BoxRec

John wobbled all over the ring and almost KO'd by Juarez and Watt gives the round even so he can give the fight to John.

yer noticed that as well lol. i wish sky would just pay HBO so we can listen to some people that know boxing instead of listen to our very average ones

I have no idea how he thought John deserved an even round there. Possibly the worst bit of scoring I have ever seen from Watt. Makes you think his old age might be catching up with him if he thinks he can justify that.

lol i noticed that, John did start off fairly well in 12th but no way should he have score that 10-10, juarez had him hanging on for dear life.. 30 seconds longer and it would've been 10-8 if John was lucky to see the final bell.

But Watt did disgracefully score many earlier rounds to Rocky, when they were clearly John rounds. No one should have had that fight close on the scorecards.

In one of the later rounds the Sky team mentioned Lederman's scorecard and he had John in a clear lead while Watt had it about level. It seemed to me that Watt realised too late that his scoring was well off the mark and the only way he could correct it and have John winning the fight was not to give Juarez the last round.

What do you all think of Watt in general? He drives me a bit potty. He seems to spend all of his time bigging himself up. He covers his arse with about a million comments and then says, see I told you. Its what I predicted earlier...

Maelstrom wrote:What do you all think of Watt in general? He drives me a bit potty. He seems to spend all of his time bigging himself up. He covers his arse with about a million comments and then says, see I told you. Its what I predicted earlier...

Spot on mate.

I had it the same as him most of the way through the fight in the end I had it 115-113 to John but it was close I felt the rounds John won were more clear the 1st 5 were all his on my card but then his staminia went but the last round John was on course to win then got caught and almost lost it I gave it to Juarez as he hurt him bad

Both of them carped on about John blowing out his arse and Juarez looking solid.

And yet it was John throwing ALL the leather and Juarez throwing two a round.

Certainly last four rounds.

No good looking fresher if you're keeping it locked up and the other guy is landing scoring shots.

I thought John walked it.

Terry D wrote:
Either way, he's still our best pundit.

Agreed.

I really like Jim Watt.

I think he has a good voice for the microphone, and seems, in general, to make good points during the match. Of course we can be critical of him, and he's certianly no Larry Merchant, but I also really like Watt's range of vocabulary. I like his use of the word 'spiteful', for instance. That's something I'd never think of.

I think he's the best colour commentator. He's better than McCrory and better than MacKenzie.

Meantime, his scoring of the John -- Juarez fight seemed way off the mark. Although that said, Juarez might have been landing the heavier blows, and the split decision would suggest to me that he wasn't the only one who saw it as close.

Carbo wrote:I really like Jim Watt.

I think he has a good voice for the microphone, and seems, in general, to make good points during the match. Of course we can be critical of him, and he's certianly no Larry Merchant, but I also really like Watt's range of vocabulary. I like his use of the word 'spiteful', for instance. That's something I'd never think of.

I think he's the best colour commentator. He's better than McCrory and better than MacKenzie.

Meantime, his scoring of the John -- Juarez fight seemed way off the mark. Although that said, Juarez might have been landing the heavier blows, and the split decision would suggest to me that he wasn't the only one who saw it as close.

It was close but scoring that last round even was ridiculous.

opticald wrote:

Carbo wrote:I really like Jim Watt.

I think he has a good voice for the microphone, and seems, in general, to make good points during the match. Of course we can be critical of him, and he's certianly no Larry Merchant, but I also really like Watt's range of vocabulary. I like his use of the word 'spiteful', for instance. That's something I'd never think of.

I think he's the best colour commentator. He's better than McCrory and better than MacKenzie.

Meantime, his scoring of the John -- Juarez fight seemed way off the mark. Although that said, Juarez might have been landing the heavier blows, and the split decision would suggest to me that he wasn't the only one who saw it as close.

It was close but scoring that last round even was ridiculous.

It certainly was.

Carbo wrote: he's certianly no Larry Merchant.

Yes, I particularly like this feature of his.

Carbo wrote:I really like Jim Watt.

I think he has a good voice for the microphone, and seems, in general, to make good points during the match. Of course we can be critical of him, and he's certianly no Larry Merchant, but I also really like Watt's range of vocabulary. I like his use of the word 'spiteful', for instance. That's something I'd never think of.

.

Big fan of the Watt. Obviously he didn't nail the Juarez - John fight but he's the best co-commentator in the game by some distance.

there are certain of my favourite fights, Moore-Macklin Chavez-Rosario being two of them, that just wouldn't feel the same without Watt's commentary.

"Aaaaaaarrrrrrm puncheees"

Everyone can have an off night, and I agree. He got this one wrong, but 9 times out of 10 for me he is spot on.

Watt is the most critical Sky pundit, and therefore the one I like best. If someone's not performing, he's more likely to say so. He more often calls things as he sees them than the others.

He's waaay too negative for my liking.

I told him at the Witter vs Harris fight that he needs to be a bit more positive and he just smiled at me.