatedly tossed a drunken dwarf out of a hotel bar and into a cold and clammy London street back when I was propaganda minister for Don King. It might’ve been after Frank Bruno beat Ollie McCall. I think Ayling also has a bar fight victory over Herve Villachaize and maybe midget wrestlers Sky Low Low and Little Beaver.
He likes to pick on little guys yet he quivers whenever the diminutive but dangerous ex-Warren partner, Fearless Frank Maloney, is about.
Come to think of it, Ayling quite resembles a beaver especially with his Just Enlisted Marine style haircuts. When Andy tells he’s just been bowling he means he just got a haircut. You would think he would take the salad dressing and olive oil out of his hair but he’s far from the brightest lamp in Warren’s library.
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 17:40
Asterix wrote:Boxingchat aka Andy Ayling is talked about here: http://www.teampalle.dk/composite-1517.htm
I can’t say too much more about Ayling except that he repeatedly tossed a drunken dwarf out of a hotel bar and into a cold and clammy London street back when I was propaganda minister for Don King. It might’ve been after Frank Bruno beat Ollie McCall. I think Ayling also has a bar fight victory over Herve Villachaize and maybe midget wrestlers Sky Low Low and Little Beaver.
He likes to pick on little guys yet he quivers whenever the diminutive but dangerous ex-Warren partner, Fearless Frank Maloney, is about.
Come to think of it, Ayling quite resembles a beaver especially with his Just Enlisted Marine style haircuts. When Andy tells he’s just been bowling he means he just got a haircut. You would think he would take the salad dressing and olive oil out of his hair but he’s far from the brightest lamp in Warren’s library.
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 19:49
Just for the record, a few times it's been mentioned "look whom Lennox Lewis fought" in his first few:
Well- here - http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer Not Woirld beaters, by any means, but a far far higher calibre of opposition I'd say.
In his 5th fight Lewis was fighting a guy who had travelled over to Britain 2 years a before and beaten a former British and commonwealth champion (who would challenge for the belt again afterwards).
Well- here - http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer Not Woirld beaters, by any means, but a far far higher calibre of opposition I'd say.
In his 5th fight Lewis was fighting a guy who had travelled over to Britain 2 years a before and beaten a former British and commonwealth champion (who would challenge for the belt again afterwards).
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 13 Dec 2009, 22:37
Ah yeah, Melvin Epps, beat Trevor Currie at the alley pally.
That was an aweful fight for lenny at the Albert Hall, I think we went to the appollo pheonix in stratford after, jmain event Jimmy Mac got done by Azumah Nelson,
That was an aweful fight for lenny at the Albert Hall, I think we went to the appollo pheonix in stratford after, jmain event Jimmy Mac got done by Azumah Nelson,
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 14 Dec 2009, 06:33
There was a post of some Latvian 'pro' boxing from youtube on here a while back, commented on by Bob Mee which shows gym fights between novices to build records which can then be sold.FtmPress wrote:I am very sorry to all you boxing fans for the quality of Friday nights opponents if i had knowing there where that bad there no way we would have used them. We will not use Lavin opponents any more unless we can stand up their records. As for the title fight this was oder by the BBBof C.I have to take the full blame for the 3 opponents as i have the final word, all the boxers can do is go out there and fight who in front of them.
They wouldn't last with a solid Amatuer most of them.
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 16 Dec 2009, 16:12
When??FtmPress wrote:Fights will be up later this week on our sitetaffytoon wrote:FtmPress wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKo3h6kDLBs
Is the main event fight going to be up loaded? Also did you record any of the undercard that was not shown?
Re: To Frank Maloney and Sky
Posted: 20 Dec 2009, 13:47
Come on Frank get these fights uploaded mate