BoxRec

Seems Pretty clear cut to me. BBBOC licence holders can fight for the WBF Title but the board won't recognise it. If the board take this stance are boxers now allowed to fight for white collar/unlicensed organizations too as to ban them from doing so would infringe on they're right to earn a living etc?

Bit harsh from the WBF as they are meant to look out for the best of the boxer and this title gives them more money plus it will be the highlight of some boxer's careers. I believe they have the same stance on the new WBU too.

If this the Luxemburg licence fight of Haye v Chisora happens in UK. i reckon it wont be long before with have another British board.

Until the BBBOC are recognised in parliament as the only governing body regulating the sport of boxing In the UK, I think they are powerless to stop any of their licenced boxers fighting for whatever organization they want. It just may effect the boxers insurance policy.

The Insider wrote:Until the BBBOC are recognised in parliament as the only governing body regulating the sport of boxing In the UK, I think they are powerless to stop any of their licenced boxers fighting for whatever organization they want. It just may effect the boxers insurance policy.

They are powerless to stop them boxing for another organisation, but if they do, they risk never boxing for the Board again

gobbles wrote:

The Insider wrote:Until the BBBOC are recognised in parliament as the only governing body regulating the sport of boxing In the UK, I think they are powerless to stop any of their licenced boxers fighting for whatever organization they want. It just may effect the boxers insurance policy.

They are powerless to stop them boxing for another organisation, but if they do, they risk never boxing for the Board again

But does that then infringe on the boxers right to make a living boxing elsewhere as the BBBOC are not the sole arbiters of Boxing as a sport in the UK.

I just wish the likes of the WBF, WBU etc would disappear. I realise it gives certain fighters the opportunity to fight for 'world honours' but we all know that the WBF, WBU champion isn't a proper champion. With all due respect to Tony Dodson, would we really have classed him as a 'world champion' had he won his proposed WBF fight? Similarly would anyone be considering Martin Rogan as a world heavyweight champion had he fought and won for the WBF title as he was scheduled to do?
Of course we wouldn't...

The so called major organisations are turning the sport into a joke so we don't need to these small pretenders to join in and ridicule boxing further.

milpool wrote:I just wish the likes of the WBF, WBU etc would disappear. I realise it gives certain fighters the opportunity to fight for 'world honours' but we all know that the WBF, WBU champion isn't a proper champion. With all due respect to Tony Dodson, would we really have classed him as a 'world champion' had he won his proposed WBF fight? Similarly would anyone be considering Martin Rogan as a world heavyweight champion had he fought and won for the WBF title as he was scheduled to do?
Of course we wouldn't...

The so called major organisations are turning the sport into a joke so we don't need to these small pretenders to join in and ridicule boxing further.

Agree mate. We need someone to buy all the sanctioning bodies then have on champ at each weight!

The Insider wrote:

gobbles wrote:

The Insider wrote:Until the BBBOC are recognised in parliament as the only governing body regulating the sport of boxing In the UK, I think they are powerless to stop any of their licenced boxers fighting for whatever organization they want. It just may effect the boxers insurance policy.

They are powerless to stop them boxing for another organisation, but if they do, they risk never boxing for the Board again

But does that then infringe on the boxers right to make a living boxing elsewhere as the BBBOC are not the sole arbiters of Boxing as a sport in the UK.

Then can feel free to go the unlicensed route I assume? I'd imagine that the Luxembourg thing will be seen as an alternative so it wouldn't infringe anything...

I did an earlier thread about the AIBA taking pro boxers to the Rio Olympics, these will be contracted boxers to the AIBA. The power if the BBBoC is diminishing as we speak by the looks of it.

Worth noting that BBBofC also members of WBC, WBA, WBO and IBF so any boxers would risk being barred by them too.
Don't think BBBofC has any duty to licence anyone who breaks their rules.

gobbles wrote:Worth noting that BBBofC also members of WBC, WBA, WBO and IBF so any boxers would risk being barred by them too.
Don't think BBBofC has any duty to licence anyone who breaks their rules.

Could the promotor be banned?

milpool wrote:I With all due respect to Tony Dodson, would we really have classed him as a 'world champion' had he won his proposed WBF fight? Similarly would anyone be considering Martin Rogan as a world heavyweight champion had he fought and won for the WBF title as he was scheduled to do?
Of course we wouldn't...

Rogan was aiming for the WBU title not WBF. I was at the press conference announcing it and have the poster at home. Make me an offer...collector's item

If someone like Audley Harrison doesn't even have the audacity to call themselves a “world champion” after winning, in this case the World Boxing Foundation heavyweight title aka the WBF. Then I think it's safe to say you might as well throw the belt into the bin. The only place it's fit for.

leforge wrote:

gobbles wrote:Worth noting that BBBofC also members of WBC, WBA, WBO and IBF so any boxers would risk being barred by them too.
Don't think BBBofC has any duty to licence anyone who breaks their rules.

Could the promotor be banned?

Any licence holder could be banned - promoter, timekeeper, referee, doctor, boxer.

gobbles wrote:

leforge wrote:

gobbles wrote:Worth noting that BBBofC also members of WBC, WBA, WBO and IBF so any boxers would risk being barred by them too.
Don't think BBBofC has any duty to licence anyone who breaks their rules.

Could the promotor be banned?

Any licence holder could be banned - promoter, timekeeper, referee, doctor, boxer.

So putting on a potential Haye v CHisora unlicened by BBBoC would have massive consquences.

leforge wrote:

gobbles wrote:

leforge wrote: Could the promotor be banned?

Any licence holder could be banned - promoter, timekeeper, referee, doctor, boxer.

So putting on a potential Haye v CHisora unlicened by BBBoC would have massive consquences.

Thats what I'm thinking as well, I'd imagine the BBBofC could tell FW to screw himself and ban his fighters from fighting for anything to do with of the BBBofC.

iamasadlittleboy wrote:

leforge wrote:

gobbles wrote:
Any licence holder could be banned - promoter, timekeeper, referee, doctor, boxer.

So putting on a potential Haye v CHisora unlicened by BBBoC would have massive consquences.

Thats what I'm thinking as well, I'd imagine the BBBofC could tell FW to screw himself and ban his fighters from fighting for anything to do with of the BBBofC.

Does that mean we could then end up with two different versions of the British title for example? The BBBofC one, and the FW one. Christ, that's just what the sport needs....

iamasadlittleboy wrote:

leforge wrote:

gobbles wrote:
Any licence holder could be banned - promoter, timekeeper, referee, doctor, boxer.

So putting on a potential Haye v CHisora unlicened by BBBoC would have massive consquences.

Thats what I'm thinking as well, I'd imagine the BBBofC could tell FW to screw himself and ban his fighters from fighting for anything to do with of the BBBofC.

But will "the board" be prepared to cut the hand off that feeds them? It this "Luxembourg" licence malarchy is allowed by the board it sets a president that will only see the downfall of the BBBOC as we know it.

If anyone goes to Ricky Hatton's website, Robert Smith is quoted as saying that the Board IS approved by the Government in an interview. Therefore, it must be all powerful.

If I remember rightly, around the time that the BBBofC moved to stipulate greater medical care, ambulances in situ etc at fights in the mid 90's following Michael Watson's injury was when it established some kind of quasi-legal status with the govt. I might be wrong there though, just going from memory.

While this feature was written on a slightly different subject, reading Robert Smith's comments in this interview should give you a better picture to the position the board finds itself in.

http://www.secondsout.com/columns/andre ... its-future

Wake up call wrote:While this feature was written on a slightly different subject, reading Robert Smith's comments in this interview should give you a better picture to the position the board finds itself in.

http://www.secondsout.com/columns/andre ... its-future

Interesting piece. Do you, or anyone else for that matter, happen to know the disparity in costs in terms of medical bills between 'licensed' and 'alternatively licensed' boxers?

Do you ever envisage bodies like the EBF moving away from being an outlet for 'white collar' and 'ex-pros who didn't make it' into staging more high-quality shows in terms of the abilities of the boxers?