The Bitterness of being Frank
Posted: 22 May 2011, 07:32
In the aftermath of last nights action and the comments that have been circling this past week, I feel the need to get something off my chest about Mr Warren
The man is coming across like a spoiled little child. He's now demanding an immediate rematch claiming that "One way or another that fight will happen again. If it doesn't happen, George Groves should be ashamed of himself. I haven't found one person who thought George won that fight and I'm sure he's got a lot of pride and he wouldn't want it to be like that. I'm sure he wants his victory to be an emphatic one."
Now can anyone genuinely see that had the result been the other way, with Degale taking it by the closest of margins that he'd have been straight in there offering a rematch? Nil chance, I suspect.
His comments on Sky after the fight were typically snide and utterly lacking in respect. He blamed the loss on James throwing the fight away and never once acknowledged the performance of Groves. I'm thoroughly looking forward to his column next saturday in which everyone will get the blame for Degales defeat, while making himself out to be the poorly downtrodden, innocent party who was just trying to do his best for the fans and his boxers. We'll hear nothing of fleecing the fans for a show that was barely better than Khan - McCloskey, a show he was so outspoken about when contemplating its value as a PPV.
We so often hear how is the best promoter in the game and he's been doing it for over 30 years, but I think he is feeling the pressure from Matchroom and it is showing in some increasingly angry behaviour. If he truly believes in Degale as a boxer, then this close loss should mean very little and that he'll be able to bring him back and build him towards title level. However, I don't think he gives a damn about Degales boxing prospects and his anger stems from the defeat hurting his future PPV earning potential, certainly in the short term. With that defeat, Warren simply doesn't have a boxer that can justify PPV status on his own, so in order to squeeze more money from the paying public, he'll either have to do more Magnificent 7 type shows (and dilute his share of the profits by paying out higher sums to the fighters) or will have to put his stable in with highly competitive challengers / world titlists - an approach that he has been against throughout his entire promoting career and again a strategy that would cost more as decent opponents don't come cheap.
He doesn't seem to acknowledge that the sport and the broadcasting environments have changed significantly in recent years. His dismissal of forum users as people who just complain and know nothing about the difficulties of boxing promotion simply don't reflect that forum users represent those people that p[ay his wages - we buy the tickets for shows, we pay our subs and PPV fees, we buy Boxing News and Boxing Monthly and we congregate on forums to discuss forthcoming and past events. I may know nothing about running a boxing show but as a paying consumer, I have purchased a right to comment and hold an opinion. His ostrich like approach to the internet barely seems to acknowledge that it simply provides an instant outlet for opinions that didn't exist in the past. The opinions, however, have always existed. His use (or lack of) Twitter is also pretty pre-historic. Now I appreciate not everyone 'gets' Twitter, but in a sport that thrives on engagement with its paying public, to try to operate a promotional company without it is nonsensical. In the immediate aftermath of last nights fight, Twitter was abuzz with comment and reflection from a range of interested spectators, including journalists from both sides of the Atlantic, other sports figures, a number of fighters backing both sides and some key figures from across the fight game. One of these, Eddie Hearn, has only recently taken to tweeting, but his comments do seem to measure the temperature of public opinion fairly well and he seems to be getting well-timed digs in at Warren at many opportunities. It is fair to say that our Frank is leaving himself open with his comments, actions and negligent treatment of his public.
The man is coming across like a spoiled little child. He's now demanding an immediate rematch claiming that "One way or another that fight will happen again. If it doesn't happen, George Groves should be ashamed of himself. I haven't found one person who thought George won that fight and I'm sure he's got a lot of pride and he wouldn't want it to be like that. I'm sure he wants his victory to be an emphatic one."
Now can anyone genuinely see that had the result been the other way, with Degale taking it by the closest of margins that he'd have been straight in there offering a rematch? Nil chance, I suspect.
His comments on Sky after the fight were typically snide and utterly lacking in respect. He blamed the loss on James throwing the fight away and never once acknowledged the performance of Groves. I'm thoroughly looking forward to his column next saturday in which everyone will get the blame for Degales defeat, while making himself out to be the poorly downtrodden, innocent party who was just trying to do his best for the fans and his boxers. We'll hear nothing of fleecing the fans for a show that was barely better than Khan - McCloskey, a show he was so outspoken about when contemplating its value as a PPV.
We so often hear how is the best promoter in the game and he's been doing it for over 30 years, but I think he is feeling the pressure from Matchroom and it is showing in some increasingly angry behaviour. If he truly believes in Degale as a boxer, then this close loss should mean very little and that he'll be able to bring him back and build him towards title level. However, I don't think he gives a damn about Degales boxing prospects and his anger stems from the defeat hurting his future PPV earning potential, certainly in the short term. With that defeat, Warren simply doesn't have a boxer that can justify PPV status on his own, so in order to squeeze more money from the paying public, he'll either have to do more Magnificent 7 type shows (and dilute his share of the profits by paying out higher sums to the fighters) or will have to put his stable in with highly competitive challengers / world titlists - an approach that he has been against throughout his entire promoting career and again a strategy that would cost more as decent opponents don't come cheap.
He doesn't seem to acknowledge that the sport and the broadcasting environments have changed significantly in recent years. His dismissal of forum users as people who just complain and know nothing about the difficulties of boxing promotion simply don't reflect that forum users represent those people that p[ay his wages - we buy the tickets for shows, we pay our subs and PPV fees, we buy Boxing News and Boxing Monthly and we congregate on forums to discuss forthcoming and past events. I may know nothing about running a boxing show but as a paying consumer, I have purchased a right to comment and hold an opinion. His ostrich like approach to the internet barely seems to acknowledge that it simply provides an instant outlet for opinions that didn't exist in the past. The opinions, however, have always existed. His use (or lack of) Twitter is also pretty pre-historic. Now I appreciate not everyone 'gets' Twitter, but in a sport that thrives on engagement with its paying public, to try to operate a promotional company without it is nonsensical. In the immediate aftermath of last nights fight, Twitter was abuzz with comment and reflection from a range of interested spectators, including journalists from both sides of the Atlantic, other sports figures, a number of fighters backing both sides and some key figures from across the fight game. One of these, Eddie Hearn, has only recently taken to tweeting, but his comments do seem to measure the temperature of public opinion fairly well and he seems to be getting well-timed digs in at Warren at many opportunities. It is fair to say that our Frank is leaving himself open with his comments, actions and negligent treatment of his public.
