Page 1 of 1
Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 16:43
by rooq
according to the schedule its against Asamoah Wilson ( 0 - 3).
is this right??
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 17:15
by gobbles
Another classic Sky Friday night fight.
This from the same company that turned its nose up at Froch v Taylor. Sky are a disgrace.
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 17:54
by Dioufy
gobbles wrote:Another classic Sky Friday night fight.
Please tell me this isn't headlining. It shouldn't even be on TV, in any capacity.
0-3, are you joking?
*waits for the mugs at Sky to tell us his real record isn't 0-3, but in fact 12-11*
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 18:31
by REAL_DEAL
BBBOC should turn away all these african fighters with suspect records untill they can give evidence they have had that certain amount of fights.
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 19:47
by brian13
how can they even sanction these fights because these fights wouldn't be allowed to take place in America.
I think its time we see the Commonwealth title been made defunct because it is turning into a pure joke, Munroe is fighting a guy with f**k all fights and Broadhurst has been doing the same since he won the title last year aswell as Cleverly but he did fight Oakey for the title and its becoming rare we see two decent fighters going at it.
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 19:54
by gobbles
brian13 wrote:
how can they even sanction these fights because these fights wouldn't be allowed to take place in America.
I think its time we see the Commonwealth title been made defunct because it is turning into a pure joke, Munroe is fighting a guy with f**k all fights and Broadhurst has been doing the same since he won the title last year aswell as Cleverly but he did fight Oakey for the title and its becoming rare we see two decent fighters going at it.
Well what about that Stephen Haughian fight on Saturday at York Hall - Haughian 17- against a guy with a 1-7 record. Result a one-round stoppage - great!
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 19:59
by brian13
gobbles wrote:brian13 wrote:
how can they even sanction these fights because these fights wouldn't be allowed to take place in America.
I think its time we see the Commonwealth title been made defunct because it is turning into a pure joke, Munroe is fighting a guy with f**k all fights and Broadhurst has been doing the same since he won the title last year aswell as Cleverly but he did fight Oakey for the title and its becoming rare we see two decent fighters going at it.
Well what about that Stephen Haughian fight on Saturday at York Hall - Haughian 17- against a guy with a 1-7 record. Result a one-round stoppage - great!
What I meant was a fighter 0-3 can fight in a 12 round fight, I should have phrased that a bit better.
Haughian fight was scheduled for 6 rounds.
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 13 Apr 2009, 05:52
by dondada
REAL_DEAL wrote:BBBOC should turn away all these african fighters with suspect records untill they can give evidence they have had that certain amount of fights.
Been there, done that.
This is how it works.
A promoter goes to one of several African boxing commissions within the Commonwealth and asks for a record to be verified. They write a letter on headed paper stating the boxer's record and listing the opponents, etc., stamping it with their seal (I've got some of them).
Promoter submits that as evidence to the Board - that's their job done.
I am very reliably told by an impeccable source that, in Ghana for example, they do have a televised boxing league and the results from that aren't always picked up. However, I also know that a fighter was once listed as having a bout in Accra which didn't happen...because the source was there at ringside.
And I also know that the Commonwealth Board try very hard to get the African commissions to be more assiduous in their record keeping.
Boxrec does not have complete records for most of these Africans.
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 13 Apr 2009, 06:56
by gobbles
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:REAL_DEAL wrote:BBBOC should turn away all these african fighters with suspect records untill they can give evidence they have had that certain amount of fights.
Been there, done that.
This is how it works.
A promoter goes to one of several African boxing commissions within the Commonwealth and asks for a record to be verified. They write a letter on headed paper stating the boxer's record and listing the opponents, etc., stamping it with their seal (I've got some of them).
Promoter submits that as evidence to the Board - that's their job done.
I am very reliably told but an impeccable source that, in Ghana for example, they do have a televised boxing league and the results from that aren't always picked up. However, I also know that a fighter was once listed as having a bout in Accra which didn't happen...because the source was there at ringside.
And I also know that the Commonwealth Board try very hard to get the African commissions to be more assiduous in their record keeping.
Boxrec does not have complete records for most of these Africans.
That's very true. According to boxrec, this guy Broadhurst is down as fighting made his debut fighting for the West African and Ghanain title, losing a 12-round split decision. That obviously sounds very unlikely.
Re: Broadhurst Commonwealth defence?
Posted: 13 Apr 2009, 11:03
by iwz678
it's a joke that some of these African kids come over and they dont trouble the champs. There's been one or two Ghanaians in the past but I dont expect much again here.
It's a disgrace that Sky havent bothered picking up Froch v Taylor and are instead putting on drivel like this :x