Page 1 of 1
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 27 Aug 2013, 15:49
by Bard of Boxrec
Sometimes I swear there's an unwritten code among journalists and researchers that you're allowed to get sportsmen's names wrong, as long as they're boxers.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 28 Aug 2013, 21:55
by iftkwoody
Lol this reminds me of a story my dad told me of a guy that he had working for him that "claimed" he was a know it all about football and whilst my dad and another guy was talking about man utd he confidently stated that "Brian Briggs" was useless
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 29 Aug 2013, 05:11
by ILikeBeer
There's a hell of a lot of people that make the mistake of thinking that because boxing is a sport that involves trading physical blows, that any old knob can have an expert opinion on it.
A few years ago, I was in the pub in an evening, and Sky Sports were showing Danny Williams on a Friday Fight Night show. My mate started trying to discuss his thoughts on boxing, despite the fact that he didn't know who Danny Williams was. (This was before he knocked out Tyson). Then, without a hint of irony, he started telling me what he thought the problems with the sport was, using something that happened in one of the Rocky films as an example.

Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 29 Aug 2013, 06:30
by Tarquin Tarpaulin V
Come on, give the guy a break. He's talking to boxing fans all of whom would know he means Barry McGuinness

Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 29 Aug 2013, 12:27
by bennie
I once read a newspaper story in which John Mugabi was spelt John McGarbey; another newspaper spelt Juan Laporte 'Ron' Laporte, which just goes to show that names said over the telephone can laughably mislead.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 29 Aug 2013, 12:43
by n1ebf
in the Kessler Calzaghe fight ringwalks there's 2 absolute belters. I can't remember both of them but at one point the commentator makes reference to the 5000 Dutch fans that have come to support Kessler....
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 30 Aug 2013, 12:47
by banjo
It's not just boxing though that gets misreported on by these experts who know everything about fornicate all, I'm also a big fan of motorcycle road racing and everyone becomes a TT expert when somebody gets killed and try to come across as all moral and take that "disgusted from Tunbridge Wells" tone without ever taking into account that the reason why competitors and spectators love the sport is because it is dangerous and there is a very real chance you could go home in a box. Go and weed your garden you soft twats and leave us to it.
I see lots of ignorance about boxing in the mainstream though, I always counter with the same response - boxing has saved more lives than it has ended.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 31 Aug 2013, 05:58
by pablothunder
Wasn't Jim Watt once introduced by the MC as Jim Scott from Wattland.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 31 Aug 2013, 09:44
by oliverfennell
My favourites were David Kane (Haye) and Jim McNeilly referring to Roy Woods and Clinton Jones.
I miss Jim McNeilly, actually...
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 31 Aug 2013, 14:54
by jtourettes
ILikeBeer wrote:There's a hell of a lot of people that make the mistake of thinking that because boxing is a sport that involves trading physical blows, that any old knob can have an expert opinion on it.
A few years ago, I was in the pub in an evening, and Sky Sports were showing Danny Williams on a Friday Fight Night show. My mate started trying to discuss his thoughts on boxing, despite the fact that he didn't know who Danny Williams was. (This was before he knocked out Tyson). Then, without a hint of irony, he started telling me what he thought the problems with the sport was, using something that happened in one of the Rocky films as an example.

Rocky was a documentary mane.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 02 Sep 2013, 09:09
by ILikeBeer
jtourettes wrote:
Rocky was a documentary mane.
Talking of any old knob....

Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 02 Sep 2013, 09:10
by ILikeBeer
There's a show on Channel 5 on the 14th.... I reckon there'll be some blinders by the commentators.

Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 02 Sep 2013, 09:21
by orbtastic
Riddick Ruddock was my favourite malapropism.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 03 Sep 2013, 15:55
by handsofstone
Darren Baker anybody?
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 05 Sep 2013, 08:33
by WelshJack
Segey Kovalev to be the next superstar of Russian boxing after Golovkin was one of my favourites can't remember who said it though.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 05 Sep 2013, 09:09
by JC
oliverfennell wrote:My favourites were David Kane (Haye) and Jim McNeilly referring to Roy Woods and Clinton Jones.
I miss Jim McNeilly, actually...
If you're talking about Jim Neilly that's quite ironic.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 14 Sep 2013, 09:48
by oliverfennell
handsofstone wrote:Darren Baker anybody?
He was "Darren Barger" on the cover of the local boxing mag here in Thailand.
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 14 Sep 2013, 09:50
by oliverfennell
J-C wrote:oliverfennell wrote:My favourites were David Kane (Haye) and Jim McNeilly referring to Roy Woods and Clinton Jones.
I miss Jim McNeilly, actually...
If you're talking about Jim Neilly that's quite ironic.
So it is!
Re: not really worth a topic...
Posted: 14 Sep 2013, 14:27
by hurlock
Anthony smells lol!