BoxRec

danconnollyeire wrote:

Dirk Kelly wrote: Think he drew and lost his two fights and went off to be an amateur.

Well that can't have happened... as you can't be a pro then become an amatuer

Yep you can 4 fights or less you can go back to the amatuers cant box internationly for a year or something along those lines

As long as he was given the same opportunity as any other 35 year old bloke who had never boxed, spent the last 20 years on the piss, and physical exercise was restricted to a rather sedentary sport, then nobody can argue.

If he was given special treatment because of who he is, then there is a problem.

The general public really under estimate the "lower level" pro boxers. A boxer regarded as a journeyman who has been around the block could do some serious damage to a "man off the street".

With regards to Curtis Woodhouse : he was an athlete in an athletic sport, he had no weight issues, had trained in boxing gyms for years, and turned pro at a much younger age (some may say in his physical prime), so it is not fair to compare the two.

As others have said, I hope that he is given a good short, sharp shock and knocked out early (obviously, without any physical harm).

I just don't know what could be worse for boxing - Flintoff losing, or Flintoff winning.

Ps - and for Maloney to make his comments is unbelievable, giving some of the shite he has promoted. He is probably just gutted that he isn't the promoter.

Chambers2 wrote:

wrimc wrote:It is farcical. All this does is perpetuate the myth amongst some people that if you think you are a bit handy you should have a go at pro boxing because all it takes is throwing punches.

Its not the case and the casual fan also sees that Freddie FLintoff tried his hand so it cant be that hard or skilled its just if you are prepared to throw and take a punch which is not the reality of professional boxing. Many "top" unlicensed boxers have had a go in the pro game and found themselves wanting by journeymen on their debut.

It devalues the achievements of genuine boxers and the skill and commitment it really takes to get into the ring and hold your own. Would they do the same programme for cricket? "Ricky Hatton trains as a fast bowler and batsmen for 10 weeks having previously no experience. Watch him make his Lancashire debut this weekend" It just wouldnt happen it would be farcical.

If Flintoff turns pro and wins a British or World title in a year (not gonna happen) then it may show the sport in a bad light. If Freddie turns pro and has some close fights with journeymen or gets beat by them then it further proves what a tough sport boxing is

It's all about freedom of choice, if Freddie wants to try and be a pro HW who are you ar anyone else (other than the BBBC) to say he can't have a go at it?? Matt Skelton turned pro later than Freddie has and look how well he done, were you giving him the same criticsm

Matt Skelton was a world champion kickboxer though, he had years of combat sports experience, you can't really compare the two. But I agree if Freddie passes the tests that the board administers then he should be granted a licence.

bripez wrote:As long as he was given the same opportunity as any other 35 year old bloke who had never boxed, spent the last 20 years on the piss, and physical exercise was restricted to a rather sedentary sport, then nobody can argue.

If he was given special treatment because of who he is, then there is a problem.

The general public really under estimate the "lower level" pro boxers. A boxer regarded as a journeyman who has been around the block could do some serious damage to a "man off the street".

With regards to Curtis Woodhouse : he was an athlete in an athletic sport, he had no weight issues, had trained in boxing gyms for years, and turned pro at a much younger age (some may say in his physical prime), so it is not fair to compare the two.

As others have said, I hope that he is given a good short, sharp shock and knocked out early (obviously, without any physical harm).

I just don't know what could be worse for boxing - Flintoff losing, or Flintoff winning.

Ps - and for Maloney to make his comments is unbelievable, giving some of the shite he has promoted. He is probably just gutted that he isn't the promoter.

What a crock!

danconnollyeire wrote:

Dirk Kelly wrote: Think he drew and lost his two fights and went off to be an amateur.

Well that can't have happened... as you can't be a pro then become an amatuer

He did so there must be some rule around it.

Chambers2 wrote:

bripez wrote:As long as he was given the same opportunity as any other 35 year old bloke who had never boxed, spent the last 20 years on the piss, and physical exercise was restricted to a rather sedentary sport, then nobody can argue.

If he was given special treatment because of who he is, then there is a problem.

The general public really under estimate the "lower level" pro boxers. A boxer regarded as a journeyman who has been around the block could do some serious damage to a "man off the street".

With regards to Curtis Woodhouse : he was an athlete in an athletic sport, he had no weight issues, had trained in boxing gyms for years, and turned pro at a much younger age (some may say in his physical prime), so it is not fair to compare the two.

As others have said, I hope that he is given a good short, sharp shock and knocked out early (obviously, without any physical harm).

I just don't know what could be worse for boxing - Flintoff losing, or Flintoff winning.

Ps - and for Maloney to make his comments is unbelievable, giving some of the shite he has promoted. He is probably just gutted that he isn't the promoter.

What a crock!

??????

It might help the debate along if you explain what you disagree with and why.

Dirk Kelly wrote:

danconnollyeire wrote:

Dirk Kelly wrote: Think he drew and lost his two fights and went off to be an amateur.

Well that can't have happened... as you can't be a pro then become an amatuer

He did so there must be some rule around it.

Yes you can... if you have had less than 5 pro fights you can re enter the amateur ranks. McGuire signed for Hayemaker had a couple of fights.... all wins, and then went back to the amateur ranks.

Don't think you can compete in championships (such as the Olympics or worlds - but don't quote me on that).... but you can win the ABA title and box for your country.

stujones wrote: Yes you can... if you have had less than 5 pro fights you can re enter the amateur ranks. McGuire signed for Hayemaker had a couple of fights.... all wins, and then went back to the amateur ranks.

Don't think you can compete in championships (such as the Olympics or worlds - but don't quote me on that).... but you can win the ABA title and box for your country.

Cool thanks for clearing it up

banjo wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:

wrimc wrote:It is farcical. All this does is perpetuate the myth amongst some people that if you think you are a bit handy you should have a go at pro boxing because all it takes is throwing punches.

Its not the case and the casual fan also sees that Freddie FLintoff tried his hand so it cant be that hard or skilled its just if you are prepared to throw and take a punch which is not the reality of professional boxing. Many "top" unlicensed boxers have had a go in the pro game and found themselves wanting by journeymen on their debut.

It devalues the achievements of genuine boxers and the skill and commitment it really takes to get into the ring and hold your own. Would they do the same programme for cricket? "Ricky Hatton trains as a fast bowler and batsmen for 10 weeks having previously no experience. Watch him make his Lancashire debut this weekend" It just wouldnt happen it would be farcical.

If Flintoff turns pro and wins a British or World title in a year (not gonna happen) then it may show the sport in a bad light. If Freddie turns pro and has some close fights with journeymen or gets beat by them then it further proves what a tough sport boxing is

It's all about freedom of choice, if Freddie wants to try and be a pro HW who are you ar anyone else (other than the BBBC) to say he can't have a go at it?? Matt Skelton turned pro later than Freddie has and look how well he done, were you giving him the same criticsm

Matt Skelton was a world champion kickboxer though, he had years of combat sports experience, you can't really compare the two. But I agree if Freddie passes the tests that the board administers then he should be granted a licence.

I'm not saying the situations are identical, clearly not, just that both came to boxing from different sports at a mature age. As you say, if the board are happy for him to fight then so am I.

Personally I think Freddie should be getting a pat on the back (esp from boxing fans) for his braveness. He's a boxing fan, so he's gonna be under no illusions of how tough it's gonna be or the possibe consequences, especially in the weight class he's in.

He could've quite easily took the easy route (the route I'd take if I was him) of making appearances on panel shows, reality Tv shows, turning on Christmas lights, etc........ but fair play to him he's got the knackers to get in the ring with the BIG boys (wonder how many people criticising him on here have got the same set of nads on them)

Plus he's giving the sport more publicity and might draw in new fans to the sport, reckon there'll be plenty tuning in even if it's just to see him get flattened

Chambers2 wrote:I'm not saying the situations are identical, clearly not, just that both came to boxing from different sports at a mature age.

Skeltons background was kickboxing, Flintoff was cricket.

I would have thought that one sport was more relevant than the other.

Also, Skelton moved from one sport to another without a break - how many years has Flintoff been retired ?

I don't know how Skelton looked after himself but Flintoff likes to promote his image as a bit of a beer drinking lad.

Chambers - agree largely with what you say. However, I've read around this and both the McGuigans and Flintoff have refused to answer questions on whether this is a one off performance for this TV show he is doing or if he will fight on after this.

This and only this is the the reason why I am somewhat against Flintoff getting the licence.

Perhaps they are being coy cause they are not confident, then fair enough. Have if it just for this TV show and it will be a one off - I have to question the BBBoC decision to sanction him. Apparently one of the questions they ask is "why" do you wish to box.... will be quite dissapointed if the answer was "was given an idea for a reality TV show to be a boxer for the night" and he was given a licence.

bripez wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:

bripez wrote:As long as he was given the same opportunity as any other 35 year old bloke who had never boxed, spent the last 20 years on the piss, and physical exercise was restricted to a rather sedentary sport, then nobody can argue.

If he was given special treatment because of who he is, then there is a problem.

The general public really under estimate the "lower level" pro boxers. A boxer regarded as a journeyman who has been around the block could do some serious damage to a "man off the street".

With regards to Curtis Woodhouse : he was an athlete in an athletic sport, he had no weight issues, had trained in boxing gyms for years, and turned pro at a much younger age (some may say in his physical prime), so it is not fair to compare the two.

As others have said, I hope that he is given a good short, sharp shock and knocked out early (obviously, without any physical harm).

I just don't know what could be worse for boxing - Flintoff losing, or Flintoff winning.

Ps - and for Maloney to make his comments is unbelievable, giving some of the shite he has promoted. He is probably just gutted that he isn't the promoter.

What a crock!

??????

It might help the debate along if you explain what you disagree with and why.

From the top...

Of course he's going to get more opportunities than a man off the street, this is the entertainment game and he's a famous person. A high profile puts bums on seats and brings more opportunities in our beloved sport. To say anything different is a Crock! Of course he will get special treatment

He's not spent the last 20 years on the piss, he's had some high profile piss-ups, but to say he's spent 20 years on the piss whilst being one of the best English cricketers of his generation, is a Crock!

The fitness of a fast bowler is obviously very different to a boxers fitness, but to say it's a sedantary occupation is a Crock. No way he could've competed at the level he played at if he wasn't fit. Howard Daley had an occupation far more sedate when he turned pro in his 30's

Not sure what point you're trying to make about "Lower Level" boxers, I'm sure Freddie's not underestimating any pro boxer

Nobody is saying Curtis's and Freddies situations are identical, but there are similarities in their circumstances. Freddie's competing as HW where the average age is much older than at the lower weight classes.

If he gets KTFO early then so be it, I'm not saying he's gonna be a world beater, just that he deserves the same opportunity of being a pro boxer as anybody else does. Reckon he deserves respect from us, especially the non-combatal posters (like myself)

OWZAT!!

stujones wrote:Chambers - agree largely with what you say. However, I've read around this and both the McGuigans and Flintoff have refused to answer questions on whether this is a one off performance for this TV show he is doing or if he will fight on after this.

This and only this is the the reason why I am somewhat against Flintoff getting the licence.

Perhaps they are being coy cause they are not confident, then fair enough. Have if it just for this TV show and it will be a one off - I have to question the BBBoC decision to sanction him. Apparently one of the questions they ask is "why" do you wish to box.... will be quite dissapointed if the answer was "was given an idea for a reality TV show to be a boxer for the night" and he was given a licence.

I'd imagine it depends on how the first fight goes as to whether he has another, never look past your next fight

I agree it would be disappointing if he performed well in his first fight then never fought again, but it still wouldn't turn the whole thing into a negative for me

Disgraceful that Sky and the board have even entertained Flintoff as a boxer.
Why not promote a young up and coming fighter rather than a washed up cricketer who's going nowhere.

bripez wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:I'm not saying the situations are identical, clearly not, just that both came to boxing from different sports at a mature age.

Skeltons background was kickboxing, Flintoff was cricket.

I would have thought that one sport was more relevant than the other.

Also, Skelton moved from one sport to another without a break - how many years has Flintoff been retired ?

I don't know how Skelton looked after himself but Flintoff likes to promote his image as a bit of a beer drinking lad.

I'm not saying the situations are identical, clearly not, just that both came to boxing from different sports at a mature age.

He was a professional cricketer who liked the odd piss up, he wasn't a pisshead who had the odd game of cricket.

Flintoffs been retired a few years, which is probably why he's had a long build up to his first fight. He looks in good nick from the pics I've seen.

Would you like the BBBC to not allow him to fight even if he adequately passes their test as other boxers have done? Or just that he hadn't bothered to box at all?

Chambers2 wrote:

stujones wrote:Chambers - agree largely with what you say. However, I've read around this and both the McGuigans and Flintoff have refused to answer questions on whether this is a one off performance for this TV show he is doing or if he will fight on after this.

This and only this is the the reason why I am somewhat against Flintoff getting the licence.

Perhaps they are being coy cause they are not confident, then fair enough. Have if it just for this TV show and it will be a one off - I have to question the BBBoC decision to sanction him. Apparently one of the questions they ask is "why" do you wish to box.... will be quite dissapointed if the answer was "was given an idea for a reality TV show to be a boxer for the night" and he was given a licence.

I'd imagine it depends on how the first fight goes as to whether he has another, never look past your next fight

I agree it would be disappointing if he performed well in his first fight then never fought again, but it still wouldn't turn the whole thing into a negative for me

True, the vibe though the papers are getting is that this is a publicity stunt - its going to be nothing more than a one off freak show. Surely he can answer the question on what his INTENTIONS are after this fight relating to boxing. Apparently, according to some of the press reviews he was asked flat out if this is just a one off reality show thing and he wouldn't comment.

Not saying there aren't positives even if it is a one of reality thing. But not sure I feel comfortable if the BBBoC are aware of this and still gave him a licence.

Who really gives a fvck? Everyone's acting like...."I can't believe the Board gave him a licence". Really???? This is the BBBoC were talking about here.

If he gets knocked spark out by Hastings Rasani inside 30 seconds the Board will look only slightly more stupid than they do already and if he turns out to be the next Marciano, well that's great. I dont care, I just wanna see if he can rumble. If he can even hang with the mediocre Heavys fair play I say.

WAR FREDDIE!

stujones wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:

stujones wrote:Chambers - agree largely with what you say. However, I've read around this and both the McGuigans and Flintoff have refused to answer questions on whether this is a one off performance for this TV show he is doing or if he will fight on after this.

This and only this is the the reason why I am somewhat against Flintoff getting the licence.

Perhaps they are being coy cause they are not confident, then fair enough. Have if it just for this TV show and it will be a one off - I have to question the BBBoC decision to sanction him. Apparently one of the questions they ask is "why" do you wish to box.... will be quite dissapointed if the answer was "was given an idea for a reality TV show to be a boxer for the night" and he was given a licence.

I'd imagine it depends on how the first fight goes as to whether he has another, never look past your next fight

I agree it would be disappointing if he performed well in his first fight then never fought again, but it still wouldn't turn the whole thing into a negative for me

True, the vibe though the papers are getting is that this is a publicity stunt - its going to be nothing more than a one off freak show. Surely he can answer the question on what his INTENTIONS are after this fight relating to boxing. Apparently, according to some of the press reviews he was asked flat out if this is just a one off reality show thing and he wouldn't comment.

Not saying there aren't positives even if it is a one of reality thing. But not sure I feel comfortable if the BBBoC are aware of this and still gave him a licence.

Yeah they're fair points well made. From what you're saying it does sound like a one off fight for him, but he still gets my respect for getting in the square ring and if the BBBC see him fit to fight then I've got no issues

insider has nailed it for me, who gives a shit lets just watch what happens

I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.

Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really fornicating imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus fornicating Christ, get out more.

Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.

Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.

I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.

I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.

Will I watch it? Of course I fornicating will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.

Glyn Leach wrote:I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.

Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really effing imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus effing Christ, get out more.

Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.

Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.

I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.

I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.

Will I watch it? Of course I effing will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.

The best thing about this post Glyn is that I spotted you first registered on this site Christmas day 2007. You going to be round on your 5th anniversary to post up a few more comments?

TopGun wrote:

Glyn Leach wrote:I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.

Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really effing imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus effing Christ, get out more.

Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.

Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.

I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.

I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.

Will I watch it? Of course I effing will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.

The best thing about this post Glyn is that I spotted you first registered on this site Christmas day 2007. You going to be round on your 5th anniversary to post up a few more comments?

I hope to be but presently there is a very real risk of my brain exploding with rage 24 days earlier!

That is an excellent post Glyn I do agree with all points made and have to put my hands up didn't take into account the "what if Flintoff gets seriously hurt" point. Fingers crossed he doesn't. I think its a point well made, we've talked about him "doing a Cracknell" - but James got up eventually and was okay, an excellent point you raise about the dangers being worst than what happend to Cracknell.

However, a couple of things

1) A fair amount of insinuation there that this is a publicity one of "whim" - hard to know for sure, hard to know what he has been doing in the gym.

2) What you say about Woodhouse is spot on. Curtis has PROVEN to be a very good addition to the pro ranks and I am sure did very well in the tests. However, as an outsider if you looked at how Curtis started. He continued to play football at League and then conference level for the first few years of his pro career. Now football training and boxing training are quite different - an outsider, who hasn't seen Curtis behind closed doors, who didn't know the determination or even the skill level of Curtis might think "hang on, here is a guy no boxing experience, turning pro and is showing that much dedication to it he won't give up his day job which involves training different muscle groups".... Curtis has shown though that he has a steely dedication to the sport and is a valuable asset to the sport. However, I think its wrong to claim Flintoff is doing this for very different reasons without assessing it....we can look at Curtis' career in hindsight now and say how well he has done. When he first turned pro though, before his first bout people must have, and possibly should have, been questioning his motives and motivations..... but no one said Smith and Giles should go for it. At least Flintoff is potentially dedicating his whole life to boxing now, we KNEW Woodhouse couldn't have been cause he was still playing and training in football daily.

Glyn, I am playing Devil's advocate.... I do agree, it looks like a whim it looks like it is all a publicity joke and I don't like it. However, we cannot say this categorically.

This leads to my next point. If this was a 35 year old who hadn't boxed before but wasn't famous. Would you be so damning of the BBBC decision to licence him? You mentioned the bad press the Flintoff thing could get if some terrible happend. But should we bar a person for having the human right for applying and getting a boxing licence just cause they are famous.

The really ironic thing about this is I can remember Frank Maloney claiming that he offered Michael Flately who was in his mid 40's and not a heavyweight a deal to turn pro with him after he left lord of dance. Okay Flately I believe was an excellent amateur, but he hadn't fought in years and was very old to learn new tricks.

TopGun wrote:

Glyn Leach wrote:I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.

Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really effing imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus effing Christ, get out more.

Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.

Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.

I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.

I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.

Will I watch it? Of course I effing will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.

The best thing about this post Glyn is that I spotted you first registered on this site Christmas day 2007. You going to be round on your 5th anniversary to post up a few more comments?

fornicating hell Glyn it's one pro fight!! As for ending up like McClellan he's not going to be fighting the HW Benn he'll be fed a soft touch and people will subscribe to watch maybe.
Curtis was was used as an example because he came from a none combat (street brawls not inc) sport with no amateur experience certainly not a ridiculous comparison. In fact Flintoff would do bloody well talking to Curtis!
How do you know that Flintoff doesn't want a 'serious' career in the sport he may love it but more than likely he'll be to old to learn new tricks and he'll find it hard and it will put him off.


Freddie-Flintoff ‘I played my last game of cricket at the age of 31 and I’m only 34 now.

'I’ve always loved boxing and I’m going to have a go at it and see where it takes us.

'I just really enjoy having a go at things. When you put yourself out there you put yourself up for a bit of criticism, but I’m not bothered. The people who criticise, what are they are doing? Criticising is an easy thing to do.’

Glyn Leach wrote:I can't go with this 'but there are so many worse things in boxing to worry about' 'argument'. Maybe there are, but not one of them could do the sport as much instant and irreparable damage as one soft celebrity drawing the general public into our world and getting seriously (by which I mean seriously) hurt.

Imagine that - Flintoff gets McClellan'd. God forbid that or anything similar should happen, but imagine the huge and TOTALLY UNNECESSARY damage that would be done to the sport on the back of such a horrific instance. Think about it and really effing imagine it. You want to compare that to boxing has too many sanctioning bodies? Dillian Whyte drank a dodgy tinny? Jesus effing Christ, get out more.

Fact is, a fighter could be fatally injured in a British ring and it would barely raise an eyebrow these days; the press would be suitably outraged for a few days and then move on. That would not be the case should some celebrity dabbler suffer a similar fate. We'd never hear the last of it and all the positive PR the sport got through the Olympics earlier this year would be flushed down the drain.

Please, don't make comments to the effect that 'but it could happen to anyone'. Of course it could, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that someone who can't fight a lick (but hey, he's got great BMI and can do loads of situps) is more at risk than the average competitor.

I find the comparison of Flintoff to Curtis Woodhouse ridiculous and insulting. Woodhouse was an active athlete from another sport who wanted a serious career in boxing, Flintoff is a retired athlete from another sport indulging a whim - odds on we'll never see him again after this.

I have absolutely nothing against Flintoff, who seems like an OK fella. But I find it incredibly short sighted that any boxing types could aid and abet such a potentially damaging daydream. I have massive respect for Barry McGuigan but he's disappointed me here. And as for the Board licensing it, yeah, a Cardiff license really should be regarded more highly than one from Luxembourg - nice work Charlie you rocket scientist.

Will I watch it? Of course I effing will, but only to check that Flintoff walks away from the ring unassisted afterwards and in the hope that he takes enough stick to discourage fellow fame hungry B-listers from giving that boxing thing a go - enough stick but no more, because the risk of further damage just doesn't bear thinking about. I'll watch it alright, but I won't be worrying about why so and so isn't a mandatory contender for such and such as I do.

Preach, brother, preach!