BoxRec

"Tyson Fury camp criticises request from Anthony Joshua"

Tyson Fury's trainer believes that there is favouritism at play after Anthony Joshua lodged an IBF exemption request.

Matchroom Boxing reportedly filed a request to the International Boxing Federation in the hope that Joshua will be able to delay the mandatory defence of his IBF title.

Kubrat Pulev is the mandatory challenger for the belt that Joshua retained with his 11th round TKO victory over Wladimir Klitschko in Wembley last month.

But 'AJ' wants to postpone the Pulev fight until 2018, according to a report from World Boxing News.

A decision on whether the IBF will allow that delay, pending agreement from the Pulev camp, won't arrive until next week, but the fact that the request is even being entertained has irked Tyson Fury's trainer and uncle, Peter Fury.

“I find this just shows the level of tide against Tyson as we had no such option allowed to us,” Fury told World Boxing News.

“Instead, we got stripped of the IBF when Tyson won it. Let’s be honest, they couldn't wait to take his belt.

Fury was famously stripped of the IBF title just ten days after strolling to victory over Klitschko in 2015 due to the fact that it appeared as though the Ukrainian was set to exercise his rematch clause against his polarising rival.

But Fury's camp are incensed that they were not afforded the luxury of having their request heard by the IBF because Joshua is effectively in the same situation that Fury found himself.

Personally-speaking, I believe that Peter Fury's complaints about the IBF's behaviour are legitimate.

But did Tyson or Peter Fury actually lodge an extension request with the IBF?
If not, it's their own fault.

SteveO wrote:But did Tyson or Peter Fury actually lodge an extension request with the IBF?
If not, it's their own fault.

They're claiming they did. I believe them, since this was reported (at the time) by multiple reputable journalists.

Here's what the IBF announced, less than five days after Tyson Fury captured the IBF title:

"To be clear, Tyson Fury must fight Vyacheslav Glazkov next. If they agree terms before December 11 we cancel the purse bid. If it goes to a purse bid, the winning bidder has 90 days to do the fight," IBF chairman Lindsey Tucker explained to World Boxing News.

"Regarding the Klitschko rematch taking precedence, it's just the opposite as the mandatory takes priority of the rematch.

"In fact Rule 3B Return Bout states: No contract for a Championship contest shall contain any clause or provision, whatsoever, guaranteeing or in any way assuring or promising either contestant a return Championship contest where such clause or provision interferes with the mandatory defense of the Title."

Three days later, he was stripped of his IBF belt.

I’m guessing that the IBF’s ability to allow flexibility in the application of their rules is directly proportional to the prospective size of the sanctioning fees that they’re likely to receive from their champions.

It does seem unfair and fury was treated disgracefully by the IBF

However from an outsider looking in Joshua's team do seem much more professional and savvy when dealing with these bodies.

No arguing fury was treated badly though.

As it happens he would have lost the belts anyway due to his out of ring problems, but that's not the point here

Is it also Joshua's fault that Fury got caught using steroids?

boxing_rocks wrote:Is it also Joshua's fault that Fury got caught using steroids?

An irrelevant post. The issue is about the IBF, but you knew that didn't you.

I think the circumstances that surround the situation with Fury and the situation surrounding Joshua are different.

Klitschko almost immediately exercised his rights to his contractual rematch with Fury. With Joshua, Klitschko is yet to decide whether he will take it or not.

I suspect that if Klitschko does take the rematch, the IBF will strip Joshua of the title, and rightly so. The requested delay is just that, a request. One I believe will be turned down based on the outcome of Klitschko's decision.

The Fury team as ever, just making noise.

They are right, on the other hand, Pulev ducked Joshua time over time over time again and again, so in my opinion he doesn't really deserve the title either. I think someone like Povetkin, or even Takam earned it by now.

verlichte wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:Is it also Joshua's fault that Fury got caught using steroids?

An irrelevant post. The issue is about the IBF, but you knew that didn't you.

Very relevant. Fury shouldn't have been allowed to fight Klitchko in the first place.

boxing_rocks wrote:

verlichte wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:Is it also Joshua's fault that Fury got caught using steroids?

An irrelevant post. The issue is about the IBF, but you knew that didn't you.

Very relevant. Fury shouldn't have been allowed to fight Klitchko in the first place.

Why? He hadn't been proven guilty of anything. He hadn't been banned by anyone. His license wasn't withdrawn.

And besides, your comment is still irrelevant, since the topic of the thread is about the IBF's application of double-standards.

verlichte wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

verlichte wrote: An irrelevant post. The issue is about the IBF, but you knew that didn't you.

Very relevant. Fury shouldn't have been allowed to fight Klitchko in the first place.

Why? He hadn't been proven guilty of anything. He hadn't been banned by anyone. His license wasn't withdrawn.

And besides, your comment is still irrelevant, since the topic of the thread is about the IBF's application of double-standards.

There is no double standard. It was a request. The thread, as well as Team Coke Troll's whining are premature.

Tanzio wrote:

verlichte wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:
Very relevant. Fury shouldn't have been allowed to fight Klitchko in the first place.

Why? He hadn't been proven guilty of anything. He hadn't been banned by anyone. His license wasn't withdrawn.

And besides, your comment is still irrelevant, since the topic of the thread is about the IBF's application of double-standards.

There is no double standard. It was a request. The thread, as well as Team Coke Troll's whining are premature.

Learn to read.

There must be special classes teaching to read verliSHIT. Nobody will sign though.

verlichte wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

verlichte wrote: Why? He hadn't been proven guilty of anything. He hadn't been banned by anyone. His license wasn't withdrawn.

And besides, your comment is still irrelevant, since the topic of the thread is about the IBF's application of double-standards.

There is no double standard. It was a request. The thread, as well as Team Coke Troll's whining are premature.

Learn to read.

I'm not learning to read your crap until you learn how to edit yourself or hire someone to do it.

tyson fury has lost any claim on
anything by not showing up. if
he wants opportunity again, he
has to earn it.

he now is a man who held a belt
for a few months. nothing more.
i believe the version of wlad which
showed up against AJ would have
put tyson to a good sleep.

asdfjkl wrote:They are right, on the other hand, Pulev ducked Joshua time over time over time again and again, so in my opinion he doesn't really deserve the title either. I think someone like Povetkin, or even Takam earned it by now.

How many times he ducked him?

You are saying that Pulev is afraid :) ?

Sagaroth wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:They are right, on the other hand, Pulev ducked Joshua time over time over time again and again, so in my opinion he doesn't really deserve the title either. I think someone like Povetkin, or even Takam earned it by now.

How many times he ducked him?

You are saying that Pulev is afraid :) ?

For AJ? Yes, he ducked him several times, he even acted like he didn't understand English any more when Eddie Hearn asked him about the fight.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JQR-5L1uWfg

asdfjkl wrote:They are right, on the other hand, Pulev ducked Joshua time over time over time again and again, so in my opinion he doesn't really deserve the title either. I think someone like Povetkin, or even Takam earned it by now.

Gone off Shannon Briggs now have you?

I might be wrong but I think it was before Josh won the IBF title that Hearn was trying to get Pulev as an opponent.

Pulev wasn’t interested because losing would have lost him his position as mandatory challenger.

clopixolacuphase wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:They are right, on the other hand, Pulev ducked Joshua time over time over time again and again, so in my opinion he doesn't really deserve the title either. I think someone like Povetkin, or even Takam earned it by now.

Gone off Shannon Briggs now have you?

Never been on, he'll soon have his title.

boxing_rocks wrote:Is it also Joshua's fault that Fury got caught using steroids?

No one is actually blaming Joshua. Just that the IBF is clearly treating him differently from Tyson Fury.

asdfjkl wrote:

Sagaroth wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:They are right, on the other hand, Pulev ducked Joshua time over time over time again and again, so in my opinion he doesn't really deserve the title either. I think someone like Povetkin, or even Takam earned it by now.

How many times he ducked him?

You are saying that Pulev is afraid :) ?

For AJ? Yes, he ducked him several times, he even acted like he didn't understand English any more when Eddie Hearn asked him about the fight.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JQR-5L1uWfg

I hate it when people jump to conclusions without fact-checking.

Pulev didn’t “duck” Anthony Joshua at all, it’s been well-publicised that he insists on becoming the mandatory challenger, since he would be offered a bigger percentage of the purse split (via the purse bid process) than what was being proposed by Eddie Hearn.

I believe that Eddie Hearn clearly explained this fact when he was interviewed by Kugan Cassius via the iFL TV YouTube channel.

Pulev also preferred to go down the mandatory challenger purse bid route when he faced Wladimir Klitschko for precisely the same reason.

Instead of prematurely jumping to all sorts of derogatory conclusions, by automatically assuming that certain pugilists are “cowards” and “ducks” whenever they refuse to accept specific fights, please remember that boxers are known as “PRIZE” fighters for a reason, which means that they are likely to decline opportunities if they feel they aren’t being paid their worth.

If you adopt that stance and then research what has actually transpired, you’ll have a better understanding of the facts and the conclusions that your draw will more accurately reflect reality.

verlichte wrote:I hate it when people jump to conclusions without fact-checking.

Pulev didn’t “duck” Anthony Joshua at all, it’s been well-publicised that he insists on becoming the mandatory challenger, since he would be offered a bigger percentage of the purse split (via the purse bid process) than what was being proposed by Eddie Hearn.

I believe that Eddie Hearn clearly explained this fact when he was interviewed by Kugan Cassius via the iFL TV YouTube channel.

Pulev also preferred to go down the mandatory challenger purse bid route when he faced Wladimir Klitschko for precisely the same reason.

Instead of prematurely jumping to all sorts of derogatory conclusions, by automatically assuming that certain pugilists are “cowards” and “ducks” whenever they refuse to accept specific fights, please remember that boxers are known as “PRIZE” fighters for a reason, which means that they are likely to decline opportunities if they feel they aren’t being paid their worth.

If you adopt that stance and then research what has actually transpired, you’ll have a better understanding of the facts and the conclusions that your draw will more accurately reflect reality.

Basically took the words out of my mouth.

Rob3_142 wrote:

verlichte wrote:I hate it when people jump to conclusions without fact-checking.

Pulev didn’t “duck” Anthony Joshua at all, it’s been well-publicised that he insists on becoming the mandatory challenger, since he would be offered a bigger percentage of the purse split (via the purse bid process) than what was being proposed by Eddie Hearn.

I believe that Eddie Hearn clearly explained this fact when he was interviewed by Kugan Cassius via the iFL TV YouTube channel.

Pulev also preferred to go down the mandatory challenger purse bid route when he faced Wladimir Klitschko for precisely the same reason.

Instead of prematurely jumping to all sorts of derogatory conclusions, by automatically assuming that certain pugilists are “cowards” and “ducks” whenever they refuse to accept specific fights, please remember that boxers are known as “PRIZE” fighters for a reason, which means that they are likely to decline opportunities if they feel they aren’t being paid their worth.

If you adopt that stance and then research what has actually transpired, you’ll have a better understanding of the facts and the conclusions that your draw will more accurately reflect reality.

Basically took the words out of my mouth.

Yeah, I think some casual fans prefer to use derogatory terms like “coward” and “duck”, because it excites them and supports their hateful narrative. However, they forget that boxing is a business, where money usually dictates whether fights get made or not.

Put it this way, a highly-ranked anonymous fighter with no financial drawing power would usually prefer to become the mandatory challenger and go down the purse bid process, rather than negotiate terms against a financially lucrative A-side world champion if they were being offered less than 25% of the purse split (as per the Klitschko-Pulev situation).

This situation can go the opposite way though, since a financially lucrative A-side world champion is more likely to decline contract negotiations and immediately demand a purse bid when they are obliged to defend their world title against an anonymous challenger with no financial drawing power that is demanding more than 25% of the purse (as per the GGG-Jacobs situation).

People don’t listen to me though, since it’s more "fun" and "interesting" for them to have hateful opinions rather than possess "boring" factual opinions.

verlichte wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

Sagaroth wrote:
How many times he ducked him?

You are saying that Pulev is afraid :) ?

For AJ? Yes, he ducked him several times, he even acted like he didn't understand English any more when Eddie Hearn asked him about the fight.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JQR-5L1uWfg

I hate it when people jump to conclusions without fact-checking.

Pulev didn’t “duck” Anthony Joshua at all, it’s been well-publicised that he insists on becoming the mandatory challenger, since he would be offered a bigger percentage of the purse split (via the purse bid process) than what was being proposed by Eddie Hearn.

I believe that Eddie Hearn clearly explained this fact when he was interviewed by Kugan Cassius via the iFL TV YouTube channel.

Pulev also preferred to go down the mandatory challenger purse bid route when he faced Wladimir Klitschko for precisely the same reason.

Instead of prematurely jumping to all sorts of derogatory conclusions, by automatically assuming that certain pugilists are “cowards” and “ducks” whenever they refuse to accept specific fights, please remember that boxers are known as “PRIZE” fighters for a reason, which means that they are likely to decline opportunities if they feel they aren’t being paid their worth.

If you adopt that stance and then research what has actually transpired, you’ll have a better understanding of the facts and the conclusions that your draw will more accurately reflect reality.

Could you show me perhaps? As far as I know he could have had a shot against Anthony Joshua when AJ had a world title, but Pulev avoided that fight and fought for a Euro title instead.