BoxRec

Personally I think its a mickeytake, SC's dad reckons he wont get a fair go in belfast, but of course it was fine for frampton to go to the states twice.

@matt___s wrote:Frampton - Santa Cruz 3 - not in Belfast?

I am not surprised in the least.

When Carl defeated Leo for the title, there was an immediate rematch clause (despite McGuigan saying that there wasn't) so they had to give LSC the rematch. They should've insisted that the rematch be in Britain, going to LSC's backyard was a BIG mistake...
I know that the allure of fighting in Vegas is hard to turn down, they should've never agreed to that fight. If the 2nd fight was going to pts, then Leo would be handed it everytime.

And I never understood McGuigan or Carl's confidence of getting LSC back to Belfast, both of them giving it the old "he's a man of his word" craic...
Why would he? Why would he even consider travelling when he owns the belt now and it in the driving seat?

It a 3rd fight does happen, I expect it to be in California - in LSC's very hometown.

Yip piss take indeed! LSC gave his word but has now reneged because his dad has bottled it on his behalf. I think Frampton wins a fight in Belfast not because of judges but because the home crowd and surroundings will give him an extra edge. The SCs know this and that's why they're backing out.

I don't want a third fight.

Their 2nd fight was abysmal.

Horse wrote:I don't want a third fight.

Their 2nd fight was abysmal.

Wasn't as good as the first fight but it was in no way 'abysmal'....

Stuarty30 wrote:Wasn't as good as the first fight but it was in no way 'abysmal'....

It was very sloppy for a world level fight.

They could barely touch each other.

Awful.

Crease wrote:

@matt___s wrote:Frampton - Santa Cruz 3 - not in Belfast?

I am not surprised in the least.

When Carl defeated Leo for the title, there was an immediate rematch clause (despite McGuigan saying that there wasn't) so they had to give LSC the rematch. They should've insisted that the rematch be in Britain, going to LSC's backyard was a BIG mistake...
I know that the allure of fighting in Vegas is hard to turn down, they should've never agreed to that fight. If the 2nd fight was going to pts, then Leo would be handed it everytime.

And I never understood McGuigan or Carl's confidence of getting LSC back to Belfast, both of them giving it the old "he's a man of his word" craic...
Why would he? Why would he even consider travelling when he owns the belt now and it in the driving seat?

It a 3rd fight does happen, I expect it to be in California - in LSC's very hometown.

Frampton lost that fight, he wasn't as good as LSC on the night. Nothing to do with home judging

chrisnew86 wrote:Frampton lost that fight, he wasn't as good as LSC on the night. Nothing to do with home judging

I agree, I too scored the fight in Santa Cruz's favour.


My point was more a figurative one. For example, had Carl edged the fight, I don't think the judges would have legitimately gave him the past victory.

Crease wrote:

chrisnew86 wrote:Frampton lost that fight, he wasn't as good as LSC on the night. Nothing to do with home judging

I agree, I too scored the fight in Santa Cruz's favour.


My point was more a figurative one. For example, had Carl edged the fight, I don't think the judges would have legitimately gave him the past victory.

Yeah I scored it to LSC and like yourself I'm a big Frampton fan. I think if LSC comes to Belfast then Carl would edge him due to the extra push from the home support and him being in comfortable surroundings. Not because of the judges. LSC and his team look to have bottled it here IMO.

Horse wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:Wasn't as good as the first fight but it was in no way 'abysmal'....

It was very sloppy for a world level fight.

They could barely touch each other.

Awful.

it was high class counter punching, the fact that not as much connected is a testament to their defensive skills

Horse wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:Wasn't as good as the first fight but it was in no way 'abysmal'....

It was very sloppy for a world level fight.

They could barely touch each other.

Awful.

Just out of interest, given that you are a person with such clear, fair, decisive and reliably objective assessment and opinion of boxing matters, in light of the fact that you consider the 2nd fight awful and abysmal, how would you describe Klitschko v Fury's world title fight?

Crease wrote:
When Carl defeated Leo for the title, there was an immediate rematch clause (despite McGuigan saying that there wasn't)

You know this for a fact or you're just speculating ?

liamlion wrote:Just out of interest, given that you are a person with such clear, fair, decisive and reliably objective assessment and opinion of boxing matters, in light of the fact that you consider the 2nd fight awful and abysmal, how would you describe Klitschko v Fury's world title fight?

Arguably the fight of the year.

Very tense and very historically significant.

Horse wrote:

liamlion wrote:Just out of interest, given that you are a person with such clear, fair, decisive and reliably objective assessment and opinion of boxing matters, in light of the fact that you consider the 2nd fight awful and abysmal, how would you describe Klitschko v Fury's world title fight?

Arguably the fight of the year.

Very tense and very historically significant.

You're a hypocritical twat.

Stuarty30 wrote:You're a hypocritical twat.

I like what I like and I hate what I hate.

I don't blame LSC, for not going why should he being the champion, bloody Irish, make you laugh.

liamlion wrote:

Horse wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:Wasn't as good as the first fight but it was in no way 'abysmal'....

It was very sloppy for a world level fight.

They could barely touch each other.

Awful.

Just out of interest, given that you are a person with such clear, fair, decisive and reliably objective assessment and opinion of boxing matters, in light of the fact that you consider the 2nd fight awful and abysmal, how would you describe Klitschko v Fury's world title fight?

Fury title win over klit was a masterclass of tactics, against the man who had everything in his favour and still tried cheating, Fury was wonderful that night

Rexob wrote:

liamlion wrote:

Horse wrote:It was very sloppy for a world level fight.

They could barely touch each other.

Awful.

Just out of interest, given that you are a person with such clear, fair, decisive and reliably objective assessment and opinion of boxing matters, in light of the fact that you consider the 2nd fight awful and abysmal, how would you describe Klitschko v Fury's world title fight?

Fury title win over klit was a masterclass of tactics, against the man who had everything in his favour and still tried cheating, Fury was wonderful that night

Correct tactics and it was a fight that I couldn't take my eyes off but as a contest it was poor. Neither wanted to pull the trigger and Wlad was abysmal. He looked petrified and out of ideas. Horse criticises the LSC Frampton fight for being poor for a world level contest but talks the Fury fight up to be something it clearly wasn't. I'm a Fury fan and it was a great achievement but it wasn't a good fight. The LSC Frampton contest was a much better fight.

Depends what your looking for I suppose.

I can't say I'm surprised that Santa Cruz wouldn't do it in Belfast. I don't think I recall him ever saying he would. Frampton just wanted him too.

gilgamesh wrote:I can't say I'm surprised that Santa Cruz wouldn't do it in Belfast. I don't think I recall him ever saying he would. Frampton just wanted him too.

He gave Frampton his word apparently. He's also been on record saying he'd have no problems travelling to Belfast. When it's came down to it he's backed out. I don't personally see any excuse for that kind of nonsense. Frampton has fought him twice in the states. Fairs fair.

I agree with you though. I'm not surprised LSC doesn't fancy it now. I think Frampton beats him in Belfast.

Stuarty30 wrote:The LSC Frampton contest was a much better fight.

No, it wasn't.

Frampton has done well for himself beating the dangerous and late Gonzalez Jr and Santa Cruz, at least first time, in America.

I think he's reached his limit, especially being up at featherweight, and wouldn't have won the first fight if he hadn't shaken Santa Cruz with the right uppercut.

Expecting the rubber match in Belfast makes me think people don't believe he can win unless with home bias.

Talking about fairness is silly because Frampton was treated fairly on the cards both times in the States.

Autobarn wrote:Frampton has done well for himself beating the dangerous and late Gonzalez Jr and Santa Cruz, at least first time, in America.

I think he's reached his limit, especially being up at featherweight, and wouldn't have won the first fight if he hadn't shaken Santa Cruz with the right uppercut.

Expecting the rubber match in Belfast makes me think people don't believe he can win unless with home bias.

Talking about fairness is silly because Frampton was treated fairly on the cards both times in the States.

I mentioned fair and it's not silly at all! Frampton travelled to the States twice. What's to say LSC won't get a fair crack over here? It's nothing to do with the cards. Home advantage, familiar surroundings. I think Frampton beats him in Belfast because he'll perform better at home. Nothing to do with the judges at all.

It's silly to suggest that if Frampton hadn't landed that uppercut then he wouldn't have won! What round was that? 4th? Come on man!

Horse wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:The LSC Frampton contest was a much better fight.

No, it wasn't.

Of course it was