BoxRec

http://news.boxrec.com/news/2010/board- ... udley-full

Yet another Audley story! You know you want them!

I think a deduction is appropriate here. Boxers must be sent a message that they cannot expect to be paid for nothing and that they are under a duty to try to entertain the fans who have paid good money to see them fight. Maybe if Harrison gets some money deducted it may encourage him to give better value to the fans in future, rather than the usual rubbish he churns out.

Don't agree with that one. Why didn't the board say anything when he lost to Danny Williams? He was just as passive then.

or why didnt the board do the same to williams when he lost to chisora

Think David was lucky to get his full purse when he beat Valuev on that basis!!

I think the size of the purse must be factored in here. If a fighter gets only a low 5 figure purse then it is more morally questionable to withhold some as after deductions he could be left with almost nothing. Where the purse is 1.5 million then surely a fighter must do something to justify it.

Don't think the board should do that.

MachoMan09 wrote:Who will launch the 'deliberations' into why the Board allowed the fight to happen in the first place?

I don't buy that line of attack, though lots of other people seem to. He was European champ - though that shot was fortuitous too, as was the result.

i bet hayemaker will love to get more money :!: it's a liberty to with hold the man's purse as much as i was angry at him, he's been publicly humiliated & should take his money & live in the mountains D (big scare)

MachoMan09 wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:Who will launch the 'deliberations' into why the Board allowed the fight to happen in the first place?

I don't buy that line of attack, though lots of other people seem to. He was European champ - though that shot was fortuitous too, as was the result.

I don't really buy into it either; in the same way I don't buy into their 'deliberations' on whether or not they will advise Audley be paid in full. What is their policy on investigating this type of thing?

In my experience, public pressure has a huge amount to do with what they look at. Outrage on here definitely helped get Fury-McDermott re-visited. I've just had a look at the rules of boxing again and I can't see anything about not trying, though it must be somewhere.

There's the old catch all caveat of 'bringing the sport into disrepute' to use too.

I genuinely think that Harrison should not get paid in full for that performance.

Its irrelevant what he did in his previous performances because they werent for the World Heavyweight Title and they didnt attract the same level of courage and exposure.

He was part of a product that was sold at real expense to people. If that fight wasnt on PPV then I dont think the argument would be so strong for his purse to be withheld. He simply didnt fight. He therefore didnt do his job and thus he shouldnt get paid in full.

His performance has potentially damaged the general public's view of boxing, or at least damaged it further. He needs to be accountable for that.

It would be totally unfair if the board are allowed to do this.

Why are they being to heavy handed on Audleys very poor performance - when there are many other incidents that get overlooked if you belong to a certain promoter, or you are the said promoter ...

Give Audley the money. It's not like anyone with a tiny amount of boxing knowledge didn't see what was going to happen away. It was hardly surprising. Haymaker made their bed.

Shouldn't Haye be docked some cash then? He hardly threw a punch in the first 2 rounds

This is out of order, Audley froze on the night which was predictable. If he really intended to lose the fight without trying he wouldnt have got up from the first knockdown. He also trained very hard for the fight. If anything Sky should refund everyone's PPV fee

I think the fact he got up to take the finish shows he should get paid. He took some lumps when it came to the end.

A knee jerk reaction to placate the 'Disgusted' from Scunthorpe Sun brigade

Who do they think they are , He trained , he got in the ring , he took punches , HE GETS PAID, simple has that . If people don't like the way he fought tough , they paid for it because they were gullible enough to believe that he had somehow reincarnated himself at his age . There fault for paying for it maybee in the future they won't buy, which will force HAYE AND OTHERS TO FIGHT proper OPPONENTS .

I said before the fight it was the lowest risk , highest reward for Haye , So much in fact Haye backed himself for the round , NO WHERE does it say a fighter has to fight with a certain ferocity , You show up you go to work you get paid , and these idiots think they have the right to recommend he don't get paid .

Love too see it anyway cos after the judge honors his contract and forces the promoter to pay up plus expenses , maybee Harrison can throe a couple of hundred grand suing the board .

The only thing they should be concerned with is did he bring the sport into disrepute , if they think he did fine him , take his liscence , if they don't do that THEY SHOULD SHUT THE FACK UP .

But if your gonna fine someone and take liscences theres been far more damage done by promoters , closing down companies to avoid paying what they owe fighters ,

The Board don't have a leg to stand on. The match was approved, Audley was outclassed and got hammered. He did try, he got up. Just because there is public anger over it, so what? This is all led by the tabloid media.

What's more, it wasn't even the worst mismatch on the card. Whoever at the Board approved those disgraceful matches featuring Johnny Greaves and Colin Kenna on the bill should be strung up.

I couldn't believe the Boxing News report claiming the crowd liked Greaves's antics, which were essentially to hold his hand up and call his opponent a wanker. The crowd booes Greaves throughout and after the fight too. Whereas Kenna was so overweight, he looked like he had just been dragged out of the pub.

Both were a truly appalling spectacle for British boxing.

gobbles wrote:The Board don't have a leg to stand on. The match was approved, Audley was outclassed and got hammered. He did try, he got up. Just because there is public anger over it, so what? This is all led by the tabloid media.

What's more, it wasn't even the worst mismatch on the card. Whoever at the Board approved those disgraceful matches featuring Johnny Greaves and Colin Kenna on the bill should be strung up.

I couldn't believe the Boxing News report claiming the crowd liked Greaves's antics, which were essentially to hold his hand up and call his opponent a wanker. The crowd booes Greaves throughout and after the fight too. Whereas Kenna was so overweight, he looked like he had just been dragged out of the pub.

Both were a truly appalling spectacle for British boxing.

Yes Kenna match up was shocking. This is same board that approved the Lativan lemmings on Maloney show In December did they have there purse withheld?

gobbles wrote:.What's more, it wasn't even the worst mismatch on the card. Whoever at the Board approved those disgraceful matches featuring Johnny Greaves and Colin Kenna on the bill should be strung up.

I couldn't believe the Boxing News report claiming the crowd liked Greaves's antics, which were essentially to hold his hand up and call his opponent a wanker. The crowd booes Greaves throughout and after the fight too. Whereas Kenna was so overweight, he looked like he had just been dragged out of the pub.

Both were a truly appalling spectacle for British boxing.

The Kenna match was dreadful and I said so in my report. Really terrible and he should pack it in. His paper record is very deceptive and he's kidding people with it.

I don't think the Greaves fight was a mismatch - Greaves, unlike Kenna, is fit and can look after himself. He was never going to do anything but at least he wasn't steamrollered. The crowd were on his side at the start but he overdid it, especially with clipping the lad round the ear at the end which was totally unnecessary. He was rightly booed at the end.

Don't agree at all. They must have been aware what could have happened in a worse-case scenario, therefore they should have prevented the match if they felt the need to get involved. To punish Harrison for their own lack of judgement, or failing to back their judgement, in the first place is unacceptable.

And who will benefit from any money the Board withhold from Audley?
The Promoters? No,
Sky TV? No.
The Fans? No.
The Board = Yep!

What a farce.The board, I am afraid to say, has been swayed by a public witch hunt.A blind man on a flying horse could see that this fight was going to be mismatch i.e one of the fighters is world class and the other is fringe British level only, and yet they sanctioned it.It's sad enough for Audley that he froze like that, but he also took some legitimate big shots to be felled heavily, and to have his pay deducted seems an unfair step to take.

Spot on Lennox. A knee jerk reaction to media pressure, the need to be seen to be doing something. Very shortsighted, rather than start issuing dramatic statements straight away the board should have realised that within three days the fight would be old news, the mock horror outrage would have died down. There was no need to say anything other then 'we are considering our options' at such an early stage, but now the more reactionary elements in the media and the part time fans who buy PPVs will be baying for blood. Disappointing administration in my view.