BoxRec

Lord mainstream media, especially propaganda machines Sky and the Sun make me fear for collective sanity.... saw this in the Scum.....worth a laugh. Here are some vintage quotes from Sky Sports 'experts' Johnny Nelson and Carl Froch (even though he says he doesn't follow boxing...) about this year's boxing.... (only available on Sky of course).

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/2810669/ ... g-in-2017/

Carl Froch wrote:I had 80,000 at Wembley for my second George Groves fight. But I’m proud of AJ for raising it to 90,000.

Well, it was predictable.... but still made me chuckle. Froch seems to have Tourette's when it comes to any comment on boxing. It always has to include George Groves and 80,000 at Wembley.....

Johnny Nelson wrote:IJN: People who think Tony’s mad are thinking about the Haye of six or seven years ago.
But he’s been flat-footed and doesn’t look anywhere near fit or ready enough for a decent opponent.

So Johnny is trying to build a case for a mismatch PPV sale

Johnny Nelson wrote:JN: If Haye turns back time, he wins via stoppage.
If Bellew’s gamble pays off, he wins by stoppage.

Annddddd it gets worse. Apparently either can win and it's a 50/50 fight instead of the Haye decapitation of a fat Bellend - real boxing fans know will happen.

Carl Froch wrote:II’d hate to come up against Linares. He would be my worst nightmare with his fast hands and his punching variety.

Again talking up a fight. In case you hadn't realised Carl (and as you said you don't follow boxing), Linares is a lightweight and I very much doubt he's your biggest boxing nightmare....

Carl Froch wrote:ICF: Golovkin’s heading for 35 and takes too many risks.
Kell Brook exposed him — I’m not on the Golovkin bandwagon like everyone else.

Brook 'exposed' Golovkin? Um he landed a couple of half decent shots but got battered and pulled out in round 5 by his own corner to stop him getting badly hurt. It's comparable to saying Bruno 'exposed' Tyson in their first fight because he landed one decent shot.

Carl Froch wrote:I2017 is the biggest ever year for boxing on Sky Sports.

I very much doubt Froch said that, and also - if this is really the biggest year ever for boxing on Sky Sports, the preceding years must be bloody terrible!!!!

Its weird, almost as if Sky are trying to hype up their boxing output. Don't we get a similar thing at the start of each year & what credibility have Froch or Johnny get left now, just company men playing the game & getting well paid to do so.

It's only Feb 2nd and this year on Sky we've already had Degale Jack and Frampton Santa Cruz II. Joshua Klitschko will be, attendance wise, the biggest post-War fight the country has ever seen.

I daresay it could be a pretty good year for them. Certainly has started off quite well.

Re Haye Bellew, plenty of people want to see that fight. As a comparison with some best odds from previous fights, Haye (1/5) is the same price to win as Mayweather was to beat Shane Mosley. Not a classic, but I don't recall anyone laughing at it as a farcical mismatch either.

dirk2686 wrote:It's only Feb 2nd and this year on Sky we've already had Degale Jack and Frampton Santa Cruz II. Joshua Klitschko will be, attendance wise, the biggest post-War fight the country has ever seen.

I daresay it could be a pretty good year for them. Certainly has started off quite well.

Re Haye Bellew, plenty of people want to see that fight. As a comparison with some best odds from previous fights, Haye (1/5) is the same price to win as Mayweather was to beat Shane Mosley. Not a classic, but I don't recall anyone laughing at it as a farcical mismatch either.

Do you work in the marketing department for Sky Sports?

boxingknockout wrote:

dirk2686 wrote:It's only Feb 2nd and this year on Sky we've already had Degale Jack and Frampton Santa Cruz II. Joshua Klitschko will be, attendance wise, the biggest post-War fight the country has ever seen.

I daresay it could be a pretty good year for them. Certainly has started off quite well.

Re Haye Bellew, plenty of people want to see that fight. As a comparison with some best odds from previous fights, Haye (1/5) is the same price to win as Mayweather was to beat Shane Mosley. Not a classic, but I don't recall anyone laughing at it as a farcical mismatch either.

Do you work in the marketing department for Sky Sports?

No. I'm just able to see that the comments of Froch and Nelson are as to be expected. You do realise when Froch says he'd hate to fight Linares he says this with the caveat that he's not really talking about really fighting him?

Either way, their plans for 2016 look well ahead of anyone else's. I was hoping Warren's new era was going to be a proper competition starter. Instead we have Flanagan in what can best be described as a typical Terry Flanagan fight, Warrington against maybe Kiko, maybe not, who knows, but no world title this year, Hughie in NZ on a Saturday morning if the fight even happens, and still an absolute mountain of confusion about the state of the BT deal. What do you expect Sky to say? 'This year we predict we'll be rubbish?'

dirk2686 wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:

dirk2686 wrote:It's only Feb 2nd and this year on Sky we've already had Degale Jack and Frampton Santa Cruz II. Joshua Klitschko will be, attendance wise, the biggest post-War fight the country has ever seen.

I daresay it could be a pretty good year for them. Certainly has started off quite well.

Re Haye Bellew, plenty of people want to see that fight. As a comparison with some best odds from previous fights, Haye (1/5) is the same price to win as Mayweather was to beat Shane Mosley. Not a classic, but I don't recall anyone laughing at it as a farcical mismatch either.

Do you work in the marketing department for Sky Sports?

No. I'm just able to see that the comments of Froch and Nelson are as to be expected. You do realise when Froch says he'd hate to fight Linares he says this with the caveat that he's not really talking about really fighting him?

Either way, their plans for 2016 look well ahead of anyone else's. I was hoping Warren's new era was going to be a proper competition starter. Instead we have Flanagan in what can best be described as a typical Terry Flanagan fight, Warrington against maybe Kiko, maybe not, who knows, but no world title this year, Hughie in NZ on a Saturday morning if the fight even happens, and still an absolute mountain of confusion about the state of the BT deal. What do you expect Sky to say? 'This year we predict we'll be rubbish?'

SMH - yes I understand the principles of marketing, PR and pushing your product to get buys. But to the knowledgeable fan these tactics are crude, cringeworthy and off putting.

Real boxing fans like us can see when we're being sold a pig in a poke

boxingknockout wrote:SMH - yes I understand the principles of marketing, PR and pushing your product to get buys. But to the knowledgeable fan these tactics are crude, cringeworthy and off putting.

Real boxing fans like us can see when we're being sold a pig in a poke

I don't buy the 'Golovkin was exposed' line, but the others don't seem as crazy as you make them seem.

Linares comments by Froch? I don't mean this to seem rude, but it comes across as a little autistic to assume Froch is literally talking about himself, (a super middleweight), fighting a man many divisions below. These sort of comments are made all the time.

Nelson isn't saying it's a fifty fifty fight at all. Even in the bits you've quoted he talks about 'Bellew's gamble.' As for his comments about Haye, who knows? He's not fought in getting on for a year, only had two dismal opponents in many, many years. If it goes beyond four could he gas? The bookies aren't being paid by Sky and they all have Bellew around 4/1. Hardly the odds of a man who cannot win.

For what it's worth I want Haye to win and think he will win and win early. But I think you've got your knickers in a twist about nowt much really!

boxingknockout wrote:

dirk2686 wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:
Do you work in the marketing department for Sky Sports?

No. I'm just able to see that the comments of Froch and Nelson are as to be expected. You do realise when Froch says he'd hate to fight Linares he says this with the caveat that he's not really talking about really fighting him?

Either way, their plans for 2016 look well ahead of anyone else's. I was hoping Warren's new era was going to be a proper competition starter. Instead we have Flanagan in what can best be described as a typical Terry Flanagan fight, Warrington against maybe Kiko, maybe not, who knows, but no world title this year, Hughie in NZ on a Saturday morning if the fight even happens, and still an absolute mountain of confusion about the state of the BT deal. What do you expect Sky to say? 'This year we predict we'll be rubbish?'

SMH - yes I understand the principles of marketing, PR and pushing your product to get buys. But to the knowledgeable fan these tactics are crude, cringeworthy and off putting.

Real boxing fans like us can see when we're being sold a pig in a poke

What does it matter? You say you can see through the hype so why worry, it's not aimed at you. It's a hype business and some people lap it up, doesn't bother me tbh. You've got a choice to watch the shows or not.

I always encourage and help mates find alternative means of watching Sky events

Taking breaks between rounds on Box Office events is unforgivable

Froch can be bitter and he seems to have it in for Golovkin; I imagine that there will be more comments like that, especially should GGG lose.

TheLeprechaun wrote:I always encourage and help mates find alternative means of watching Sky events

Taking breaks between rounds on Box Office events is unforgivable

I'll tell you what else is unforgivable.

The way the cameras immediately cut away when the ring girls come in shot. Somehow in today's crazy PC world it's ok to show two sweaty shirtless men smashing each other about the head for 36 minutes yet we can't cast an admiring glance at a pretty girl in a bikini.

boxingknockout wrote:

dirk2686 wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:
Do you work in the marketing department for Sky Sports?

No. I'm just able to see that the comments of Froch and Nelson are as to be expected. You do realise when Froch says he'd hate to fight Linares he says this with the caveat that he's not really talking about really fighting him?

Either way, their plans for 2016 look well ahead of anyone else's. I was hoping Warren's new era was going to be a proper competition starter. Instead we have Flanagan in what can best be described as a typical Terry Flanagan fight, Warrington against maybe Kiko, maybe not, who knows, but no world title this year, Hughie in NZ on a Saturday morning if the fight even happens, and still an absolute mountain of confusion about the state of the BT deal. What do you expect Sky to say? 'This year we predict we'll be rubbish?'

SMH - yes I understand the principles of marketing, PR and pushing your product to get buys. But to the knowledgeable fan these tactics are crude, cringeworthy and off putting.

Real boxing fans like us can see when we're being sold a pig in a poke

Just gotta realise it ain't made for us, we aren't important if we're already tuning in, and why wouldn't we be? They've got some very good fights on.

The shit they spew is to sell to those in the dark!

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

TheLeprechaun wrote:I always encourage and help mates find alternative means of watching Sky events

Taking breaks between rounds on Box Office events is unforgivable

I'll tell you what else is unforgivable.

The way the cameras immediately cut away when the ring girls come in shot. Somehow in today's crazy PC world it's ok to show two sweaty shirtless men smashing each other about the head for 36 minutes yet we can't cast an admiring glance at a pretty girl in a bikini.

The same goes for when fighters swear, a fighter will say Fcuk or bugger and Smith and co are all " we're really sorry you had to hear that at home" yeah because people who watch to blokes knocking FCuk out of each other will be offended.

crusader wrote:Froch can be bitter and he seems to have it in for Golovkin; I imagine that there will be more comments like that, especially should GGG lose.

Froch still has it in for Ward and follows every compliment with "but he's horrible to watch and that's why nobody likes him".

Some definite rhetoric. That's how Sky Sports is run now, with extra positivity and focus on their image and told more what to say. Been like this for about 9 years now, hasn't it? They all want to keep their jobs though, don't they?

Yes, some creepy comments in there, almost degrading. If there was an equivalent to Linares at 168 I know Froch would've got stuck right in!

However, Johnny has a point. If anything goes wrong for Haye, everyone will mention how fat and off balance he looked while beating on the Kossovan.

That said, '16 was a strong year in Britain. Everyone cried about the worst year ever for boxing, maybe, unless you're looking at UK and also Japanese boxing. So why shouldn't big things happen in '17?

crusader wrote:Froch can be bitter and he seems to have it in for Golovkin; I imagine that there will be more comments like that, especially should GGG lose.

Yes right "GGG was exposed by brook" if this was so then wouldnt froch want a couple of easy million ££ to capitalise on those exposures? Froch is full of sh1t in the commentary team just like the rest of the crew

All this and still no word of Paul Smiths next world title shot?

Nightmare Roy wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

TheLeprechaun wrote:I always encourage and help mates find alternative means of watching Sky events

Taking breaks between rounds on Box Office events is unforgivable

I'll tell you what else is unforgivable.

The way the cameras immediately cut away when the ring girls come in shot. Somehow in today's crazy PC world it's ok to show two sweaty shirtless men smashing each other about the head for 36 minutes yet we can't cast an admiring glance at a pretty girl in a bikini.

The same goes for when fighters swear, a fighter will say Fcuk or bugger and Smith and co are all " we're really sorry you had to hear that at home" yeah because people who watch to blokes knocking FCuk out of each other will be offended.

Yeah if you have to apologise at least do it in a way that shows a slight bit of contempt for the fact that you have to do it. Like Ron's apology for Coldwell saying "f*ck", you could tell he wasn't taking it seriously. Ron was told to do it but on sky its people like smith who make up the policies.

TheLeprechaun wrote:I always encourage and help mates find alternative means of watching Sky events

Taking breaks between rounds on Box Office events is unforgivable

Yes this was controversial at the time.

Extra money, innit. So they will do it, in this greedy, penny pinching, micro managed world of business.

And they make it harder for you to record events. That really did it for me.

Nothing like blowing your own trumpet Sky seem to specialise in blowing hot air up their own arses!

They've started the year pretty well tbf but the amount of PPVs is a joke. Probably gonna be looking at another 6/7 this year, 2 already confirmed.

ShadrachSimmo wrote:All this and still no word of Paul Smiths next world title shot?

This needs addressing. Everyone knows he's contracted to get two a year until he wins one, times cracking on now to announce the first.

Stuarty30 wrote:Nothing like blowing your own trumpet Sky seem to specialise in blowing hot air up their own arses!

They've started the year pretty well tbf but the amount of PPVs is a joke. Probably gonna be looking at another 6/7 this year, 2 already confirmed.

After Satellite and cable this was always going to be the way of the world sadly. And with greed of both promoters and fighters, they keep giving you less, for more money and keep on at it.

It's a bit cringeworthy, but to be fair it's a press release (i.e. basically an advert). Sky are hardly likely to come out and bemoan the lack of 50-50 fights or criticise PPV.

All pressers are execrable

What a load of Absolute crap

I've just cancelled sky because the boxing is so rubbish. Even a half decent flight is spoiled by the commentary and pundits.

Garbage