BoxRec

I saw his column from this morning. At the end of it it said 'This is my last column for The Sun'. Whilst I don't think FW made best use of the column I think it would be a shame if it weren't replaced by another dedicated weekly boxing article.

This was inevitable really. His column paid a bit of lip service to other stuff, but in the main it was always banging the drum for that weekend's offering on b ox n ation. That's fair enough, you can understand why, but it means little to the vast majority of readers of that paper. It was just propaganda for the promoter's channel. They were always going to pull the plug on it sooner or later, the column was irrelevant.

Manchester hitman has been put on suicide watch.

Warren's newspaper column was toilet paper, anyway. For a long time it was just bashing anybody he didn't promote, and hyping up B.allegedly.

Still, I agree that it'd be sad if it wasn't replaced by a proper boxing column.

Presumed Hatton or Hearn or ghosted for Calzaghe or similar will step in. Wont be a hack in the celebrity is everything culture of modern tabs?

I'm surprised he's clung on so long. With the link that newspaper has to Sky TV, you'd have thought that Frank would have been kicked to the kerb in favour of Eddie some time back.

Everytime froch won a fight he would remind everyone how calzaghe was twice the fighter and then go through everyone on his loses and how he was avoiding ward

I always thought he quite suited the paper.

Allegedly's column was just a PR and propaganda column for his own interests. Never understood how it was allowed or why it was allowed. Surely someone in the Sun's editorial team got a backhander??!!!

The only positive about the column was that it put boxing in the popular press who his good for the sport .

reggaereggae wrote:Allegedly's column was just a PR and propaganda column for his own interests. Never understood how it was allowed or why it was allowed. Surely someone in the Sun's editorial team got a backhander??!!!

The only positive about the column was that it put boxing in the popular press who his good for the sport .

Agree on both points.

Although there is very little boxing in the national press, I used to try to avoid this column as it would just wind me up !

It was just used as a vehicle to promote his own boxers and to slag off the boxers of other promoters - he must have paid the paper to print the stuff.

rio wrote:Everytime froch won a fight he would remind everyone how calzaghe was twice the fighter and then go through everyone on his loses and how he was avoiding ward

I noticed that !!!! It really did seem to be every time Carl was fighting....

JimJim2009 wrote:

rio wrote:Everytime froch won a fight he would remind everyone how calzaghe was twice the fighter and then go through everyone on his loses and how he was avoiding ward

I noticed that !!!! It really did seem to be every time Carl was fighting....

To be fair, there's many posters on here who do exactly the same!

Reckon Hearn is getting that column......Eddie's virtually a News International/Sky employee already.

Bodyshot3 wrote:Reckon Hearn is getting that column......Eddie's virtually a News International/Sky employee already.

Eddie Hearn already has a column online for the Daily Mail and I couldn't imagine him doing both.

I always found Frank's column really frustrating. Not only would he frequently mention Calzaghe when discussing Froch but he seemed to go out of his way to point out that Andre Ward was number 1.

It seemed to be a missed opportunity to promote the sport and get the casuals to watch shows which is key to growing the sport. The weekend of the recent Matchroom Liverpool show there was no mention of Anthony Joshua or Callum Smith but there were a couple of paragraphs dedicated to Frank Buglioni who had lost his previous fight.

maverick23 wrote:Eddie Hearn already has a column online for the Daily Mail and I couldn't imagine him doing both.

I didn't know that. the Sun & The Daily Mail, eh? Says a lot about our sport...

Sklar wrote:

maverick23 wrote:Eddie Hearn already has a column online for the Daily Mail and I couldn't imagine him doing both.

I didn't know that. the Sun & The Daily Mail, eh? Says a lot about our sport...

Daily mail at least have a dedicated boxing writer. I seem to remember years ago the Guardian took a 'moral position' and refused to follow boxing for a period.

The Sun used to be a staple purchase for many (outside of Liverpool) but that has probably flagged dramatically in the last few years, as younger readers use the smart phone or ipad for instant news now via facebook or twitter links that are shared.

Online, they have ring-fenced it and you have to pay to log on , the last time i checked anyway. To have payment gateways on websites to see "news" is a big deal breaker and a sure fire way to marginalise your visitor numbers from going back.

A lot of the "Stings" and "phone hacking" has only heaped more soil onto their coffin as it's lowered into it's 1990's grave.

There are some good, hard working staff there - but I feel that the brand has been devalued massively in recent years.

In closing, the column was a sniper's nest from which he shot down rival promoter's fighters on a regular basis without any real merit. It didn't really serve boxing fans with much else than that to be honest. It was tired and predictable. If someone's fighter was doing well and enjoying a good public profile, "they would never beat so and so" is usually trundled out - with 'so and so' being one of his own fighters.

But still, it was funny at times with some of the stuff that was said. And finally, at least it was something about boxing amongst the thousands upon thousands of words about football !

Sklar wrote:

maverick23 wrote:Eddie Hearn already has a column online for the Daily Mail and I couldn't imagine him doing both.

I didn't know that. the Sun & The Daily Mail, eh? Says a lot about our sport...

You think? The Guardian has done RBRs for some big fights in the last couple of years, Kevin Mitchell is probably their best known boxing journalist too. The papers fill themselves up with what sells and boxing simply isn't big news like it used to be, if it was getting the same support football was doing every paper would be as full of it as it is football, but it simply doesn't, unfortunately.

rio wrote:Everytime froch won a fight he would remind everyone how calzaghe was twice the fighter and then go through everyone on his loses and how he was avoiding ward

Which was absurd in itself. Firstly, Froch has already fought Ward, so how could he be ducking him? Anybody with even the most casual interest in Froch's career knows that he isn't one to avoid tough fights. Besides, Ward is such a part-time boxer these days you could make the case for him ducking the entire division.

If anything, Froch's resume of fighting the best opponents available puts Calzaghe's to shame, irregardless of which one you consider the better fighter.

It amazes me that Warren can look himself in the mirror, knowing the bollocks he used to routinely write in that article.