BoxRec

I don't like it, especially when a decision is disputed. Often one boxer is a better talker than the other and dominates the interview.

I don't think it's fair. Both fighters should be able to have their say without the other present IMO. Remember the first fight between Paul Burke and Eamon Magee? Okay Magee was robbed but that wasn't Burke's bloody fault. He shouldn't have had to sit and take the brunt of Magee's frustration like that, live on tv.

Maybe I'm the only one that gives a monkeys about this?

Yeah it was also a shame that after a great win for Beardsley against Thirwell he had to sit there and have McCracken say to him you know there is no way you won that fight.

Lenny Albert wrote:Yeah it was also a shame that after a great win for Beardsley against Thirwell he had to sit there and have McCracken say to him you know there is no way you won that fight.

Good old Beardsley was about 2 decent punches away from stopping Thirwall in the rematch. That would've shut McCracken right up.

Lenny Albert wrote:Yeah it was also a shame that after a great win for Beardsley against Thirwell he had to sit there and have McCracken say to him you know there is no way you won that fight.

yeah two on to one verbal assualt....
Jimmy Mac was a bit out of order after Sprott beat Williams last time too

It's nice when the fighters get on and show mutual respect but some post-fight interviews can be uncomfortable. Especially, as said, one is more articulate than the other. Robert McCracken should know better.

I agree they should be interviewed independently.

HH