Page 1 of 2
Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 01 May 2014, 19:53
by dan h
Rematch in toowoomba on July 4.
Tough comeback fight for earl after 5 years out.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 02 May 2014, 19:48
by tsmithy50
What a horrible fight, Earl's chin was shot years ago. If he wanted abit of a payday and holiday there's easier opponents and if I was his advisor I would have suggested Queensland in the summer.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 02 May 2014, 20:29
by polecateddy
It will be a replay of Danny Green v Paul Briggs. Earl is shot to pieces and endangering his health.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 02 May 2014, 23:28
by Beltane
How could this rematch be sanctioned, when Michael retired Earl in 5 rounds, over 7 years ago?
Earl has not fought for 5 years, and after Michael's bout, he was stopped twice in 1 round.
Come on QLD boxing officials, extract the digit and cancel this fiasco!
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 03 May 2014, 03:01
by dan28uk
Pointless rematch earl has been out for so long and dont think katsidis should still be fighting and he is one of my all time favourites.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 03 May 2014, 04:43
by AntonS
Beltane wrote:How could this rematch be sanctioned, when Michael retired Earl in 5 rounds, over 7 years ago?
Earl has not fought for 5 years, and after Michael's bout, he was stopped twice in 1 round.
Come on QLD boxing officials, extract the digit and cancel this fiasco!
Safe matching is promoters responsibility not officials in every Oz State
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 03 May 2014, 06:48
by Beltane
Some responsibility!
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 05 May 2014, 02:26
by ShadrachSimmo
Its a very dangerous match up.
Hopefully it doesn't go ahead it will prove nothing.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 09 May 2014, 04:38
by p4p1
AntonS wrote:Beltane wrote:How could this rematch be sanctioned, when Michael retired Earl in 5 rounds, over 7 years ago?
Earl has not fought for 5 years, and after Michael's bout, he was stopped twice in 1 round.
Come on QLD boxing officials, extract the digit and cancel this fiasco!
Safe matching is promoters responsibility not officials in every Oz State
How can that be the case? Surely the governing body has a duty of care to keep promoters in line.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 09 May 2014, 04:45
by AntonS
p4p1 wrote:AntonS wrote:Beltane wrote:How could this rematch be sanctioned, when Michael retired Earl in 5 rounds, over 7 years ago?
Earl has not fought for 5 years, and after Michael's bout, he was stopped twice in 1 round.
Come on QLD boxing officials, extract the digit and cancel this fiasco!
Safe matching is promoters responsibility not officials in every Oz State
How can that be the case? Surely the governing body has a duty of care to keep promoters in line.
They can't act on opinion
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 09 May 2014, 04:46
by dberry
Meh, they're fighters, first and foremost, they know no different, no one knows what Earl's been up to in the last few years, and Kats is approved to fight, let 'em fight, I say.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 09 May 2014, 05:52
by tsmithy50
I don't know, Earl was pretty shot by the time he retired. Maybe a four round warm up could be advised before flying 10,000 miles to slugg it out with a busy puncher like katsidas.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 10 May 2014, 19:24
by fox
p4p1 wrote:AntonS wrote:Beltane wrote:How could this rematch be sanctioned, when Michael retired Earl in 5 rounds, over 7 years ago?
Earl has not fought for 5 years, and after Michael's bout, he was stopped twice in 1 round.
Come on QLD boxing officials, extract the digit and cancel this fiasco!
Safe matching is promoters responsibility not officials in every Oz State
How can that be the case? Surely the governing body has a duty of care to keep promoters in line.
Why can't they? NSW wouldn't sanction a Mundine fight so why can't they for this one. If this one is such a bad match up I think Qld officials can not sanction it.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 25 May 2014, 23:18
by bogan whisperer
Please somebody put a stop to this fight
Kats shouldn't be fighting and even more so Earl.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 25 May 2014, 23:47
by AntonS
Why can't they? NSW wouldn't sanction a Mundine fight so why can't they for this one. If this one is such a bad match up I think Qld officials can not sanction it.
NSW Authority had no right to do so & has since then been informend so by government legal eagles.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 05 Jun 2014, 09:19
by Beltane
Earl's last fight almost 5 years ago, was a 6 round points victory against a fighter whose record was at that time:
16 wins -125 losses - 7 draws!
Come on QLD Commission, pull the plug on this miss-match!
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 05 Jun 2014, 17:21
by caveman
agree with beltane,i reckon this fight is nothing more than a money grab, the health of both fighters should b put first,
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 06 Jun 2014, 18:56
by fox
Beltane wrote:Earl's last fight almost 5 years ago, was a 6 round points victory against a fighter whose record was at that time:
16 wins -125 losses - 7 draws!
Come on QLD Commission, pull the plug on this miss-match!
What I want to know is, if this is such bad match up, why can't the Qld branch of the ANBF pull the plug on it. I thought they were in charge of boxing in Qld and should be able to pull the fight it needed. Tell me if I'm wrong.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 06 Jun 2014, 23:28
by Sweet P
AntonS wrote:Why can't they? NSW wouldn't sanction a Mundine fight so why can't they for this one. If this one is such a bad match up I think Qld officials can not sanction it.
NSW Authority had no right to do so & has since then been informend so by government legal eagles.
Why cant they?
The commission here has dis allowed a few fights over the last few years.
To be honest though. How Mike is allowed to fight in the first place is beyond me. He retired because of some irregularity in his brain. Now he is back fighting. He is in more danger than Earl IMO.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 07 Jun 2014, 07:14
by dberry
They're fighters, they know no different, they have nothing else. They want to fight, they want to fight each other, let 'em fight.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 07 Jun 2014, 08:31
by fox
dberry wrote:They're fighters, they know no different, they have nothing else. They want to fight, they want to fight each other, let 'em fight.
If these fighters shouldn't be fighting, and I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, but the boxing body has a duty of care for these fighters so they don't end up permanently damaged. I don't know how each fighter is but alot of good boxing people on here seem to be concerned about both boxers safety.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 07 Jun 2014, 22:20
by Matt Ropis
The fight will cause much less damage than the preparation.
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 08 Jun 2014, 07:07
by dberry
fox wrote:dberry wrote:They're fighters, they know no different, they have nothing else. They want to fight, they want to fight each other, let 'em fight.
If these fighters shouldn't be fighting, and I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, but the boxing body has a duty of care for these fighters so they don't end up permanently damaged. I don't know how each fighter is but alot of good boxing people on here seem to be concerned about both boxers safety.
The doctors are the ones with the duty of care!
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 08 Jun 2014, 07:33
by tsmithy50
Bullshit, have you ever watched Larry Holmes/Muhammad Ali?
Re: Katsidis v Earl II
Posted: 09 Jun 2014, 09:37
by fox
Yes true the doctors do have a duty of care if something is a miss. Obviously both fighters have been cleared to fight. The point I'm trying to make is that if this fight is such a bad match up as most people are saying, wouldnt it be in their best interest not to sanction it. Don't get me wrong it could turn out a great fight, but the question I'm asking is can the Qld branch of the ANBF not sanction it. Some people are saying its not up to them. I'm pretty sure they would be able to stop it if they felt the need. And there seems to be alot of good boxing people on here saying the fight should not happen.