BoxRec

All credit to Flintoff for getting in there and having a go and beating the hopeless Dawson. It took dedication, courage and determination. However, the standard was no better than what you'd witness from first timers on a white collar show. Should the Board have licensed Flintoff (and who the fornicate licensed Dawson)?

Dawson - the midwest circuit is bad but I didn't think it was that woeful, saying that
Dawson could have won that if he applied a bit of pressure, the only proper shot he
hit Flintoff with he put him down.

I think this says more about amateur boxing's very stupid age limit rule, they had
a rule of the super heavyweight division having a 95kgs weight limit but they soon
changed their minds when the Russians and the Cubans screamed foul. I think Flintoff
is more suited to the amateur ring for now but of course he is too old or is on the cusp
of it. I am sure there are a few more midwest tanktown types he can beat for now though.

So the answer for now is 'no' only if they have the money to bring in some of these
midwest fighters in - I wouldn't put him in with a fellow BBB of C licensed heavyweight
for another 12 months.

Absolutely not! FF was and is a rank novice. If there is any criticism to dish out here, it should be aimed at the promoters and PR people that made this a headline event. In hindsight, Freddies debut should have been put on a small hall undercard, maybe even off tv. That way most people would be saying that it is what it is, a pro athlete dipping his toe into new waters. Now learn from it and move on to the next fight. But no. because of the media circus, people were expecting too much, and didn't get it.

You're writing like you think he'll box on. What gives you that impression? I'm pretty sure this is a one off. That's why I think he should've gone the amateur route, he's not too old yet or, if not amateur, white collar. I think the Board should set it's standard considerably higher than what we saw this evening.

smoothmoves wrote:Absolutely not! FF was and is a rank novice. If there is any criticism to dish out here, it should be aimed at the promoters and PR people that made this a headline event. In hindsight, Freddies debut should have been put on a small hall undercard, maybe even off tv. That way most people would be saying that it is what it is, a pro athlete dipping his toe into new waters. Now learn from it and move on to the next fight. But no. because of the media circus, people were expecting too much, and didn't get it.

100%

thats exactly what i said to my da earlier on, Flintoff should have had his 4 2's somewhere down the card.

Look at Selkirks fight, the commentator was spot on when he called it a glorified spar, thats what Flintoff really should have had, to get a learning curve. Should have put him in with Simeon Cover, near-empty hall, fcuk the tickets and the celebrity mates... but thats all by the by now

next step for him really is to have a couple more of those 4 2's in the gym, not gym fights but hard sparring against someone who is under orders to take advantage of every slip-up... exactly as they would in a full fight. He should fight again in 5 months - 2 months sparring and sharpening up, month off, 8 weeks training for the next fight.

JLP wrote:You're writing like you think he'll box on. What gives you that impression? I'm pretty sure this is a one off. That's why I think he should've gone the amateur route, he's not too old yet or, if not amateur, white collar. I think the Board should set it's standard considerably higher than what we saw this evening.

I just think he will, he will wake up tomorrow and think 'Hey, I am still alive and I didn't get embarrassed' and there is money to be made for all concerned, I bet that fight got more viewing
figures than the Price fight an hour before. I'll be very surprised if he stops now, even if it
is the sensible thing to do.

I'm not sure he will box on. I think that if he does, he should now take the undercard route. If he has another fight soon with him healing a big venue, he won't be taken seriously. Get on some undercards, and learn the trade. Get good sparring, and learn the trade.if he wants to be taken seriously.

That said, I'm not sure how he will react to all the criticism. He could very well call it a day there. I just think fair play for giving it a go. And the criticism would not be so harsh if it wasn't big news.

prize fighter? ive seen worst on there.

the most ironic part in all of this is that BBBoC agressively condemned Warren & threatened to go after anyone involved in haye-chisora because it was a fight sold to the public off the back of shameful publicity....



Seemed keen enough to give Jacamo their advertising with this freddy flintoff circus show.

kingfinn wrote:prize fighter? ive seen worst on there.

i've not, but junior witter in the final of PF was close to it

Is there still a rule which prevents amateurs and pro's fighting on the on the same show?
If so then this is a perfect example of why it should be allowed to happen, other genuine pros could have fought and flintoff could have had a fight at amateur level on the same bill.

To be honest if amateurs were allowed on pro shows its actually something that could be taken advantage of to boost boxing attendances by inviting celebrities to fight on under cards etc at an amateur level in a safer fashion (headguards, standing counts etc)

Would just have to make sure that a maximum amount of amateur fights were allowed on per show (ie....2) to prevent promotors filling cards with cheap labour and then having one pro fight at the end to bump up the ticket prices. It's a no brainier for me.

I know he should never really have had a pro Licence but it can only do good for the sport raise the profile even higher and bring in fans from other sports. I thought It was a shame more ppl boxers didn't get behind him. I was also very disappointed in Bunce and Lillis duo giving him stick If freddie wants to fight again Id support him he has never once claimed to be a world beater. If its keeping him fit and healthy and providing his matched right then watch how he progresses and enjoy.

The whole issue is a disgrace and the only people sticking up for Flintoff are his friends.

desperados wrote:the most ironic part in all of this is that BBBoC agressively condemned Warren & threatened to go after anyone involved in haye-chisora because it was a fight sold to the public off the back of shameful publicity....



Seemed keen enough to give Jacamo their advertising with this freddy flintoff circus show.

Spot on.

I thought it was a promotion for Jacamo at one point.

The BBBofC has lost any credibility they had.

Boxing suffers from farcical matchups, multiplicity of titles & top fighters avoiding each other which damages the sport enough, but this event just added to it.

I don't have a problem with Flintoff wanting to do it; in fact, I praise him for his courage, but this should never have been a professionally licensed bout IMO.

I can only assume in his trail bout he looked much better. You have to spar against another pro and i for one would like to know who it was and how he got on. On the basis of seeing the Dawson fight i think the BBBoC were wrong to licence him as he wasnt competent enough but perhaps with the pressure of "Freddie" seeking a Licence elsewhere (Luxembourg or White Collar) had the Board knocked him back, they felt they had no choice. Simeon Cover would have knock Freddie out as would have nearly any heavyweight pro with a BBBoC licence.

The Insider wrote:I can only assume in his trail bout he looked much better. You have to spar against another pro and i for one would like to know who it was and how he got on. On the basis of seeing the Dawson fight i think the BBBoC were wrong to licence him as he wasnt competent enough but perhaps with the pressure of "Freddie" seeking a Licence elsewhere (Luxembourg or White Collar) had the Board knocked him back, they felt they had no choice. Simeon Cover would have knock Freddie out as would have nearly any heavyweight pro with a BBBoC licence.

!00% Correct mate Answers are needed as to who conducted the trial bout and who it was against IMO

spudder56 wrote:

The Insider wrote:I can only assume in his trail bout he looked much better. You have to spar against another pro and i for one would like to know who it was and how he got on. On the basis of seeing the Dawson fight i think the BBBoC were wrong to licence him as he wasnt competent enough but perhaps with the pressure of "Freddie" seeking a Licence elsewhere (Luxembourg or White Collar) had the Board knocked him back, they felt they had no choice. Simeon Cover would have knock Freddie out as would have nearly any heavyweight pro with a BBBoC licence.

!00% Correct mate Answers are needed as to who conducted the trial bout and who it was against IMO

Well Chris i think its safe to say we know where it wouldnt have been passed mate.

The Insider wrote:

spudder56 wrote:

The Insider wrote:I can only assume in his trail bout he looked much better. You have to spar against another pro and i for one would like to know who it was and how he got on. On the basis of seeing the Dawson fight i think the BBBoC were wrong to licence him as he wasnt competent enough but perhaps with the pressure of "Freddie" seeking a Licence elsewhere (Luxembourg or White Collar) had the Board knocked him back, they felt they had no choice. Simeon Cover would have knock Freddie out as would have nearly any heavyweight pro with a BBBoC licence.

!00% Correct mate Answers are needed as to who conducted the trial bout and who it was against IMO

Well Chris i think its safe to say we know where it wouldnt have been passed mate.

too true lol

Next up, Jeremy Clarkson makes his F1 debut.

In all seriousness, this hasn't done anything bad for boxing, as much as I love boxing it is a joke of a sport ran by morons. Half a dozen world champions per division, interim, super, silver, champion emeritus, champion of the decade titles, mismatches masquerading as legitimate fights, the two biggest names in the sport despite being around the same weight class will not fight each other amongst other things. Boxing has been shooting itself in the foot for years, there's obviously a reason why out of all the TV networks only Sky has consistently been involved with boxing over the last 20 years but everyone is too quick to go "oh oh the tv companies are all snobs" even though ironically boxing traditionally is a snobs sport, rich men betting on poor blokes beating the piss out of each other.

Boxing as a whole needs to take a long hard look at itself before people go pointing fingers, "oh look this ex-cricketer thinks he can waltz in here and be a boxer, he's bringing our sport down" now that's snobbery. Flintoff looked terrible last night but I can guarantee you somewhere in the British Isles that there is at least one licensed boxer who is worse.

What would be interesting is if he fought on a continued to box in huge venues. It would prove once and for all that the cult of celebrity is the 21st century religion. Thousands of people parting with their hard earned cash once to watch someone do something badly (for novelty value) because they were once good at something completely different is one thing, doing it twice, thrice, etc is another thing entirely. I don't think even the British public are that cretinous.

It's all about the money baby, that's why is was hyped up so much. I'm sure there are plenty of useless pros in the UK, FF wouldn't be the first or last so I guess the BBBoC can't be criticised too much, however personally he should have fought as an amateur first as he is clearly not a natural, and never will be even with all the world class training he gets.

Vaudeville Villain wrote:Freddie Flintoff Vs Zahid Kahut, anyone?

If that matched ever happened they should play it on an infinite loop in experimental mental institutions just to see what it did to people's minds.

If they were out of order to license Flintoff, then what the hell were they thinking licensing Dawson? And what about the two guys who were so poor that they actually lost to Dawson? Surely whichever hokey backward commission licensed them, they should be shot?

Get over it people - He was never in danger of being hurt, he achieved a dream and sated an itch that was clearly burning. He has no pretensions of glory or greatness, just to have experienced the feeling of stepping in a ring.

And to whine on about the unfairness of him selling so many tickets and headlining a show on his debut? Since when was boxing a meritocracy? It has always been about who sells the most tickets, best captures the public imagination. There are so many instances down the years of 'better' fighters being overlooked for title shots because of more financially lucrative opposition. It's always happened and will continue to happen.

Why not look to some of the positives - a great crowd for what was effectively a small hall card; some great undercard action that will have caught the eye of so-called casuals who were not previously interested in boxing; the sport getting headlines across the British sports media; increased participation resulting from the Sky 1 show attracting viewers that wouldn't normally tune in to Vassell v Heffron.

earsjohn wrote:If they were out of order to license Flintoff, then what the hell were they thinking licensing Dawson? And what about the two guys who were so poor that they actually lost to Dawson? Surely whichever hokey backward commission licensed them, they should be shot?

Get over it people - He was never in danger of being hurt, he achieved a dream and sated an itch that was clearly burning. He has no pretensions of glory or greatness, just to have experienced the feeling of stepping in a ring.

And to whine on about the unfairness of him selling so many tickets and headlining a show on his debut? Since when was boxing a meritocracy? It has always been about who sells the most tickets, best captures the public imagination. There are so many instances down the years of 'better' fighters being overlooked for title shots because of more financially lucrative opposition. It's always happened and will continue to happen.

Why not look to some of the positives - a great crowd for what was effectively a small hall card; some great undercard action that will have caught the eye of so-called casuals who were not previously interested in boxing; the sport getting headlines across the British sports media; increased participation resulting from the Sky 1 show attracting viewers that wouldn't normally tune in to Vassell v Heffron.

This

The sole issue should be the health and safety of all concerned - that's the BBBC's bag. Neither man looked able to hurt the other last night, and to be fair Flintoff was in better physical condition than I've seen many pros.

Yes the standard was dreadful and the fight was of no interest to me as a bout. I was happy though that he had obviously trained hard and there can be no doubt that he tried his bollocks off, to his detriment really - he didn't take the sport for a fool and gave it the respect it was due.

If people want to pay to watch it then good on them, it's their cash they can do with it what the like. Not my choice of how to spend my wages but then it's not mine on how they spend yours.

Like it or not those crying on here because it attracted a big crowd are boxing snobs, get over yourselves.

The whole thing was a farce. Freddie's wife was laughing her head off with mates just seconds before the fight started which i just thought was extremely weird. Freddie's attitude was odd as well, he seemed very confident and straight onto the front foot so it was obviously made clear to him that Dawson wasn't going to be up to much.