BoxRec

Anyone tell me how the meeting went and what was the outcome of the meeting?
Did the licence holders( the owners of the board)get any more power to vote?
Or did the board get their way and tighten their grip on what goes on?
Any changes to the articles of association?
Anyone get sacked or asked to resign?

Hopefully it was more constructive than the manchester event, ruined by idiots gobbing it off.

link to meeting where no one was allowed to speak and the board ruled anyone will any finacial interest cannot sit on a area council http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5uFcTz1SC8

You know you can hire an assassin through facebook these days?

Allegedly.

charlieb wrote:You know you can hire an assassin through facebook these days?

Allegedly.

princess wrote:link to meeting where no one was allowed to speak and the board ruled anyone will any finacial interest cannot sit on a area council http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5uFcTz1SC8

my favourite part is Jane's Summary "wankers"

On a serious note, what is stopping someone starting a rival sanctioning body?

slapbangwhallop wrote:On a serious note, what is stopping someone starting a rival sanctioning body?

Someone did mention it yesterday Leonard but how far it will go I don't know.

Here's a chat me and Jane had after the meeting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXYfHpQ70mg

Wake up call wrote:

slapbangwhallop wrote:On a serious note, what is stopping someone starting a rival sanctioning body?

Someone did mention it yesterday Leonard but how far it will go I don't know.

Here's a chat me and Jane had after the meeting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXYfHpQ70mg

Thanks for that, watched it earlier along with the one with Tommy Gilmour. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyIQRXEx ... er&list=UL

Didnt the IBF try and start a body before? Also did Mr. Wárren threaten to do the same, I seem to remember someone saying something along those lines, but could be wrong.

How would that work, would you only be able to fight for one of the titles, would you be able to go on to fight for EBU title or world honours?

Don't know the mechanics of it to be honest mate, or if it would ever happen but it's easy to see why people are frustrated.

They'll some more videos with Miranda Carter, Bruce Baker, Les Allen and Greg Steene later.

princess wrote:anyone will any financial interest cannot sit on a area council

that sounds like a fair ruling, no conflict of interest.

Seems fair to me aswell, should license holders be allowed to rule on other license holders I don't think so. Most councils have been like this for years

jonny wrote:Seems fair to me aswell, should license holders be allowed to rule on other license holders I don't think so. Most councils have been like this for years

The conflict of interest is a fair point.

However, if those with a "financial interest" in boxing are to be removed from council there must be some sort of accountability procedure put in place.

In other words the licence holders should be able to vote which "non financially interested parties" are on the councils and boards.

slapbangwhallop wrote:

jonny wrote:Seems fair to me aswell, should license holders be allowed to rule on other license holders I don't think so. Most councils have been like this for years

The conflict of interest is a fair point.

However, if those with a "financial interest" in boxing are to be removed from council there must be some sort of accountability procedure put in place.

In other words the licence holders should be able to vote which "non financially interested parties" are on the councils and boards.

your missing the point guys That fine that you cant sit on the council if your finacially interested thats the rule so fine But when the chairman of the board and 3 other directors are being paid and paid well then they cant be directors or chairman as they are finacially interested So thats the rule they have made it But they arent sticking to it as there are still chairman and directors ?? Its wrong They made the rule so why they not sticking to it ??

jonny wrote:Seems fair to me aswell, should license holders be allowed to rule on other license holders I don't think so. Most councils have been like this for years

Quite correct,only the central and northern councils remain interested in ££££££££

Imagine applying for a licence,then have council members block your application cos your taking their jobs?

Not fair is it?

standing8 wrote:

jonny wrote:Seems fair to me aswell, should license holders be allowed to rule on other license holders I don't think so. Most councils have been like this for years

Quite correct,only the central and northern councils remain interested in ££££££££

Imagine applying for a licence,then have council members block your application cos your taking their jobs?

Not fair is it?

your missing the point guys That fine that you cant sit on the council if your finacially interested thats the rule so fine But when the chairman of the board and 3 other directors are being paid and paid well then they cant be directors or chairman as they are finacially interested So thats the rule they have made it But they arent sticking to it as there are still chairman and directors ?? Its wrong They made the rule so why they not sticking to it ??

princess wrote:

standing8 wrote:

jonny wrote:Seems fair to me aswell, should license holders be allowed to rule on other license holders I don't think so. Most councils have been like this for years

Quite correct,only the central and northern councils remain interested in ££££££££

Imagine applying for a licence,then have council members block your application cos your taking their jobs?

Not fair is it?

your missing the point guys That fine that you cant sit on the council if your finacially interested thats the rule so fine But when the chairman of the board and 3 other directors are being paid and paid well then they cant be directors or chairman as they are finacially interested So thats the rule they have made it But they arent sticking to it as there are still chairman and directors ?? Its wrong They made the rule so why they not sticking to it ??

Which 4 people are been paid?

standing8 wrote:

princess wrote:

standing8 wrote: Quite correct,only the central and northern councils remain interested in ££££££££

Imagine applying for a licence,then have council members block your application cos your taking their jobs?

Not fair is it?

your missing the point guys That fine that you cant sit on the council if your finacially interested thats the rule so fine But when the chairman of the board and 3 other directors are being paid and paid well then they cant be directors or chairman as they are finacially interested So thats the rule they have made it But they arent sticking to it as there are still chairman and directors ?? Its wrong They made the rule so why they not sticking to it ??

Which 4 people are been paid?

That will come out soon But its 4 people that say they do it for expenses and for the love of the sport They are directors One just came back from his 4th holiday this year From his place abroad Now that is wrong as shareholders surely we have the right to know where our licence money is being spent :??

princess wrote:

standing8 wrote:

princess wrote: your missing the point guys That fine that you cant sit on the council if your finacially interested thats the rule so fine But when the chairman of the board and 3 other directors are being paid and paid well then they cant be directors or chairman as they are finacially interested So thats the rule they have made it But they arent sticking to it as there are still chairman and directors ?? Its wrong They made the rule so why they not sticking to it ??

Which 4 people are been paid?

That will come out soon But its 4 people that say they do it for expenses and for the love of the sport They are directors One just came back from his 4th holiday this year From his place abroad Now that is wrong as shareholders surely we have the right to know where our licence money is being spent :??

was it a holiday, or trip to see an oversea's fight involving a british fighter?

standing8 wrote:

princess wrote:

standing8 wrote: Which 4 people are been paid?

That will come out soon But its 4 people that say they do it for expenses and for the love of the sport They are directors One just came back from his 4th holiday this year From his place abroad Now that is wrong as shareholders surely we have the right to know where our licence money is being spent :??

was it a holiday, or trip to see an oversea's fight involving a british fighter?

It was the 4th holiday of the year had it had been to represent a brit abroad i wouldnt have put HOLIDAY I was talking to a well respected licence holder who was there yesterdat who had been to the place Abroad Now lets hope theres a full investigation as to where licence holders money REALLY goes eh