BoxRec

with me being a right pleb at the moment, with no internet connection, i've been relying on BBC sport for the boxing results, from my virgin media equivalent of teletext. usually they only report on the allegedly shows. and the reports seem to make extremely exaggerated cases for the quality of the fights:

cleverly v the pole was "action packed" (not prematurely stopped)
groves v degale was "sensational" (even though it didn't catch fire til round 9)
burns v laryea was a "bruising encounter" (bruised knuckles?)

there were more but i can't be arsed

i got of a surprise when i bought these fights -and more - on DVD, expecting pulsating, heart stopping action and getting something altogether less impressive. what is wrong with the effing reporters?

Don't buy fights on dvd from some moneymaker. Let me know if want anything and I'll send them to you for free.

And yes, Buncey hour apart, BBC is lacking on the boxing knowledge front

For me, BBC news is going down the pan in general. The boxing coverage (minus bunce, as mentioned) is fkin awful.

for me, it doesn't do justice when there is a genuinely exciting fight. such as walsh-kays, or bellew's hard fight with the african.

these writers take serious liberties with what happened, polishing dreadful "world title" turds in particular.