BoxRec

I'm all for honest punditry but I thought Bellew and Khan really overstepped the mark in their assessment of how the fight ended tonight. In fairness to him, Khan's not the sharpest tool in the shed and he was merely parroting what Bellew had to say but it was a bit below the belt.

But Bellew ffs. He catches an unknown African with a lucky shot and beats a crippled, 5 years past his best Haye and suddenly he's Larry Merchant or Bert Sugar ? To say Kell had the fight beaten out of him was plain wrong, the lad couldn't see and no matter how much of a warrior you are (and he proved again tonight that he is a warrior) you don't wanna risk losing your eyesight ffs.

A proper anchorman like Dempsey or Buncey would've pulled him up straightaway. Johnny tried to put things right but the scouse gobshite with the tacit approval of Woolhouse and Khan giving him confidence just wouldn't shutup.

Somebody should point out to Bellew on air that he sh1t his pants in the press conference with Stevenson and sh1t himself in the ring also.

I won't criticise Brook for stopping, but how didn't he have the fight beat out of him?

He was beaten to the point where he wanted to stop. That to me is the definition of having the fight beat out of you.

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:I won't criticise Brook for stopping, but how didn't he have the fight beat out of him?

He was beaten to the point where he wanted to stop. That to me is the definition of having the fight beat out of you.

If his nose was smashed to pieces like in the Jones fight he'd have fought on but the worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences is not quite the same as having the fight beaten out of you.

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:I won't criticise Brook for stopping, but how didn't he have the fight beat out of him?

He was beaten to the point where he wanted to stop. That to me is the definition of having the fight beat out of you.

If his nose was smashed to pieces like in the Jones fight he'd have fought on but the worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences is not quite the same as having the fight beaten out of you.

It is if you decide to quit when you're losing rather than 4 rounds earlier when the injury took place but you were ahead on the cards.

Bellew doesn't have half the heart of Kell Brook, he'd have bailed early in a fight like that, Tony embrassed himself tonight.

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:I won't criticise Brook for stopping, but how didn't he have the fight beat out of him?

He was beaten to the point where he wanted to stop. That to me is the definition of having the fight beat out of you.

To put it like that really isn't fair. That cliche really sounds like it's used for someone who just doesn't fancy it no more

When you throw another suspect eye socket injury into the equation, fresh with the knowledge of how serious that injury is having had it from the golovkin fight, it's very harsh to use a turn of phrase like that.

In the literal sense you are right in a way, but I'd argue it's not fit in this sense

CaptainSpacerod wrote:The worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences

Ah, but that is the crux of the matter - the fact that Kell willingly withdrew from the bout during the heat of battle.

With Kell making that decision it does bring about a question:
How do we know Kell won't do this again in the future?

We, as boxing fans and ultimately paying customers are entitled to ask this question...

Finn wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:I won't criticise Brook for stopping, but how didn't he have the fight beat out of him?

He was beaten to the point where he wanted to stop. That to me is the definition of having the fight beat out of you.

If his nose was smashed to pieces like in the Jones fight he'd have fought on but the worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences is not quite the same as having the fight beaten out of you.

It is if you decide to quit when you're losing rather than 4 rounds earlier when the injury took place but you were ahead on the cards.

I'm guessing the injury got much worse during those 4 rounds

It may seem uncharitable to ask, bit how do we know that Kell Brook won't pull out again the next time the going gets real tough in the ring?

Maybe his physical sensitivity and worry over his eye socket means he will never be the fighter that he used to be & that he'll never be 100% again.

Crease wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:The worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences

Ah, but that is the crux of the matter - the fact that Kell willingly withdrew from the bout during the heat of battle.

With Kell making that decision it does bring about a question:
How do we know Kell won't do this again in the future?

We, as boxing fans and ultimately paying customers are entitled to ask this question...

That's a troubling attitude. And one that seems to be every where these days. You are not a customer, you are a fan.

Crease wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:The worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences

Ah, but that is the crux of the matter - the fact that Kell willingly withdrew from the bout during the heat of battle.

With Kell making that decision it does bring about a question:
How do we know Kell won't do this again in the future?

We, as boxing fans and ultimately paying customers are entitled to ask this question...

We're customers who pay to see sporting excellence not to see catastrophic injury inflicted even though the latter's sometimes an unfortunate by product of the former

As per my comments on the RBR thread, I disagree with what Bellew and Khan said. One for how they said it, it didn't come across as punditry, it came across as 'I wouldn't have done it, so I'm better'. Secondly, Bellew quit against Stevenson. Thirdly, Khan said it is better to get knocked out, which is ridiculous and ironic (Maidana fight aside I will add).

However, losing your sight is surely one of the scariest disabilities, and that is where the line is crossed for me. If he quits because he can't hack body shots then shoot him down all you like, but the fear of losing your sight is up there (but not quite as high) with the fear of a brain injury in my opinion.

Brook has been in a great fight, I had him one down going into that round and its not the first time Brook has been in an edge of your seat fight.

Crease wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:The worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences

Ah, but that is the crux of the matter - the fact that Kell willingly withdrew from the bout during the heat of battle.

With Kell making that decision it does bring about a question:
How do we know Kell won't do this again in the future?

We, as boxing fans and ultimately paying customers are entitled to ask this question...

Completely against this post

As boxing fans we should be supporting these guys going to war. They get paid well but it's dangerous work. How unlucky is it to fracture 2 different eye sockets in 2 consecutive fights. Have some morals, it's potentially career over type situation, there is no lack of heart involved here.

He's showed guts in the past and showed guts tonight. I will admit that I think there were fears over the injury in his head near the end, but to say quit when the going gets tough is quite weak to come out with.

He certainly had the fight beaten out of him. It wasn't all the eye, the body shots sapped his strength. Great last stand to close the tenth. Busted eye, tired, and your opponent is coming at you harder than he did early in the fight. Great effort but he was beaten mentally and physically by the superior fighter.

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:

Crease wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:The worry about how badly damaged his eyesocket was caused him to pull out voluntarily. I know what you mean but deciding to stop to prevent an injury leading to catastrophic consequences

Ah, but that is the crux of the matter - the fact that Kell willingly withdrew from the bout during the heat of battle.

With Kell making that decision it does bring about a question:
How do we know Kell won't do this again in the future?

We, as boxing fans and ultimately paying customers are entitled to ask this question...

That's a troubling attitude. And one that seems to be every where these days. You are not a customer, you are a fan.

I pay my monthly sky sporys package.
I pay out again for each PPV card.

The fact is I (& thousands like me) provide the funds to make these big events happen.

Eddie Hearn himselg admitted that the PPV model (whereby customers are effectively paying out twice) is - as he described it ; "the golden ticket" which pays for getting top class fighters like GGG & Wlad over to these shores.

So bearing that in mind, i think any customer is entitled to ask a question and spark debate.

Crease wrote:

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:

Crease wrote: Ah, but that is the crux of the matter - the fact that Kell willingly withdrew from the bout during the heat of battle.

With Kell making that decision it does bring about a question:
How do we know Kell won't do this again in the future?

We, as boxing fans and ultimately paying customers are entitled to ask this question...

That's a troubling attitude. And one that seems to be every where these days. You are not a customer, you are a fan.

I pay my monthly sky sporys package.
I pay out again for each PPV card.

The fact is I (& thousands like me) provide the funds to make these big events happen.

Eddie Hearn himselg admitted that the PPV model (whereby customers are effectively paying out twice) is - as he described it ; "the golden ticket" which pays for getting top class fighters like GGG & Wlad over to these shores.

So bearing that in mind, i think any customer is entitled to ask a question and spark debate.

I think that is a disgusting attitude when we're talking about the potential health of a fighter and it's actually quite indicative of modern society. You are a customer of sky's. You have no right to question a boxer because you pay money to sky.

Every fighters face and propensity to injuries is,different

A chudinov gets hit with everything and the kitchen sink but his face doesnt bruise his expression doesnt change

Brook has a great chin and heart but his eyes r weak

Khans very harsh comments which were really just parroting bellews lead and nelsons insinuations.....are made more palatable by the fact khan is one of the bravest fighters who ever entered a ring...he has fought to unconsciousness with his weakness (chin) kell chose not to which after such a brave incredibly skilled display by kell is his full right....the fact is this was old school 80s top top world class level back to back fights ggg/spence...

Overall a great show and skys presentation goes from strength to strength.adam smiths commentary and lead has in the last succesion of big shows been perfect..great to watch well worth the 17 quid.well done eddie

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:I think that is a disgusting attitude when we're talking about the potential health of a fighter and it's actually quite indicative of modern society. You are a customer of sky's. You have no right to question a boxer because you pay money to sky.

You are entitled to your opinion.

First off, i asked if Brook's uncertainty over his eyes would prevent him from going back to his best - that's a perfectly valid & credible question to ask cinsidering he's coming off back to back losses.

Secondly, EVERYONE i repeat everyone is entitled to an opinion on the outcome & unfolding of a bout provided that thry watched it.

Crease wrote:

TheDarkDestroyer wrote:I think that is a disgusting attitude when we're talking about the potential health of a fighter and it's actually quite indicative of modern society. You are a customer of sky's. You have no right to question a boxer because you pay money to sky.

You are entitled to your opinion.

First off, i asked if Brook's uncertainty over his eyes would prevent him from going back to his best - that's a perfectly valid & credible question to ask cinsidering he's coming off back to back losses.

Secondly, EVERYONE i repeat everyone is entitled to an opinion on the outcome & unfolding of a bout provided that thry watched it.

Yes of course they are, but you said you deserve to ask those things because you're a customer and that's nonsense.

Crease wrote:It may seem uncharitable to ask, bit how do we know that Kell Brook won't pull out again the next time the going gets real tough in the ring?

Maybe his physical sensitivity and worry over his eye socket means he will never be the fighter that he used to be & that he'll never be 100% again.

The going was really tough from the first seconds of round one....you got eleven rounds of topsy turvy tough world championship boxing...as a "customer" what more did u want ...?..a sadistic knockout?...a fighter to shhit in the ring? Be reasonable

Bricks wrote:

Crease wrote:It may seem uncharitable to ask, bit how do we know that Kell Brook won't pull out again the next time the going gets real tough in the ring?

Maybe his physical sensitivity and worry over his eye socket means he will never be the fighter that he used to be & that he'll never be 100% again.

The going was really tough from the first seconds of round one....you got eleven rounds of topsy turvy tough world championship boxing...as a "customer" what more did u want ...?..a sadistic knockout?...a fighter to shhit in the ring? Be reasonable

One might argue that thete is an ekement of sadism in pugilism.

He had flashbacks to the GGG fight and bottled it

Very disappointing to read some of these comments. Brook fought his heart out and stopped with a serious injury when he felt he couldn't continue as he couldn't see and risked potentially permanent and life-changing damage. Who the fvck has any right to criticise him for that? Casuals and armchair warriors!

Bricks wrote:

Crease wrote:It may seem uncharitable to ask, bit how do we know that Kell Brook won't pull out again the next time the going gets real tough in the ring?

Maybe his physical sensitivity and worry over his eye socket means he will never be the fighter that he used to be & that he'll never be 100% again.

The going was really tough from the first seconds of round one....you got eleven rounds of topsy turvy tough world championship boxing...as a "customer" what more did u want ...?..a sadistic knockout?...a fighter to shhit in the ring? Be reasonable

Good point. Proper high level boxing match. Again (following Joshua v Wlad). People should be happy with the fight itself.

Was it a returning injury?

The Golovkin fight aas stupid. Imo it shouldn't have been sanctioned by bbboc. Could well be the organised beating they decided Brook should take now has his career in danger. That eye looks rather wrong.