BoxRec

This forum is genuinely turning into a bit of a joke. Every time i log on someone is knocking Calzaghe, Haye, Hatton etc. What does a british fighter have to do to actually win some respect around here? I just don't understand it. Is it just the British nature to pick faults wherever we can? I watched the Urango fight at the weekend and found it quite amusing that a guy people knocked Hatton for fighting won a world title fairly easily. People also knock him for hammering Paulie, the guy who was number 2 in the division. Mental. The same goes for Calzaghe who has completely dominated his division in the past couple of years and then moved up and beaten the best guy at the weight above, who afterwards came back to destroy the 'next big thing' in Pavlik. People spend so much time critiscising british fighters for fighting shite opponents and then what do we do when a Brit is preparing to challenge one of the best fighters in the world? Jennings v Cotto anyone? How many times do i have to read that Jennings shouldn't be fighting Cotto? They cant win either way can they.

The thing is, in the past few years British fighters have been fighting or will be fighting the best in the world. Manny, Floyd, Hopkins, Mormeck, Cotto, Pavlik, Klitoris etc etc. And then we stand here and moan because our guys dont go after big names? British boxing is the best it has ever been by some distance and I am absolutely fornicating loving it. Just thought it was about time someone said a big well done to guys like Mick Jennings, Carl Froch, David Haye, Ricky Hatton, Joe Calzaghe etc. We have had the best fighter in 4 different divisions in the past few years - thats some feat for a little island.

I think it is something that lingers from their early career. They talk themselves up long before they get in the ring with the big names and when they finally get there, the stigma has already stuck. The guys that quietly win a world title like Clinton Woods never have a bad word said about them. If you are over exposed and are seen to take what is a perceived step down, then there usually will be a backlash and a stigma to go with it.

Cannibal wrote:I think it is something that lingers from their early career. They talk themselves up long before they get in the ring with the big names and when they finally get there, the stigma has already stuck. The guys that quietly win a world title like Clinton Woods never have a bad word said about them. If you are over exposed and are seen to take what is a perceived step down, then there usually will be a backlash and a stigma to go with it.

Thats actually a very good, valid point.

I know what your saying, its just Calzaghe I have really slated out of those mentioned. Although, not sure why you are saying well done to Jennings - they haven't fought yet, and that is a shot not deserved.

jayc wrote:This forum is genuinely turning into a bit of a joke. Every time i log on someone is knocking Calzaghe, Haye, Hatton etc. What does a british fighter have to do to actually win some respect around here? I just don't understand it. Is it just the British nature to pick faults wherever we can? I watched the Urango fight at the weekend and found it quite amusing that a guy people knocked Hatton for fighting won a world title fairly easily. People also knock him for hammering Paulie, the guy who was number 2 in the division. Mental. The same goes for Calzaghe who has completely dominated his division in the past couple of years and then moved up and beaten the best guy at the weight above, who afterwards came back to destroy the 'next big thing' in Pavlik. People spend so much time critiscising british fighters for fighting shite opponents and then what do we do when a Brit is preparing to challenge one of the best fighters in the world? Jennings v Cotto anyone? How many times do i have to read that Jennings shouldn't be fighting Cotto? They cant win either way can they.

There as masses of different opinions on here.

Calzaghe has just as many jockstrap carriers as he has detractors, so I don't really believe it's fair to say that we all bash him.

He is a high profile fighter, so he's going attract opinion from both sides of the mythical divide: This has happened for years in boxing & will continue to happen when Joe is playing with his grandchildren in years to come.

jayc wrote:The thing is, in the past few years British fighters have been fighting or will be fighting the best in the world. Manny, Floyd, Hopkins, Mormeck, Cotto, Pavlik, Klitoris etc etc. And then we stand here and moan because our guys dont go after big names? British boxing is the best it has ever been by some distance and I am absolutely effing loving it. Just thought it was about time someone said a big well done to guys like Mick Jennings, Carl Froch, David Haye, Ricky Hatton, Joe Calzaghe etc. We have had the best fighter in 4 different divisions in the past few years - thats some feat for a little island.

Have you been following boxing for very long Jay? British boxing isn't a patch on what it was in the 90s when we had Lennox Lewis, Hamed, Benn, Eubanks, Calzaghe

And Jennings isn't a top10 Brit boxer now, hes only fighting Cotto because hes been paid to take a beating

This is a forum though, your going to get criticisms where they are due and if you avoid certain challenges as Hatton/Calazaghe have done in quite calculated way, then criticism will follow.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

jayc wrote:The thing is, in the past few years British fighters have been fighting or will be fighting the best in the world. Manny, Floyd, Hopkins, Mormeck, Cotto, Pavlik, Klitoris etc etc. And then we stand here and moan because our guys dont go after big names? British boxing is the best it has ever been by some distance and I am absolutely effing loving it. Just thought it was about time someone said a big well done to guys like Mick Jennings, Carl Froch, David Haye, Ricky Hatton, Joe Calzaghe etc. We have had the best fighter in 4 different divisions in the past few years - thats some feat for a little island.

Have you been following boxing for very long Jay? British boxing isn't a patch on what it was in the 90s when we had Lennox Lewis, Hamed, Benn, Eubanks, Calzaghe

And Jennings isn't a top10 Brit boxer now, hes only fighting Cotto because hes been paid to take a beating

This is a forum though, your going to get criticisms where they are due and if you avoid certain challenges as Hatton/Calazaghe have done in quite calculated way, then criticism will follow.

Great post.

I have to agree, you cannot beat the 90s (in my lifetime) for UK boxing.

Saturday nights on ITV with the likes of Hamed, Benn & Eubank were something special.

Good point sg1985.

It's such a shame that most of the big fights have been taken off free-to-air terrestrial TV because a generation of excellent UK fighters has gone largely unnoticed (outside of boxing circles).

Joe Calzaghe & Ricky Hatton to name but 2 have only in the last couple of years come to prominence in the wider sporting sphere & even taking that into account, they're still not as big as Hamed, Benn & Eubank were.

Syntax Error wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

jayc wrote:The thing is, in the past few years British fighters have been fighting or will be fighting the best in the world. Manny, Floyd, Hopkins, Mormeck, Cotto, Pavlik, Klitoris etc etc. And then we stand here and moan because our guys dont go after big names? British boxing is the best it has ever been by some distance and I am absolutely effing loving it. Just thought it was about time someone said a big well done to guys like Mick Jennings, Carl Froch, David Haye, Ricky Hatton, Joe Calzaghe etc. We have had the best fighter in 4 different divisions in the past few years - thats some feat for a little island.

Have you been following boxing for very long Jay? British boxing isn't a patch on what it was in the 90s when we had Lennox Lewis, Hamed, Benn, Eubanks, Calzaghe

And Jennings isn't a top10 Brit boxer now, hes only fighting Cotto because hes been paid to take a beating

This is a forum though, your going to get criticisms where they are due and if you avoid certain challenges as Hatton/Calazaghe have done in quite calculated way, then criticism will follow.

Great post.

I have to agree, you cannot beat the 90s (in my lifetime) for UK boxing.

Saturday nights on ITV with the likes of Hamed, Benn & Eubank were something special.

Boxing was BIGGER in the UK in the 90s, but British boxers have been enjoying a greater success rate at top level the last year or two. At one point last year we had SEVEN world champions, including three undisputed/linear. The days of Benn and co were great, but in the whole decade only Lewis and Naz were widely considered number one in their divisions. Benn, Eubank, Bruno etc never were, despite their enormous fame.

People knock Calzaghe for 'ducking' people but then slate Haye & Froch for going after the biggest fighters, saying they need to 'Know their place' and 'Stop being cocky'. So you can't win either way!

sg1985 wrote:

jayc wrote:This forum is genuinely turning into a bit of a joke. Every time i log on someone is knocking Calzaghe, Haye, Hatton etc. What does a british fighter have to do to actually win some respect around here? I just don't understand it. Is it just the British nature to pick faults wherever we can? I watched the Urango fight at the weekend and found it quite amusing that a guy people knocked Hatton for fighting won a world title fairly easily. People also knock him for hammering Paulie, the guy who was number 2 in the division. Mental. The same goes for Calzaghe who has completely dominated his division in the past couple of years and then moved up and beaten the best guy at the weight above, who afterwards came back to destroy the 'next big thing' in Pavlik. People spend so much time critiscising british fighters for fighting shite opponents and then what do we do when a Brit is preparing to challenge one of the best fighters in the world? Jennings v Cotto anyone? How many times do i have to read that Jennings shouldn't be fighting Cotto? They cant win either way can they.

i completely agree with you, the haye arguement is the worst at the moment, people saying he doesnt deserve to get a big fight. the guy was the undisputed cruiserweight world champ, what is a few more fights against 2nd rate heavyweights really going to teach him. i think alot of the hatton stuff has to do with him losing, knocking the paulie fight is daft, alot of people on here picked him to win, although im not sure how many actually thought he would and weren;t just picking him because they dont like hatton. i dont know why people knock the jennings - cotto fight, i'd agree he isnt on the same level as cotto but jesus he's getting in the ring with him, he's got half a chance, get behind him.

No respect for Haye?

Haye has got more respect for gunning straight for Mormeck and Macca than just about any other fighter. The only thing is CONCERN, that he might be a bit hasty gunning for Wlad. I think we've seen sensible debate both ways on here.

I think Calzaghe gets his props for the Lacy and Kessler fights & longevity, but it has been an ordeal watching the Manfredo and Jones fights. And the Hopkins fight, I'd say, proved he's not the finished article, even at this time, because of the way that matchmaking has helped Joe throughout his career. I'd say a lot of ppl have been genuinely disappointed following Calzaghe's career.

Froch is also getting credit, especially from me, going straight from a war with Pascal to chasing after Jermain Taylor.

jayc wrote:This forum is genuinely turning into a bit of a joke. Every time i log on someone is knocking Calzaghe, Haye, Hatton etc. What does a british fighter have to do to actually win some respect around here? I just don't understand it. Is it just the British nature to pick faults wherever we can? I watched the Urango fight at the weekend and found it quite amusing that a guy people knocked Hatton for fighting won a world title fairly easily. People also knock him for hammering Paulie, the guy who was number 2 in the division. Mental. The same goes for Calzaghe who has completely dominated his division in the past couple of years and then moved up and beaten the best guy at the weight above, who afterwards came back to destroy the 'next big thing' in Pavlik. People spend so much time critiscising british fighters for fighting shite opponents and then what do we do when a Brit is preparing to challenge one of the best fighters in the world? Jennings v Cotto anyone? How many times do i have to read that Jennings shouldn't be fighting Cotto? They cant win either way can they.

What should we be doing? Prostrating ourselves at their feet and worshipping them.

Neither fighters is above reproach. Hatton made millions fighting very poor opponents for years before stepping up, Joe wasted a lot of his career fighting very poor fighters also.

oliverfennell wrote:
Boxing was BIGGER in the UK in the 90s, but British boxers have been enjoying a greater success rate at top level the last year or two. At one point last year we had SEVEN world champions, including three undisputed/linear. The days of Benn and co were great, but in the whole decade only Lewis and Naz were widely considered number one in their divisions. Benn, Eubank, Bruno etc never were, despite their enormous fame.

The biggest problem is that newspapers, until the power influence of Sky, gives little coverage to anything but football now. Football is easy, football is safe. British boxing is bigger and better than it was in the Nineties in terms of shows, money and the number of people watching boxing live. However, the TV viewing figures are much smaller.

However, it must be remembered than that is the case with everything now. In the early nineties there were four TV channels and Sky was in its infancy. Now there are hundreds of channels, that splits the audience. It is worth remembering that the first Audley-Danny fight had ITV's second biggest sporting audience of the year, even beating Chelsea v Liverpool in the Champions League semi-final. The audience is there, there is no need to be completely negative.

jamesmcdonnell wrote: What should we be doing? Prostrating ourselves at their feet and worshipping them.

Neither fighters is above reproach. Hatton made millions fighting very poor opponents for years before stepping up, Joe wasted a lot of his career fighting very poor fighters also.

That sums it up for me as well. Hatton and Calzaghe are both fantastic fighters, but both of their careers have had a longline of soft defences and glaring ommissions.

Neither Hatton or Calzaghe will get the respect from me that the likes of Haye and Froch do/will, because Haye and Froch are not content fighting people a few classes below them for a few £££'s. As has been proven by Froch choosing to fight Taylor rather than letting the purse bid situation fizzle out and taking a voluntary, and by Haye seeking out a Klitschko for his third fight at the weight.

Chambers2 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote: What should we be doing? Prostrating ourselves at their feet and worshipping them.

Neither fighters is above reproach. Hatton made millions fighting very poor opponents for years before stepping up, Joe wasted a lot of his career fighting very poor fighters also.

That sums it up for me as well. Hatton and Calzaghe are both fantastic fighters, but both of their careers have had a longline of soft defences and glaring ommissions.

Neither Hatton or Calzaghe will get the respect from me that the likes of Haye and Froch do/will, because Haye and Froch are not content fighting people a few classes below them for a few £££'s. As has been proven by Froch choosing to fight Taylor rather than letting the purse bid situation fizzle out and taking a voluntary, and by Haye seeking out a Klitschko for his third fight at the weight.

Which legends has Froch actually fought? Especially, considering he is now 31

gobbles wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote: What should we be doing? Prostrating ourselves at their feet and worshipping them.

Neither fighters is above reproach. Hatton made millions fighting very poor opponents for years before stepping up, Joe wasted a lot of his career fighting very poor fighters also.

That sums it up for me as well. Hatton and Calzaghe are both fantastic fighters, but both of their careers have had a longline of soft defences and glaring ommissions.

Neither Hatton or Calzaghe will get the respect from me that the likes of Haye and Froch do/will, because Haye and Froch are not content fighting people a few classes below them for a few £££'s. As has been proven by Froch choosing to fight Taylor rather than letting the purse bid situation fizzle out and taking a voluntary, and by Haye seeking out a Klitschko for his third fight at the weight.

Which legends has Froch actually fought? Especially, considering he is now 31

Fighting over the hill legends is not what floats my boat

winkveron wrote:People knock Calzaghe for 'ducking' people but then slate Haye & Froch for going after the biggest fighters, saying they need to 'Know their place' and 'Stop being cocky'. So you can't win either way!

Who is slating Haye and Froch? I don't see it.

Froch and Haye are both prepared to put it all on the line without wasting time with meaningless fights.

Calzaghe and Hatton by constrast spend several years defending a strap against mediocre opposition and making a killing.

Let's not forget, Hatton was a pro for eight years before he fought for a genuine title. Calzaghe took eight years to fight for the IBF.

BARNEYKX wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

winkveron wrote:People knock Calzaghe for 'ducking' people but then slate Haye & Froch for going after the biggest fighters, saying they need to 'Know their place' and 'Stop being cocky'. So you can't win either way!

Who is slating Haye and Froch? I don't see it.

Froch and Haye are both prepared to put it all on the line without wasting time with meaningless fights.

Calzaghe and Hatton by constrast spend several years defending a strap against mediocre opposition and making a killing.

Let's not forget, Hatton was a pro for eight years before he fought for a genuine title. Calzaghe took eight years to fight for the IBF.

SO JUST WHAT IS THE MOST MEANINGFUL WORLD TITLE NOWADAYS

A title belt is not the issue, it's the quality of the opposition that defines a champions reign.

Calzaghe and Hatton's careers were littered with frankly shit opposition, Hatton however stepped up once he won the title belt. Calzaghe I think was stung by being put in the shade by Hatton, and decided to actually fight proper opponents, rather than endless crappy defences of his WBO strap.

I'm sorry, but Calzaghe's career just isn't that impressive, a few very good wins, but not enough of them to constitute the word 'legend.'

especially. Go look for yourself at his record, full of stinkers, undeniable.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

winkveron wrote:People knock Calzaghe for 'ducking' people but then slate Haye & Froch for going after the biggest fighters, saying they need to 'Know their place' and 'Stop being cocky'. So you can't win either way!

Who is slating Haye and Froch? I don't see it.

Tonnes of threads on here slate both Haye & Froch for being too cocky without being able to back it up. Maybe they haven't got loads of career defining fights on their records that they would want yet but you can't knock them for having the balls to go after the biggest fights out there. But the point I was trying to make is people slate Calzaghe for the exact opposite so it's hard to win!

winkveron wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

winkveron wrote:People knock Calzaghe for 'ducking' people but then slate Haye & Froch for going after the biggest fighters, saying they need to 'Know their place' and 'Stop being cocky'. So you can't win either way!

Who is slating Haye and Froch? I don't see it.

Tonnes of threads on here slate both Haye & Froch for being too cocky without being able to back it up. Maybe they haven't got loads of career defining fights on their records that they would want yet but you can't knock them for having the balls to go after the biggest fights out there. But the point I was trying to make is people slate Calzaghe for the exact opposite so it's hard to win!

Not really - those arguments are not really comparable. Calzaghe isn't being knocked for 'the opposite' he's being knocked for having tonnes of crap fights - how is that the opposite of being cocky?

Haye and Froch have not been a belt holder for 10 years, so there's no comparison.

And where are these tonnes of threads, could you show me them, most people on here like Haye and Froch and appreciate the fact that they are trying to take the old fashioned route to greatness. Whether they get there or not is another matter, but both of them have shown way more willingness (especially Haye) than Calzaghe to take on dangerous opponents.

Well okay maybe not a lot of hate threads but a lot of posts seem to give Haye & Froch stick for going after the biggest fights but slate Calzaghe for ducking the biggest fights. So I'd say that was the opposite. Maybe you don't hold those opinions but a lot of people on this sight seem to. As soon as the news came out that he was retiring people were queueing up to have a go at him. Same as they will be IF Froch or Haye get knocked out in a big fight in the next year or so. Seems a shame to put down our British sportsmen when they achieve great things in their fields.

winkveron wrote:Well okay maybe not a lot of hate threads but a lot of posts seem to give Haye & Froch stick for going after the biggest fights

Anyone doing that needs sectioning

winkveron wrote:Well okay maybe not a lot of hate threads but a lot of posts seem to give Haye & Froch stick for going after the biggest fights but slate Calzaghe for ducking the biggest fights. So I'd say that was the opposite. Maybe you don't hold those opinions but a lot of people on this sight seem to. As soon as the news came out that he was retiring people were queueing up to have a go at him. Same as they will be IF Froch or Haye get knocked out in a big fight in the next year or so. Seems a shame to put down our British sportsmen when they achieve great things in their fields.

It's nothing new, people have been having a pop at Joe for years. Thank god he fought Kessler, otherwise his career would have been terribly dissapointing.

Chambers2 wrote:

winkveron wrote:Well okay maybe not a lot of hate threads but a lot of posts seem to give Haye & Froch stick for going after the biggest fights

Anyone doing that needs sectioning

If Froch was going after the biggest fights, he'd be going after Kessler. He isn't