http://news.boxrec.com/news/2013/2013-w ... -step-down
Any additions to either list?
Price has not.earsjohn wrote:It's quite telling that all five of those that need to step up have been or are at the mercy of Britains Greatest Promoter for over 30 years.
Those from last year that did step up (Rees and Magee) are the only ones who weren't hindered in the same way.
Ah sorry - I thought he signed up (through Maloney) for his fights to be shown on allegedly. I'm sure the Harrison fight was broadcast to the millions of BN subscribers.leforge wrote:Price has not.earsjohn wrote:It's quite telling that all five of those that need to step up have been or are at the mercy of Britains Greatest Promoter for over 30 years.
Those from last year that did step up (Rees and Magee) are the only ones who weren't hindered in the same way.
Haven't Bellew and Warren spent most of 2012 at loggerheads on Twitter, Sun columns and in courtrooms? Surely Bellew, who has always claimed that he wants to be busy, would have been fighting more often if the legal situation didn't exist?The Dark Destroyer wrote:Same old stuff in 2013 I see.earsjohn wrote:It's quite telling that all five of those that need to step up have been or are at the mercy of Britains Greatest Promoter for over 30 years.
Those from last year that did step up (Rees and Magee) are the only ones who weren't hindered in the same way.
In what world was Tony Bellew hindered by Warren's match making for him?
Did he even fight for Warren in 2012?
still at moment promoted by Maloney they only on the tv channel.earsjohn wrote:Ah sorry - I thought he signed up (through Maloney) for his fights to be shown on allegedly. I'm sure the Harrison fight was broadcast to the millions of BN subscribers.leforge wrote:Price has not.earsjohn wrote:It's quite telling that all five of those that need to step up have been or are at the mercy of Britains Greatest Promoter for over 30 years.
Those from last year that did step up (Rees and Magee) are the only ones who weren't hindered in the same way.
It helped that fwank got Degale the European title fight and Groves got injured but i thought Degale looked poor against the french guy.To have Groves in this list considering he did get injured and did beat Smith better then Degale and had a good fight in america which impressed some yanks and did a decent job on Glencoffe(shame he couldn`t pull the trigger anymore) is harsh considering he was willing to fight Stiglitz.@matt___s wrote:I think there is a case there... obviously the full ins and outs wont be known to us, but Groves' CV post Degale is reading like he lost it, Degales like he won it.
He has boxed twice in London and once in America. He also had a World Title fight lined up which he pulled out of through no fault of FW's. At Matchroom he would have been second fiddle, by a long way, to Froch. Look at Bellew and see how much he has 'benefitted'. From a World title shot in your hometown to Miranda, etc... The grass is not always greener...Parson Cross wrote:Why oh why oh why did Groves not sign for Matchroom ?
I'll never work that one out.
bit contradictory there. Surely if bellew stayed with FW then he would have remained second fiddle to cleverly by a long way. If bellew had got the nod would he really want the last 18 months or so that have been 'delivered' for clev? I.e. Largely paper champ in the weakest sanctioning body.mickey1975 wrote:He has boxed twice in London and once in America. He also had a World Title fight lined up which he pulled out of through no fault of FW's. At Matchroom he would have been second fiddle, by a long way, to Froch. Look at Bellew and see how much he has 'benefitted'. From a World title shot in your hometown to Miranda, etc... The grass is not always greener...Parson Cross wrote:Why oh why oh why did Groves not sign for Matchroom ?
I'll never work that one out.
Well Degale has been unlucky with the FW situation not watched his last fight but his first with Hennessey pushed him a lot more than expected.The Dark Destroyer wrote:What's been wrong with Degale's comp? And Tyson has just faced the best fighter he's ever fought and looked very good.Naandrew wrote:For me Hennessey has to deliver some better fights for Degale and Fury in 2013
Fwank has never said or implied he felt Groves deserved the nod in the DeGale fight. He has said he would fsavi=our him to win if they were to box each other again.squared circle wrote:bit contradictory there. Surely if bellew stayed with FW then he would have remained second fiddle to cleverly by a long way. If bellew had got the nod would he really want the last 18 months or so that have been 'delivered' for clev? I.e. Largely paper champ in the weakest sanctioning body.mickey1975 wrote:He has boxed twice in London and once in America. He also had a World Title fight lined up which he pulled out of through no fault of FW's. At Matchroom he would have been second fiddle, by a long way, to Froch. Look at Bellew and see how much he has 'benefitted'. From a World title shot in your hometown to Miranda, etc... The grass is not always greener...Parson Cross wrote:Why oh why oh why did Groves not sign for Matchroom ?
I'll never work that one out.
That said, fwank has largely done ok by groves imo. He's well positioned for a world title tilt this year. He'd have also loved seeing degale leave the stable no doubt, and fwank doing a 180 turn and implying groves was the clear winner in their scrap after all.
lolThe Dark Destroyer wrote:
He fought three times in 2012, all for Matchroom, one of those including a fight against one of the worst challengers ever brought over here, rivalled on the same night by Hector 'I can't take a left jab' Saldivia. Warren matched Bellew well up and until he left, he even got the lad a title shot in his home city when he was 16-0 in 2011.
So is it acceptable for a fringe-level up and coming young fighter to be fighting just 3 times a year at this stage of his career? I know it's now the industry norm, but doesn't mean it should be considered acceptable.The Dark Destroyer wrote:If you agree that he was matched well under Warren I don't see what you have an issue with. My point about the title is that someone blamed Warren for Bellew's alleged poor 2012, and the last fight he had under him was a world title shot in his home town in 2011, kind of a big deal, no? I give credit to Warren in as much as he made the fight, in Liverpool for a fighter who hadn't earned his shot, I know what you'll reply to that about WBO challengers etc but it doesn't negate my point. Bellew was matched well under Warren, I don't see how anyone can blame him for Bellew's 2012, he managed to fight three times.Riddick Blowe wrote:You were obviously giving him credit for getting Bellew a 'title shot' as part of your argument that Bellew has been matched well.
I agree that he has been matched well, but Bellew isn't exactly at a level where he has so much ability that people are screaming for him to be let off the leash.
Bellew got the title shot because he shared a weight division with a fellow Warren titlist. For Warren, Bellew v Cleverly was easy to make and ensured the maximum amount of money could be kept in house. It could also be seen as a risk-free defence for Nathan as Bellew was still raw with the fight being sold on the back of comments in the build up to the aborted first defence when Bellew was attempting to drop weight to make the fight. It was not viewed as a competitive fight by most (beforehand).The Dark Destroyer wrote:
Maybe he should have a word with his promoters then, eh?