BoxRec

Carl Froch - great champion as a boxer but, my God, as a commentator he's the equivalent one of those Baltic state punch bags who get ko'd in a round. His reading of a fight is absolutely awful and he peddles the same line in "house-fighter" cheerleading as the utterly risible Adam Smith. Bonus farce last night was Froch's continual referencing of Spence as Spencer.
Adam Smith and Carl Froch: I contend there has never been a worse commentating duo in British televised boxing history.
And to think people on here used to moan about Jim Watt........

I like his personality to be honest and like his dryness and even the "80,000" and "Cobra'd" stuff. Used to dislike him back in his early days but he grew on me. However, as a co-commentator he is pretty bad with a poor reading of fights, terrible scorecards, misses a lot of the little nuances that you would expect him to spot (or at least does not mention them) and the Spencer stuff was annoying. That was so poor that it may cost him his position as a commentator but he is decent enough as a pundit in the studio area.

I did not hear his commentary from last night, but i have heard him on many other shows and he does a good job IMO, he is growing into the role well and willl only improve. He's a good addition IMO.

Bad night for Carl

Why didn't Smith just tell him it's Spence

Froch's quite insightful, he called Haye's injury the moment it happened. He typically speaks about what's actually happening. That said you could put me in with Adam Smiths Hyperbole machine and I'd sound good, and I'm only an armchair boxing fan!

Awful night for Froch. Didn't even do the most basic of research and get Spence's name correct. Embarrassing for a PPV, total amateur.

I've never liked Frcoh as a person or commentator but was willing to give him a go but the 'Spencer' was unforgivable for me

Did use hear Amir Khan pre fright referring to spence as Thurman saying kell
Had a Tough fight in front of him
With Thurman lol

bigped wrote:Did use hear Amir Khan pre fright referring to spence as Thurman saying kell
Had a Tough fight in front of him
With Thurman lol

Yes that wound me up too,idiots they are

He was poor last night. I like him as a pundit though so move him back to the "studio" and get his thoughts at the half way point etc.

I mentioned in another thread I thought bellew was decent as Co commentator in the early fights (not sure everyone agreed with me), but I think when not commentating on potential opponents he can do a decent job

The fact he's got the job is laughable since it was only a few years ago he said he didn't really follow boxing and last year picked Chisora to beat Pulev because he'd never heard of him. Great insight there, the Andy Townsend of boxing analysis.

Froch had an absolute shocker last night. His bias, commentary and scores for home fighters was just awful. I had to turn the sound down. Why don't Sky push the boat out and get Darkie back.

Froch isn't nearly as bad as you guys are making out. There are some biased guys on sky but he's not one of them.

That said the spencer thing was annoying but it's an oversight nothing to do with boxing knowledge.

Froch calls a pretty strong fight normally, the only time I can't listen to him is the 168ers. As I always feel he gets the arrogant fighters head on and doesn't always speak impartially for that division imo. That said he gave groves his dues last night.

Think back to the commentators of past- Reg Gutteridge, Iain Darke, Jim Watt, Jim Rosenthal etc
Then think of these total fornicating idiots in Smith and Froch. It is absolutely incomparable. The standard of commentary and punditry on sky at the moment is absolutely appalling. Detracts from the fights it's so bad.

I don't mind Carl too much. He's a bit of a bore but he's not the worst.

Ossyrules wrote:Froch isn't nearly as bad as you guys are making out. There are some biased guys on sky but he's not one of them.

.

He was dog $hit last night. Had Allen winning by 7 and Brook up by 5. Wheeled out the same old rhetoric and dismissed any thing the away fighter did. Absolutely dire.

The Insider wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:Froch isn't nearly as bad as you guys are making out. There are some biased guys on sky but he's not one of them.

.

He was dog $hit last night. Had Allen winning by 7 and Brook up by 5. Wheeled out the same old rhetoric and dismissed any thing the away fighter did. Absolutely dire.

He was terrible recently too, I forget what fight but I posted about it on here. It was like he was commentating on a completely different fight than the one that was being screened. It was awful.

Carl was one of my favourite British fighters.

But wow he is sooo bad on sky. Did he give any 10-10 rounds last night ? His scoring of fights is shocking

He knows nothing about the current landscape of boxing and I actually don't think he is a fan of the sport.

Smith + Froch is a terrible combination

Ossyrules wrote:
That said the spencer thing was annoying but it's an oversight nothing to do with boxing knowledge.

Are you serious? It has everything to do with boxing knowledge in so far as general knowledge of the fight game is concerned.

And not to even know the fighter's actual
Name despite commentating on a PPV fight that he must've or should've been properly briefed on is alarming.

He admits himself he doesn't follow boxing so I have no idea why he would be a choice to comment on a big fight.

As for co-commentator Smith; not only did Smith not correct him but he started to refer to Errol as ''Spencer' which implies he didn't even know what Spence's real name is.

Smith has recent form for this with his 'Ian Lewinson' commentary.

All Smith does is refer to a few other fights that were good (notice he referenced Wlaaaaahhhddddd vs AAAAAYYYYY JAYYYYYYYYYY last night) or mentions something the fighter's said in the press conference or build up.

No insight, no analysis, nothing of value to the viewer.

boxingknockout wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:
That said the spencer thing was annoying but it's an oversight nothing to do with boxing knowledge.

Are you serious? It has everything to do with boxing knowledge in so far as general knowledge of the fight game is concerned.

And not to even know the fighter's actual
Name despite commentating on a PPV fight that he must've or should've been properly briefed on is alarming.

He admits himself he doesn't follow boxing so I have no idea why he would be a choice to comment on a big fight.

As for co-commentator Smith; not only did Smith not correct him but he started to refer to Errol as ''Spencer' which implies he didn't even know what Spence's real name is.

Smith has recent form for this with his 'Ian Lewinson' commentary.

All Smith does is refer to a few other fights that were good (notice he referenced Wlaaaaahhhddddd vs AAAAAYYYYY JAYYYYYYYYYY last night) or mentions something the fighter's said in the press conference or build up.

No insight, no analysis, nothing of value to the viewer.

Don't forget Smith's recently acquired habit of reading out the scorecards of everybody anywhere near ringside presumably because he himself has no idea what's going on in the fight

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:
That said the spencer thing was annoying but it's an oversight nothing to do with boxing knowledge.

Are you serious? It has everything to do with boxing knowledge in so far as general knowledge of the fight game is concerned.

And not to even know the fighter's actual
Name despite commentating on a PPV fight that he must've or should've been properly briefed on is alarming.

He admits himself he doesn't follow boxing so I have no idea why he would be a choice to comment on a big fight.

As for co-commentator Smith; not only did Smith not correct him but he started to refer to Errol as ''Spencer' which implies he didn't even know what Spence's real name is.

Smith has recent form for this with his 'Ian Lewinson' commentary.

All Smith does is refer to a few other fights that were good (notice he referenced Wlaaaaahhhddddd vs AAAAAYYYYY JAYYYYYYYYYY last night) or mentions something the fighter's said in the press conference or build up.

No insight, no analysis, nothing of value to the viewer.

Don't forget Smith's recently acquired habit of reading out the scorecards of everybody anywhere near ringside presumably because he himself has no idea what's going on in the fight

Yeah it also means he can go another half minute or more with no insight and adds 'these are of course our unofficial scorecards, the actual judges may be seeing things differently'

boxingknockout wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:
That said the spencer thing was annoying but it's an oversight nothing to do with boxing knowledge.

Are you serious? It has everything to do with boxing knowledge in so far as general knowledge of the fight game is concerned.

And not to even know the fighter's actual
Name despite commentating on a PPV fight that he must've or should've been properly briefed on is alarming.

He admits himself he doesn't follow boxing so I have no idea why he would be a choice to comment on a big fight.

As for co-commentator Smith; not only did Smith not correct him but he started to refer to Errol as ''Spencer' which implies he didn't even know what Spence's real name is.

Smith has recent form for this with his 'Ian Lewinson' commentary.

All Smith does is refer to a few other fights that were good (notice he referenced Wlaaaaahhhddddd vs AAAAAYYYYY JAYYYYYYYYYY last night) or mentions something the fighter's said in the press conference or build up.

No insight, no analysis, nothing of value to the viewer.

To clarify by boxing knowledge I mean what is happening in the ring. The technical aspects of boxing

I don't think any of its half as bad as you're making out.

Ossyrules wrote:

boxingknockout wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:
That said the spencer thing was annoying but it's an oversight nothing to do with boxing knowledge.

Are you serious? It has everything to do with boxing knowledge in so far as general knowledge of the fight game is concerned.

And not to even know the fighter's actual
Name despite commentating on a PPV fight that he must've or should've been properly briefed on is alarming.

He admits himself he doesn't follow boxing so I have no idea why he would be a choice to comment on a big fight.

As for co-commentator Smith; not only did Smith not correct him but he started to refer to Errol as ''Spencer' which implies he didn't even know what Spence's real name is.

Smith has recent form for this with his 'Ian Lewinson' commentary.

All Smith does is refer to a few other fights that were good (notice he referenced Wlaaaaahhhddddd vs AAAAAYYYYY JAYYYYYYYYYY last night) or mentions something the fighter's said in the press conference or build up.

No insight, no analysis, nothing of value to the viewer.

To clarify by boxing knowledge I mean what is happening in the ring. The technical aspects of boxing

I don't think any of its half as bad as you're making out.

Understood on technical side, but are you really suggesting that commentators should be given a pass for not getting the fighters' names right?

So to you it would be OK if Froch was talking about 70s superfights and referenced the 'Allen-Fritzell 3', thriller in Vanilla?!!