BoxRec

I am reading that people are saying Sky are in the wrong for selling this fight and it being rubbish. Fair enough for a casual fan to say or feel that but on a boxing forum? Since when should a real boxing fan have such an inability to read a fight for themselves. It was always a mismatch as David Haye is world class and Audley Harrison is not even a fringe contender.

How can anyone on a forum who is presumably a boxing fan actually be angry at Sky? Are they saying they watched a few interviews and crappy comments from the Sky team and actually believed it over what they should see and know for themselves?! If you are a boxing fan then you should know this was the likely result.

Same if you are a football fan. If Chelsea play a Sunday League outfit it should not matter if what Sky say, you will know what the likely outcome is and can decide whether to buy or not.

Sky are a business and the object of the exercise is to make money so they sold a boxing match as hard as they could to make as much money as possible. It was PPV so the choice was yours, buy it or dont, it is what it is and if you think it is a waste of money DO NOT BUY IT. Do not bitch after the event that you have been conned because you have not been.

The responsibility was in the hands of the viewer to try and work out if it was likely to be competitive. Any boxing fan should have been able to explain it would not be.

Anyway, if you are that bothered about £15 I suggest you get a better bloody job, £15 is eff all!!

Oh and as for this betting "scandal" - do not be so soft. Any sportsperson should be able to bet on THEMSELVES. It is when the result is manipulated or pre-ordained that something illegal has gone on.

Audley was not in on it. The facts were always there, they were who they were, no secrets, nothing hidden and so odds were set based on known facts. Haye felt he could end it in the third round and the bookies set the odds accordingly on their feeling on whether he could win in that round, he decided that was when he was going for it and so bet the money. Audley was not aware of this and did not fall for a betting scam. Haye had to put him down to win.

In effect what happened was he went to a bookmaker and said "I bet you X that I can knock him out in the 3rd" They said, "Well I will give you X odds against that." and he took the bet and did what it without any conspiracy. He said BEFORE the fight that he had a bet, I read that days ago

Simples.

Angry at Sky for paying £15 for Haye - Harrison as a contest - NO! Unless Harrison landed a Sprott punch this was always going to end one way.

Angry at Sky for showing just one other fight live, edited highlights of just one other fight and a load of repetitious padding - YES!

Sky arseholes should show marquez v katsdis and Williams fight but they don't it's poor,

so do you not think that we should have had a better undercard , or at least better coverage of the one that was on offer ?

do you think its right that there should be adverts between each round of the main event when weve already paid for it ?

And get off your high horse about it only being £15 , some people can afford the ppv's this close to xmas but are such boxing fans they want to see all the fights , dont forget theres another 2 to pay for over the next 3 or 4 weeks .

If there going to be ppv we want value for money , sky cant be held responsible for the main event outcome and i already said on another thread its a business etc etc , but they have to think long term , they need to offer more undercard , just in case the main event goes tits up like it did tonight , there will be many customers who dont buy the next one after tonight , so that will mean less money for sky and the promotors , less apparant interest could then have a negative impact in the future of the sport on tv , dont be so short sighted .

No it wasnt a fix , anyone saying so is crazy , but im unhappy with the sky coverage and that is SKYS FAULT

I agree with you all saying that the content of the show was poor with just two fights, my point was against those that are complaining about the fact Harrison did not put up a fight. He was never going to.

Come on, £15? It is nothing.

tobyh5 wrote:I agree with you all saying that the content of the show was poor with just two fights, my point was against those that are complaining about the fact Harrison did not put up a fight. He was never going to.

Come on, £15? It is nothing.

Its maybe nothing if youve not got kids to be xmas presents for like myself , or like in my case just rebuilding things due to my house burning down in summer and losing everything i owned , and i mean everything .

So dont ASSUME about peoples finances , as im sure there will be people on this very forum worse off than me , if you was to say these things to my mrs shed be even more against it as shes not the boxing fan , to here its even less worth the money , ill still buy the froch v abraham show and the W arren 30th anniversary show , but you cant assume that something that isnt much to you isnt to others , For all i know you still live at home with your parents and have no bills or responsibilities , but im not going to just ASSUME thats the case , as everyone has different finances .

If you can afford it buy it, if you cant, dont.

Oh and I happily gave a house away to the ex wife so that the kids lived in the home I decided they should and restarted by myself from scratch, leaving a house with a £30,000 mortgage for one with a £230,000 mortgage. So what??

If I was struggling to pay for it I would cut luxuries, and boxing PPV shows is a definite unneeded expense.

£15 is £15, behave yourself. Who cares!?

tobyh5 wrote:Oh and I happily gave a house away to the ex wife so that the kids lived in the home I decided they should and restarted by myself from scratch, leaving a house with a £30,000 mortgage for one with a £230,000 mortgage. So what??

If I was struggling to pay for it I would cut luxuries, and boxing PPV shows is a definite unneeded expense.

£15 is £15, behave yourself. Who cares!?

Stop acting the pudendum , im not saying i cant afford to , believe me if i couldnt afford it the mrs wouldnt let me watch it , simple as that , all im saying is that to you £15 might not be much , but to others it might be ,
Whats the point in telling me how much your mortgages are , all that shows is you have more money to be able to afford it rather than trying to show that you also might struggle at times , i do not own a house and never will in my lifetime be able to afford a house , so your point was rather futile , and i too have to pay for children who live with my ex so again , whats your point ?

You cant argue with the fact that its not such a small amount to some people , i make money the best way i can , through offering good quality white collar boxing shows and the mrs works in a shop , my best paid job ive ever had was £16k a year as a shop manager , even then id have said £15 wasnt cheap , not saying its expensive either , not at all , but you cant rant on about it being nothing when people with less money than you are obviously going to take offence , i wworked damn hard for everything i had to just go up in smoke , only had the clothes that were on my back , didnt even have a pair of shoes on , had no insurance and no savings , yet i know there will be people on here worse off than me , so stop acting like a dickhead , if its not much mooney to you then good for you , but its not that way for some

End of

To miss this would have required a genuine fan to take a moral stand and refuse to watch a British Champion defend his World Heavyweight title, or to break the law and watch a stream. Or pay for it.

Hardly ideal choices, really.

The point was that people knew what they were getting. A man who I do not believe has ever managed to beat anyone in the world top 40 against a genuine world class fighter. He was always going to be smashed.

I knew that but hate him so much I would have paid double to see it. The people moaning that putting on just two fights is rubbish have a point, although no one really paid 15 for anything on the undercard

It was all about the main event and everyone knew it would be a walkover.

tobyh5 wrote:although no one really paid 15 for anything on the undercard

Still, for a paying event we do have a right to expect a good show, proper (but not over done) build up and that DOES include a decent undercard.

Plus 2 or 3 good undercard bouts can SUPPORT the main event. Thats exactly the whole point of them.

Khan V Barrera was a very disappointing main event- but look how well supported that card was.

Ok, I did not care for the undercard, i just wanted to see audley humiliated as I hate him as he is such a bare faced liar. He trained for his debut down the road from me in Cornwall and after seeing him train I wrote to boxing news who printed my letter saying I would bet my house that he never won an alphabet title or is even ranked in the top ten.

Total fraud, he grew up round the corner from me when I lived in London and he has always been full of sh1t and when I then saw him training down here knew he had not changed, which my letter and posts on doghouse said at the time.

Hayemaket are a joke, the ruiz fight card was poor too. Also the groves cancelled fight I lost 20 quid on postage for tickets never got refunded?

Sorry to hear u got stung on groves. As for the undercards of this and Ruiz, they are nit announced on the day, so if it does not offer what u want, don't buy.

All sporting events are a lottery as to weather they are going to be good or not.

but i really really don't know what people were expecting tonight.
It was a joke of a fight as pretty much predicted by anyone who had ever seen a Fraudely fight over the last 10 years.

Sky hyped it well and i can see why the casual fans got sucked in,
there is really no excuse for anyone on here thoe,
you must have know what you were getting.

tobyh5 wrote:Sorry to hear u got stung on groves. As for the undercards of this and Ruiz, they are nit announced on the day, so if it does not offer what u want, don't buy.

I Think hayemaker are arseholes not intersted in pitting on a good show! If this was warren undercard people would Moan!

You are probably right but while people pay they will not change.

If they know they will make x amount as it is and a better undercard will not bring in enough to cover the extra expense it has incurred, why should they put on a better one ? Would you, if it came out of your pocket? Really?

tobyh5 wrote:You are probably right but while people pay they will not change.

If they know they will make x amount as it is and a better undercard will not bring in enough to cover the extra expense it has incurred, why should they put on a better one ? Would you, if it came out of your pocket? Really?

Hayemaker gave it the big one when they started about competitive undercards! Booth looks to me like a slimy wanker!

You did not answer what I said. You know most would do no different in that situation.

tobyh5 wrote: why should they put on a better one ?

To distract from(or to entertain after and before) the main event.

Why bother? it was always going to be a mismatch main fight but people paid knowing that. Buyer beware

tobyh5 wrote:Why bother?

So people are less pissed off. Had we had a couple more good supports, people might feel a bit better about paying.

Haye & that smug wanker booth are only after money nonlove if the game like they claimed! The magnifvient wad best pay per view bill in while even next bill better than this tonight!

Ppv for me has always been about principle.

Why should I pay to subscribe to a sports channel fir them to then charge me extra for so called premier events?

I'm surprised it has become so accepted