Page 4 of 5

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:03
by dondada
I like the way some bell end has just voted for Williams on points AFTER the verdict :lol:

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:04
by Dioufy
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:I like the way some bell end has just voted for Williams on points AFTER the verdict :lol:
fornicate you.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:04
by broomy7s
What an awful fight. Couldn't score most of the rounds would love to see the breakdown on the scorecards. Bet Enzo is regretting going down to light-heavyweight now after seeing those 2.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:05
by Baboon
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:I like the way some bell end has just voted for Williams on points AFTER the verdict :lol:
:lol:

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:05
by clintonmcphilbin
Baboon wrote:Eff Owoh and Conquest, they have no right to be fighting for a title. As much as I have absolutely no desire to see it Norton should get a rematch, that was a shameful decision.
dickinson or askin should fight next

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:06
by WestEndRiot
Well this is one robbery I won't be complaining about after taking Williams at 3/1 to win the fight! Hopefully that's the last we see of Norton on tv, nice fella I'm sure but possibly the most boring fighter I've ever seen.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:06
by leforge
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
Baboon wrote:Eff Owoh and Conquest, they have no right to be fighting for a title. As much as I have absolutely no desire to see it Norton should get a rematch, that was a shameful decision.
dickinson or askin should fight next
But they not promoted by the chuckle brothers!

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:06
by damianhucker1
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
damianhucker1 wrote:
clintonmcphilbin wrote: been after williams for a while. Turba made him luck silly.
My only concern with shane is if he can comfortably do 12 rounds , when he has been down to our gym he maybe doesnt look the fittest , although admittedly hes only been down in early prep for fights not just before , 6-8 weeks before etc so id guess hes fitter by fight night usually .
well he as fought and beat better guys then williams. And also he is fighting hastings rasini next week so if he beats him should he not get a shot as rasini as beat williams
Interesting way of looking at it , didnt realise rasani had beaten williams , id back shane to beat williams if hes as fit as should be but maybe shane will have to force the issue by beating someone also considered to be in contention for a shot such as dickinson , if tyrone wright can beat him then i see no reason why shane wouldnt .

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:09
by Craig14
The British Cruiserweight division was in a bad way before this fight with the champion not defending his title for nearly 2 years - now it really is in a bad way with a champion who throws 3 punches a round (2 less than Norton.)

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:10
by clintonmcphilbin
damianhucker1 wrote:
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
damianhucker1 wrote: My only concern with shane is if he can comfortably do 12 rounds , when he has been down to our gym he maybe doesnt look the fittest , although admittedly hes only been down in early prep for fights not just before , 6-8 weeks before etc so id guess hes fitter by fight night usually .
well he as fought and beat better guys then williams. And also he is fighting hastings rasini next week so if he beats him should he not get a shot as rasini as beat williams
Interesting way of looking at it , didnt realise rasani had beaten williams , id back shane to beat williams if hes as fit as should be but maybe shane will have to force the issue by beating someone also considered to be in contention for a shot such as dickinson , if tyrone wright can beat him then i see no reason why shane wouldnt .
well rhys davies was 7-0 when he knocked him out who as williams beat to get a shot danny couzens do me a favor

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:14
by damianhucker1
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
damianhucker1 wrote:
clintonmcphilbin wrote: well he as fought and beat better guys then williams. And also he is fighting hastings rasini next week so if he beats him should he not get a shot as rasini as beat williams
Interesting way of looking at it , didnt realise rasani had beaten williams , id back shane to beat williams if hes as fit as should be but maybe shane will have to force the issue by beating someone also considered to be in contention for a shot such as dickinson , if tyrone wright can beat him then i see no reason why shane wouldnt .
well rhys davies was 7-0 when he knocked him out who as williams beat to get a shot danny couzens do me a favor
davies was 5-0-1 , just double checked it , Timlin was 7-0

Is it not a possibility for shane to box ibbotson , i know their both with carl greaves so maybe he wouldnt be so keen , but i think shane beats him and on paper his record could boost shane a bit if that makes sense .

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:17
by Old bones Ian
I look forward to Bunce's boxing hour addressing another disgraceful decision in a British ring, or will it be glossed over??

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:21
by clintonmcphilbin
damianhucker1 wrote:
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
damianhucker1 wrote: Interesting way of looking at it , didnt realise rasani had beaten williams , id back shane to beat williams if hes as fit as should be but maybe shane will have to force the issue by beating someone also considered to be in contention for a shot such as dickinson , if tyrone wright can beat him then i see no reason why shane wouldnt .
well rhys davies was 7-0 when he knocked him out who as williams beat to get a shot danny couzens do me a favor
davies was 5-0-1 , just double checked it .

Is it not a possibility for shane to box ibbotson , i know their both with carl greaves so maybe he wouldnt be so keen , but i think shane beats him and on paper his record could boost shane a bit if that makes sense .
well shane as also beat timlin who was 7-0 when shane boxed him dean o'locklin who was 6'7 and 19 stone and beat nortons sparring partner chris keane in the abas. Am not saying shane deserves a shot but he does more then williams. I still think dickinson is the man to beat at cruiser and then askin

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:22
by clintonmcphilbin
Old bones Ian wrote:I look forward to Bunce's boxing hour addressing another disgraceful decision in a British ring, or will it be glossed over??
glossed am i the only one that thought allegedly wanted williams to win?

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:23
by jonp
The state of the cruisers in britain now probly matty askin deserves one the most but after him shane mcphilbin is as worthy as anyone else.
Id like to see Mcphilbin get one just for the fact he comes to row no matter what.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:26
by damianhucker1
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
damianhucker1 wrote:
clintonmcphilbin wrote: well rhys davies was 7-0 when he knocked him out who as williams beat to get a shot danny couzens do me a favor
davies was 5-0-1 , just double checked it .

Is it not a possibility for shane to box ibbotson , i know their both with carl greaves so maybe he wouldnt be so keen , but i think shane beats him and on paper his record could boost shane a bit if that makes sense .
well shane as also beat timlin who was 7-0 when shane boxed him dean o'locklin who was 6'7 and 19 stone and beat nortons sparring partner chris keane in the abas. Am not saying shane deserves a shot but he does more then williams. I still think dickinson is the man to beat at cruiser and then askin
yep i edited my post saying timlin was 7-0 , you obviously started your post before i had edited it . :TU:

Im sure youll agree that very soon shane needs to box some of those guys near the top of the rankings to earn a shot at the title , as although williams didnt earn a shot hes with the sons of allegedly so was going to always be in with more of a chance at getting his shot .
shane just needs maybe 2 or 3 good wins i think and then surely his chance will come .

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:29
by clintonmcphilbin
jonp wrote:The state of the cruisers in britain now probly matty askin deserves one the most but after him shane mcphilbin is as worthy as anyone else.
Id like to see Mcphilbin get one just for the fact he comes to row no matter what.
Thank you thats my point nearly all is fights av been on away shows and he will give u ur moneys worth. Not aving a pop at u damien but it annoys me when people say he should fight dickinson or askin b4 getting a shot at the title. Williams never shows money talks

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:30
by damianhucker1
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
jonp wrote:The state of the cruisers in britain now probly matty askin deserves one the most but after him shane mcphilbin is as worthy as anyone else.
Id like to see Mcphilbin get one just for the fact he comes to row no matter what.
Thank you thats my point nearly all is fights av been on away shows and he will give u ur moneys worth. Not aving a pop at u damien but it annoys me when people say he should fight dickinson or askin b4 getting a shot at the title. Williams never shows money talks
I think my above post that i did just before you did that one maybe says what i meant , its more to do with who williams is promoted by i think

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:33
by clintonmcphilbin
damianhucker1 wrote:
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
jonp wrote:The state of the cruisers in britain now probly matty askin deserves one the most but after him shane mcphilbin is as worthy as anyone else.
Id like to see Mcphilbin get one just for the fact he comes to row no matter what.
Thank you thats my point nearly all is fights av been on away shows and he will give u ur moneys worth. Not aving a pop at u damien but it annoys me when people say he should fight dickinson or askin b4 getting a shot at the title. Williams never shows money talks
I think my above post that i did just before you did that one maybe says what i meant , its more to do with who williams is promoted by i think
defo well am going to bed to calm down lol just hope now he gets dickinson or askin then divison can start to come alive.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 21 Oct 2011, 18:36
by damianhucker1
clintonmcphilbin wrote:
damianhucker1 wrote:
clintonmcphilbin wrote: Thank you thats my point nearly all is fights av been on away shows and he will give u ur moneys worth. Not aving a pop at u damien but it annoys me when people say he should fight dickinson or askin b4 getting a shot at the title. Williams never shows money talks
I think my above post that i did just before you did that one maybe says what i meant , its more to do with who williams is promoted by i think
defo well am going to bed to calm down lol just hope now he gets dickinson or askin then divison can start to come alive.
:TU:

Ill be there to show some support to shane next week , and also Nathan and Leigh , looking forward to it , not been to a pro show since froch vs dirrell .

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 22 Oct 2011, 06:11
by mahatma
williams luckiest fighter to win a british title in recent times- never the less well done to him ..i scored it 9 rounds to 3 to norton but it was a dreadfulfight liked williams bob and weaving but he threw only single shots for the first 9 rounds doubt whether he threw more than a couple a round more lively in the last 3 rounds

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 22 Oct 2011, 07:18
by Buncey
Why would I gloss over it? Did I gloss over it after the fight? I've never glossed over it - from being banned by the ABA in the late 80s to being banned by Duff ... 'gloss' over it. That's an insult, now I'm not happy.

Adios.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 22 Oct 2011, 07:34
by Old bones Ian
Buncey wrote:Why would I gloss over it? Did I gloss over it after the fight? I've never glossed over it - from being banned by the ABA in the late 80s to being banned by Duff ... 'gloss' over it. That's an insult, now I'm not happy.

Adios.
Just asking the question, as with all new media channels i was interested to see if you had to 'toe the line' , or if you had free range on what and how to comment.

No offense meant Steve, i was irate with what i saw as a bad decision last night. And took my ire out on allegedly.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 22 Oct 2011, 09:55
by Dioufy
Buncey wrote:Why would I gloss over it? Did I gloss over it after the fight? I've never glossed over it - from being banned by the ABA in the late 80s to being banned by Duff ... 'gloss' over it. That's an insult, now I'm not happy.

Adios.
Rip into it, dude. It was an awful decision, one of the very worst. Give it some welly, fat Phil Mitchell.

:bag:

Kiss.

Re: Norton v Williams

Posted: 22 Oct 2011, 10:14
by WildWaylon
Norton is horrible to watch but I still had him as the clear winner. Williams will lose that belt very quickly in my opinion. A very poor bill but I think the Norwich crowd were happy with Walsh winning conclusively.