BoxRec

A lot of talk has been of Audley Harrison not deserving a world title shot, and to be honest, I agree. But as usual it is begrudged of him primarily because of what others see as his personality.

Meanwhile, two other British guys are heading into world title shots with records no better than Harrison's, pound for pound, but we're all very excited for them because they're "nice guys".

I've never been one to base my opinions about boxing on a boxer's personality, preferring to focus on their in-ring achievements only.

Therefore, while Harrison has "only" won a European title, and "only" against Sprott, and struggled in doing so, is struggling against Sprott any worse than struggling against Matt Marsh? Is beating Michael Hunter or Michael Gomez worth more than beating Danny Williams? Is losing to Carl Johanneson or Ian Napa less damaging than losing to Williams or Sprott?

Now, please don't take this the wrong way. I'll be rooting for Burns and Booth as much as the next guy, and I'm always happy for our British boys to do well. If either or both of them win, I'll be chuffed to bits. But that doesn't mean either of them deserve their shots any more than Harrison does.

Thats a very insightful observation and very commonplace here.

But then....fans never like people who talk it, but don't walk it.

Wouldn't matter who it was.

Great point and I can't disagree with you.

I do think that most of the negativity towards the Haye/Harrison fight is more to do with Haye taking a backwards step in fighting Audrey and not making a fight with a Klitchsko.

And thats key, that broken promise and Harrison's supposed under-dog status will actually have more than a minority hoping he can spring the surprise.

I expect Harrison to be booed to the ring, and unless he's crushed early, cheered from it irrespective of the result.

oliverfennell wrote:A lot of talk has been of Audley Harrison not deserving a world title shot, and to be honest, I agree. But as usual it is begrudged of him primarily because of what others see as his personality.

Meanwhile, two other British guys are heading into world title shots with records no better than Harrison's, pound for pound, but we're all very excited for them because they're "nice guys".

I've never been one to base my opinions about boxing on a boxer's personality, preferring to focus on their in-ring achievements only.

Therefore, while Harrison has "only" won a European title, and "only" against Sprott, and struggled in doing so, is struggling against Sprott any worse than struggling against Matt Marsh? Is beating Michael Hunter or Michael Gomez worth more than beating Danny Williams? Is losing to Carl Johanneson or Ian Napa less damaging than losing to Williams or Sprott?

Now, please don't take this the wrong way. I'll be rooting for Burns and Booth as much as the next guy, and I'm always happy for our British boys to do well. If either or both of them win, I'll be chuffed to bits. But that doesn't mean either of them deserve their shots any more than Harrison does.

Whilst I agree with what you say, there is also the fact that Ricky Burns is rated no.1 by the WBO and therefore has to get a shot at the world title. I can't see who Ricky has beaten to deserve to be a mandatory but the fact remains that he is and hence gets a world title shot that way.

Audley is nowhere near a mandatory and also doesn't have a record that makes him an attractive opponent for a world title shot.

doctorboxing wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:A lot of talk has been of Audley Harrison not deserving a world title shot, and to be honest, I agree. But as usual it is begrudged of him primarily because of what others see as his personality.

Meanwhile, two other British guys are heading into world title shots with records no better than Harrison's, pound for pound, but we're all very excited for them because they're "nice guys".

I've never been one to base my opinions about boxing on a boxer's personality, preferring to focus on their in-ring achievements only.

Therefore, while Harrison has "only" won a European title, and "only" against Sprott, and struggled in doing so, is struggling against Sprott any worse than struggling against Matt Marsh? Is beating Michael Hunter or Michael Gomez worth more than beating Danny Williams? Is losing to Carl Johanneson or Ian Napa less damaging than losing to Williams or Sprott?

Now, please don't take this the wrong way. I'll be rooting for Burns and Booth as much as the next guy, and I'm always happy for our British boys to do well. If either or both of them win, I'll be chuffed to bits. But that doesn't mean either of them deserve their shots any more than Harrison does.

Whilst I agree with what you say, there is also the fact that Ricky Burns is rated no.1 by the WBO and therefore has to get a shot at the world title. I can't see who Ricky has beaten to deserve to be a mandatory but the fact remains that he is and hence gets a world title shot that way.

Audley is nowhere near a mandatory and also doesn't have a record that makes him an attractive opponent for a world title shot.

He's an attractive opponent for different reasons. All of them green. Well if its dollars it would be.

oliverfennell wrote:A lot of talk has been of Audley Harrison not deserving a world title shot, and to be honest, I agree. But as usual it is begrudged of him primarily because of what others see as his personality.

Meanwhile, two other British guys are heading into world title shots with records no better than Harrison's, pound for pound, but we're all very excited for them because they're "nice guys".

I've never been one to base my opinions about boxing on a boxer's personality, preferring to focus on their in-ring achievements only.

Therefore, while Harrison has "only" won a European title, and "only" against Sprott, and struggled in doing so, is struggling against Sprott any worse than struggling against Matt Marsh? Is beating Michael Hunter or Michael Gomez worth more than beating Danny Williams? Is losing to Carl Johanneson or Ian Napa less damaging than losing to Williams or Sprott?

Now, please don't take this the wrong way. I'll be rooting for Burns and Booth as much as the next guy, and I'm always happy for our British boys to do well. If either or both of them win, I'll be chuffed to bits. But that doesn't mean either of them deserve their shots any more than Harrison does.

on-point with the objective take on Audley as ever, Oliver

I see what you mean, its a good point. Personally I think that having won the British title and then defended it 3 times it would make Booth more worthy than someone who won a vacant European title against a replacement fighter in Sprott and then vacated without any defences. I can easily see how people might disagree with me though. Fair play to Audley, I bet he's so glad he gave Prizefighter a go....

People want to see Brits win titles. In the case of Burns and Booth, they are fighting them foreign types and we all want them to win, most don't mind that they don't deserve the shot. Harrison is fighting another Brit for the title (probably) and a Brit who is far more popular than he is. People want to see "our" champion Haye against the best, not taking backwards steps against that panto villain

Although i'm not going to claim Harrison isn't unpopular with most on here, I reckon the general consensus would be different if he was fighting a Klitschko brother.