ITV boxing

Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

ITV boxing

Post by Autobarn »

could it have been any worse?

-Witter and Froch looking foolish vs spoilers
-Williams pulling out vs Skelton
-losing Hatton
-matching Calzaghe against a guy he has to punch down to with a hard head
-loads of padding
-tedious fights

(maybe it'd be better off our terrestrial TV screens. just gives it a bad name to the wider audience. hell, at least Sky are more watchable now since they're showing more international stuff. but they should've picked up the Morales-Raheem & Pac-Velasquez fights instead of Clinton Woods fight an uninspired fight in an uninspired division for a bogus title.)


on the plus side, Khan has shown good development, sitting down on his punches more now.
nickd
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7071
Joined: 17 Mar 2004, 13:45

Post by nickd »

The presentation was pretty good, not sure about Duke commentating though! Rawling was pretty good I thought.

And I love the music!
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Post by Autobarn »

not like the early-mid 90s though. they showed some great fights with a great atmosphere. now it's just a parody.
Bard of Boxrec
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13114
Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00

Post by Bard of Boxrec »

no, it couldn't have been much worse. The fights were terrible and were bound to be terrible from the off.

The music, while good and a refreshing change to today's f**king annoying attitude to modernising everything, nevertheless seems a bit too dated.
split_decision
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 255
Joined: 26 Apr 2005, 16:11

Re: ITV boxing

Post by split_decision »

viciousmaussa wrote:(maybe it'd be better off our terrestrial TV screens. just gives it a bad name to the wider audience. hell, at least Sky are more watchable now since they're showing more international stuff. but they should've picked up the Morales-Raheem & Pac-Velasquez fights instead of Clinton Woods fight an uninspired fight in an uninspired division for a bogus title.)


on the plus side, Khan has shown good development, sitting down on his punches more now.


How much criticism would Sky have come under if they didnt show a British fighter in a world title fight in favour of Morales and Pac in so called warm up matches.
THEBUTCH
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6639
Joined: 27 Jan 2004, 08:51

Post by THEBUTCH »

I thought ITV were crap too. The first hour and 10 minutes consisted of 4 x3 minute rounds of boxing. Pathetic.

TV scheduling ran over AGAIN, which isn't on for those who bothered to tape it.
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Post by leforge »

Yep I missed the Calzaghe fight tape run out cheers itv
In future I put a brand new 4 hour tape in.

By the sounds of things I did not miss much.
KOJOE90
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7461
Joined: 12 May 2002, 12:12

Post by KOJOE90 »

I didn't think it was that bad to be honest I suppose it's partly down to how high your expectations are.

There is of course room for improvement.

They can be contacted here.

http://www.itv-boxing.com/
jomothepure
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2660
Joined: 24 Oct 2004, 08:43

Post by jomothepure »

leforge wrote:Yep I missed the Calzaghe fight tape run out cheers itv
Lucky bugger
dandantheweatherman
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 337
Joined: 23 Apr 2004, 20:10

Post by dandantheweatherman »

I'm not sure that ITV's boxing coverage is so bad.

Consider this: which boxer to most sports fans who don't mind boxing but aren't really, really into it likely to want to see? They'll have heard of Hatton and Kahn, but I'd say it's debatable how much they'll have heard of Calzaghe, Witter etc.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's imperative Ricjy Hatton's next fight is on ITV for his longer term marketing.

Ultimately terrestrial TV boxing coverage has to be viewed from the point of view of the casual sports fan.

And I can't be arsed with Calzaghe....I watched the tennis instead. Much more entertaining.
steve689
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9660
Joined: 20 Jan 2003, 13:50

Post by steve689 »

The overrunning needs to addressed, twice now they gone over the time frame by a good half an hour.
nickd
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7071
Joined: 17 Mar 2004, 13:45

Post by nickd »

I dont think they expected either fight to go the distance to be honest. Bad planning!
REAL_DEAL
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5027
Joined: 09 Jul 2003, 06:42

Post by REAL_DEAL »

I still think Steve holdsworth was the best. Hatton was the best co comm :oops:.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27489
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Post by stujones »

steve689 wrote:The overrunning needs to addressed, twice now they gone over the time frame by a good half an hour.
Its better that it is live and over running than they cut out fights due to one fight going a few rounds more than expected.
koomey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 104
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 15:00

Post by koomey »

I really enjoyed the ITV coverage. The show was slick and they seemed to dig more into fighters profiles etc in the build up than SKY which was good. As people have mentioned, the over-run is really bad planning. Also, with Calzaghe being on so late I fell asleep in the latter rounds (not a bad idea actually!).

All inall if they tweaked things a bit I think they will put on a better show than SKY.

Koomey
Max Molyneux
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7084
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 16:53

Post by Max Molyneux »

Hell your not getting Warren fights on your digital subcription nomore and your getting them for free on ITV now as you only pay a tv licence for BBC channels so why complain? Plus you can turn them overif youhate them.

I liked Khans fight and I liked Calzaghe's too and I see why people are pissed off with him because he's very talented.

Wonder if it was true they never recommended him for the Olympics like he said because heprobably could of brought back a gold.
JimStone
Super Featherweight
Posts: 2097
Joined: 27 Oct 2018, 03:43

Post by JimStone »

A lot of old women voicing their opinions. Some of you would moan if you got the all clear on an AIDS test.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Post by Autobarn »

you must dig boxing of a horribly low standard. it's been a dreadful time.
Max Molyneux
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7084
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 16:53

Post by Max Molyneux »

At least were getting to watchthese fights for free and it'snot like there big fights.
boxbet
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 363
Joined: 09 Sep 2005, 11:01

Post by boxbet »

music was excellent, wondered if i would ever hear that again. khan looked awsome with such variety of punches. calzaghe boring load of crap.
Max Molyneux
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7084
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 16:53

Post by Max Molyneux »

Calzaghe;s entrance music was the best. :TU:
REAL_DEAL
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5027
Joined: 09 Jul 2003, 06:42

Post by REAL_DEAL »

Max Molyneux wrote:Calzaghe;s entrance music was the best. :TU:
i think he used that 3 times, mitchell, veit 2 and his last fight.
Lenny
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3656
Joined: 27 Nov 2003, 05:31

Post by Lenny »

Aren't times hard, we've got sky putting on more 50-50 matches in the next few months than they have done in the last few years, we've got boxing back on terrestrial television on Saturday nights with proper promotion as to when the programme will be on. Of course the ITV presentation will involve a lot of background to the fighters, the magority of viewers won't have a clue and it build interest. ITV are also willing to put fights that aren't big enough for ITV on ITV2 so we don't miss anything. And how can anyone have a problem with Sky showing the Woods fight?

We're a lot, lot better off than we were 6 months ago.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Post by Autobarn »

Lenny Albert wrote:Aren't times hard, we've got sky putting on more 50-50 matches in the next few months than they have done in the last few years, we've got boxing back on terrestrial television on Saturday nights with proper promotion as to when the programme will be on. Of course the ITV presentation will involve a lot of background to the fighters, the magority of viewers won't have a clue and it build interest. ITV are also willing to put fights that aren't big enough for ITV on ITV2 so we don't miss anything. And how can anyone have a problem with Sky showing the Woods fight?

We're a lot, lot better off than we were 6 months ago.
that's what i said at the beginning of this thread - about the boxing on Sky being good. since warren took his fighters over to ITV we've been getting loads of better fights; it's the ITV ones that are sucking. Before Warren went, we seldom got good fights unless they had something to do with Hatton, Calzaghe and Harrison. Since (and even a bit before) we've had some fine international fights on Sky quite regularly.
jomothepure
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2660
Joined: 24 Oct 2004, 08:43

Post by jomothepure »

Going off on one here, but I was just thinking (makes a change) -

Assuming Hatton never fights for Warren/ITV again. Do you think ITV will force Warren, or Warren will feel the need, to push some of his fighters into world title fights in order to get back some glamour for the ITV shows. Because Hatton was going to be on a par, if not more so after the zoo fight, than sicknote in terms of audience pulling par. Now he's gone, that leaves sicknote Harrison as the only passible world title headliners - for ITV1 at least.

So, will Warren feel the need to produce another world title holder. If so, will he persist with the WBU, which was barely passible when attached even to the huge talents of Hatton, so I don't see, for example, Michael Jennings holding down a prime time show with a WBU title fight. Will he go for WBO titles, or 'big 3' titles?
Post Reply