Page 1 of 1

Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 17:29
by damianhucker1
All this business with Chisora and haye can be seen from two perspectives , some see it as a disgrace to the sport and british boxing in particular

Others think its got people taking about boxing again and despite the negatives may help the sport gain viewers .

so the poll question is simple

Is it a good thing for Boxing

or is it a bad thing for Boxing

Be interested to see what people think .

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 17:31
by sharpei_louis
No such thing as bad publicity etc etc

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 18:45
by stujones
Not good IMO..... Chisora might have done better than we anticipated but he still lost the fight clearly..... Haye lost against Klitchsko clearly.

If this was Mayweather vs Pacquiao, Klitchsko vs Klitchsko then it would be important.

When the best brawl with the best in press conferences (Ali vs Frazier, Lewis vs Rahman - ahead of the rematch, Tyson vs Lewis, Barrera vs Morales) then the publicity adds to the hype and the PPV figures...... when its a few also rans then it just makes the sport a bit of a laughing stock. The long term benefits of Bowe vs Donald, Tyson vs Green, Hide / Harrison / Bruno, and Hide vs Klitchsko were?

I don't want the staged bad blood like we've had with Groves vs Degale and Bellew vs Cleverly - there is a common link among these!

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 18:50
by leforge
stujones wrote:Not good IMO..... Chisora might have done better than we anticipated but he still lost the fight clearly..... Haye lost against Klitchsko clearly.

If this was Mayweather vs Pacquiao, Klitchsko vs Klitchsko then it would be important.

When the best brawl with the best in press conferences (Ali vs Frazier, Lewis vs Rahman - ahead of the rematch, Tyson vs Lewis, Barrera vs Morales) then the publicity adds to the hype and the PPV figures...... when its a few also rans then it just makes the sport a bit of a laughing stock. The long term benefits of Bowe vs Donald, Tyson vs Green, Hide / Harrison / Bruno, and Hide vs Klitchsko were?

I don't want the staged bad blood like we've had with Groves vs Degale and Bellew vs Cleverly - there is a common link among these!
He could have stopped chisora last night getting up from the table but let it happen!

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 18:54
by stujones
leforge wrote:
stujones wrote:Not good IMO..... Chisora might have done better than we anticipated but he still lost the fight clearly..... Haye lost against Klitchsko clearly.

If this was Mayweather vs Pacquiao, Klitchsko vs Klitchsko then it would be important.

When the best brawl with the best in press conferences (Ali vs Frazier, Lewis vs Rahman - ahead of the rematch, Tyson vs Lewis, Barrera vs Morales) then the publicity adds to the hype and the PPV figures...... when its a few also rans then it just makes the sport a bit of a laughing stock. The long term benefits of Bowe vs Donald, Tyson vs Green, Hide / Harrison / Bruno, and Hide vs Klitchsko were?

I don't want the staged bad blood like we've had with Groves vs Degale and Bellew vs Cleverly - there is a common link among these!
He could have stopped chisora last night getting up from the table but let it happen!
Yep, and I do wonder if this might affect the relationship allegedly has with K2. Haye was clearly not invited but worked for allegedly.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 18:57
by leforge
stujones wrote:
leforge wrote:
stujones wrote:Not good IMO..... Chisora might have done better than we anticipated but he still lost the fight clearly..... Haye lost against Klitchsko clearly.

If this was Mayweather vs Pacquiao, Klitchsko vs Klitchsko then it would be important.

When the best brawl with the best in press conferences (Ali vs Frazier, Lewis vs Rahman - ahead of the rematch, Tyson vs Lewis, Barrera vs Morales) then the publicity adds to the hype and the PPV figures...... when its a few also rans then it just makes the sport a bit of a laughing stock. The long term benefits of Bowe vs Donald, Tyson vs Green, Hide / Harrison / Bruno, and Hide vs Klitchsko were?

I don't want the staged bad blood like we've had with Groves vs Degale and Bellew vs Cleverly - there is a common link among these!
He could have stopped chisora last night getting up from the table but let it happen!
Yep, and I do wonder if this might affect the relationship Allegedly channel has with K2. Haye was clearly not invited but worked for Allegedly channel.
The fight was only on the channel due to Del being a Warren fighter. Wlad next fight on sky.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 19:18
by josh fg
Bad for the spot, makes our stars look like thugs. People who follow the sport are desencetised to violence, but like Haye's gang rape "joke" it turns main stream sports fans away.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 19:38
by desperados
meh, i reckon it's good.

it makes the sport look bad to non-boxing fans, who think its just violence for thugs, etc. It will only given them further ammunition, but lets face it, those poeple would never be interested in boxing anyway.

Combat sports have been around from the beggining of time, and always will be. Whats more intense, competitive, or glorifying than 2 men in the ring, competing man on man?

So that leaves us with, was it good for the sport for the fans? Ofcourse it is. Im a big fan of both the K Bros, particularly Vitali. But last night showed Vitali is ageing.

the division has been utterly woeful for a long, long time, and last night single handedly injected the most life into the division since days of Lewis & Tyson.

I'm buzzin now for a haye-chisora grudge match with the winner gettin a crack at the ageing Vitali. I had a feeling Vitali might get injured last night with the pressure Chisora would pile on, and i was right, he tore a shoulder ligament early in the fight. Time for Vitali to hang them up, and Vlad has always had a suspect chin. Finally some life in HW.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 19:43
by leforge
It will discourage corporate sponsors getting involved with the sport.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 19 Feb 2012, 21:56
by The 1bangkid
sharpei_louis wrote:No such thing as bad publicity etc etc
:TU:

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 05:29
by Lenny
leforge wrote:It will discourage corporate sponsors getting involved with the sport.
Will it though? There are far more pictures of the press conference and the weigh in online and in the national press than the actual fight itself. What would turn off sponsors more, a ruck that creates a bit of a storm and is featured big in every national newspaper, or a fight on a small time ppv channel that gets a couple of lines in selected newspapers and is forgotten about by Tuesday?

People are lapping it up

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 05:32
by Lenny
stujones wrote:
leforge wrote:
stujones wrote:Not good IMO..... Chisora might have done better than we anticipated but he still lost the fight clearly..... Haye lost against Klitchsko clearly.

If this was Mayweather vs Pacquiao, Klitchsko vs Klitchsko then it would be important.

When the best brawl with the best in press conferences (Ali vs Frazier, Lewis vs Rahman - ahead of the rematch, Tyson vs Lewis, Barrera vs Morales) then the publicity adds to the hype and the PPV figures...... when its a few also rans then it just makes the sport a bit of a laughing stock. The long term benefits of Bowe vs Donald, Tyson vs Green, Hide / Harrison / Bruno, and Hide vs Klitchsko were?

I don't want the staged bad blood like we've had with Groves vs Degale and Bellew vs Cleverly - there is a common link among these!
He could have stopped chisora last night getting up from the table but let it happen!
Yep, and I do wonder if this might affect the relationship Allegedly channel has with K2. Haye was clearly not invited but worked for Allegedly channel.
The Klitschko's will find a way to forgive everyone if it means they can sell more shows against either fighter. Wlad v Chisora and Haye v Chisora has gone from something no one would care about to almost unmissable television.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 05:40
by addi
it's not good really is it, boxing might be all over the papers but for all the wrong reasons, you got haye bottlin chisora and chisora threatening to shoot haye, it's ridiculous, what i would say though, through out both the brothers fights with these 2, our boys have behaved like thugs and then been outclassed and well beat, while wlad and vitali have shown nothing but class in and out of the ring. and adam booth is a fool and a gobshite.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 09:11
by stujones
Lenny wrote:
stujones wrote:
leforge wrote: He could have stopped chisora last night getting up from the table but let it happen!
Yep, and I do wonder if this might affect the relationship Allegedly channel has with K2. Haye was clearly not invited but worked for Allegedly channel.
The Klitschko's will find a way to forgive everyone if it means they can sell more shows against either fighter. Wlad v Chisora and Haye v Chisora has gone from something no one would care about to almost unmissable television.
Haye vs Chisora is a good fight, always thought that..... now that we've learned that a 40 year old Vitali who suffered a serious shoulder damage clearly beat Chisora in a fight in which he fought like a poor version of Wlad - then no..... thats a mismatch.

Build up will be fun, fight will end up a huge dissapointment - we'll have another Haye vs Harrison there.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 09:16
by Datsue
leforge wrote:It will discourage corporate sponsors getting involved with the sport.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, I've just had a nasty thought: You weren't joking, were you?

OTOH, no-one wanted to sponsor Barrera after twatting Morales (he never had fifteen different logos all across his shorts) at a press conference & corporate sponsors ran in terror from convicted rapist Tyson & wouldn't show his fights after he got out of prison, so maybe you have a point.

Also, the poll is missing the option I wished to select, which was "effing hilarious".

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 09:17
by jtourettes
sharpei_louis wrote:No such thing as bad publicity etc etc
First post nails it for me. The amount of coverage this has got is ridiculous. 5 extra people have now heard of allegedly.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 09:28
by freddydoesdallas
Datsue wrote:
leforge wrote:It will discourage corporate sponsors getting involved with the sport.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, I've just had a nasty thought: You weren't joking, were you?

OTOH, no-one wanted to sponsor Barrera after twatting Morales (he never had fifteen different logos all across his shorts) at a press conference & corporate sponsors ran in terror from convicted rapist Tyson & wouldn't show his fights after he got out of prison, so maybe you have a point.

Also, the poll is missing the option I wished to select, which was "effing hilarious".
Exactly, we're not talking about Standard Charter or PWC. The sponsors that are attracted to boxing in this country are The S*n, beer, lads mags, bookies, energy drinks etc. They normally want to stand out no matter what (Paddy Power and it's latest advert)

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 09:39
by Lenny
Datsue wrote:
leforge wrote:It will discourage corporate sponsors getting involved with the sport.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, I've just had a nasty thought: You weren't joking, were you?

OTOH, no-one wanted to sponsor Barrera after twatting Morales (he never had fifteen different logos all across his shorts) at a press conference & corporate sponsors ran in terror from convicted rapist Tyson & wouldn't show his fights after he got out of prison, so maybe you have a point.

Also, the poll is missing the option I wished to select, which was "effing hilarious".
:TU:

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 09:45
by JamesH
Datsue wrote:
leforge wrote:It will discourage corporate sponsors getting involved with the sport.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, I've just had a nasty thought: You weren't joking, were you?

OTOH, no-one wanted to sponsor Barrera after twatting Morales (he never had fifteen different logos all across his shorts) at a press conference & corporate sponsors ran in terror from convicted rapist Tyson & wouldn't show his fights after he got out of prison, so maybe you have a point.

Also, the poll is missing the option I wished to select, which was "effing hilarious".
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Barrera, Tyson, Chisora. Just rolls off the tongue doesn't it. :roll:

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 11:32
by Lenny
Has to have been good if FW is considering this

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/spo ... 202204914/

:wink:

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 11:39
by leforge
Datsue wrote:
leforge wrote:It will discourage corporate sponsors getting involved with the sport.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, I've just had a nasty thought: You weren't joking, were you?

OTOH, no-one wanted to sponsor Barrera after twatting Morales (he never had fifteen different logos all across his shorts) at a press conference & corporate sponsors ran in terror from convicted rapist Tyson & wouldn't show his fights after he got out of prison, so maybe you have a point.

Also, the poll is missing the option I wished to select, which was "effing hilarious".
Have at look at the sponsors at current British shows most of them are small companies with low profiles. Big fights in the US will get good sponsors but have a look at the UK scene I think your find their not many well known brands are involved.

Re: Good or Bad

Posted: 20 Feb 2012, 12:01
by Datsue
Lenny wrote:Has to have been good if FW is considering this

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/spo ... 202204914/

:wink:
Absolutely wonderful.

PMSL.