Paul Smith in the Burns/Mitchell fight!

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by rossco666, Sep 26, 2012.


Page 1 of 2
  1. rossco666

    rossco666 Guest

    Now i hear a few people rate his commentary on here but i found him annoying in that fight. He came off sounding a tad biased, like he knew Mitchell was going to take it jst because he picked him to win! He was banging on about how Burns looked nervious?!? Well i didnt see it. He did say Burns was in great shape but after praising how great Mitchell looked, he said ''no disrespect to Burns.'' like he thaught mitchell looked better. He also said it was only a matter of time before Mitchell landed the big left hook after being critical of him not disguising the shot better. but the most annoying bit was when he was criticising Burns for going as he said ''right hand happy'' meaning the straight right over the top...... Paul, if its landing more than its missing he's going to keep throwing it, if its working, he's going to keep doing it. If Mitchell keeps showing him the gap for that shot then he's not going to throw a hook is he. I know the left hook was the first one that put Mitchell on his arse and Mitchell couldnt cope with Burns size and strengh but the right hand was the shot that kept knocking Mitchells confidence in that fight!
    I think pauls a good pundit in the studio but his commentary was gash in that fight imo.
     
    rossco666, Sep 26, 2012
    rossco666, Sep 26, 2012
    #1
  2. jcairns1

    jcairns1 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,510
    283
    Feb 3, 2011
    I don't mind him as a commentator, speaks quite well, as well as the "right hand happy" comment about Burns he did also say that Kevin Mitchell shouldn't just rely on the left hook as it was becoming predictable as well.
     
    jcairns1, Sep 26, 2012
    jcairns1, Sep 26, 2012
    #2
  3. rossco666

    rossco666 Guest

    yeah i mentioned Paul was critical of mitchells use of the left hook, it was when he said ''he'll land it eventually'' that i found kinda annoying!
     
    rossco666, Sep 26, 2012
    rossco666, Sep 26, 2012
    #3
  4. HMSTempleGarden

    HMSTempleGarden Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,686
    8
    Jan 18, 2010

    probably because he is a Gallagher fighter and Gallagher was begging for Mitchell to win because he had previously promised to give Murray a rematch!
     
    HMSTempleGarden, Sep 26, 2012
    HMSTempleGarden, Sep 26, 2012
    #4
  5. perspicacity

    perspicacity Raising The Bar Full Member

    4,901
    0
    Nov 25, 2010
    I find most commentary annoying but dont usually let it bother me, however at one point all I could hear was ...

    "I wouldn't be surprised by a Burns points win or a Mitchell points win, or a Mitchell KO or a Burns KO, I wouldn't be surprised by any outcome here"

    Annoying as ****!
     
    perspicacity, Sep 26, 2012
    perspicacity, Sep 26, 2012
    #5
  6. rossco666

    rossco666 Guest

    very annoying mate, i remember him spewing out that. he said that after he realised it might not go the way he first thaught. the other commentator [forgot his name] got burns mixed up with mitchell twice and had to correct himself. ''thats great by kevin mitchell, sorry, i mean ricky burns!''
     
    rossco666, Sep 26, 2012
    rossco666, Sep 26, 2012
    #6
  7. PityTheFool

    PityTheFool Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,192
    6
    Oct 18, 2011
    He couldn't hide the fact that he predicted and wanted a Mitchell win.I've tried to give him the benefit in the past but he's a dreadful analyst.
     
    PityTheFool, Sep 26, 2012
    PityTheFool, Sep 26, 2012
    #7
  8. HeavyT

    HeavyT Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,709
    19
    Feb 9, 2009
    Both commentators seemed biased to be honest, but not to the extent I would complain. I only noticed second time I watched as I was pished the first time around.
     
    HeavyT, Sep 26, 2012
    HeavyT, Sep 26, 2012
    #8
  9. dftaylor

    dftaylor Writer, fanatic Full Member

    20,730
    1
    May 7, 2010
    Smith was at least pointing out some interesting technical things. Rawling has been a tool for a long time now. He's trots out the same cliches fight after fight, with zero insight.

    It's a shame, he's a pretty decent print journalist.
     
    dftaylor, Sep 26, 2012
    dftaylor, Sep 26, 2012
    #9
  10. knighty

    knighty Active Member Full Member

    1,141
    1
    Sep 30, 2007
    :deal:deal:deal Mate you just wrote exactly what i thought word for word. Smigga = biased ****.
     
    knighty, Sep 26, 2012
    knighty, Sep 26, 2012
    #10
  11. knighty

    knighty Active Member Full Member

    1,141
    1
    Sep 30, 2007
    John Rawling it was. He is quickly becoming a senile old ****. He's very pro English aswell when an English fighter is fighter a taff/jock/pad.
     
    knighty, Sep 26, 2012
    knighty, Sep 26, 2012
    #11
  12. SkillspayBills

    SkillspayBills Mandanda Running E-Pen Full Member

    21,647
    4
    Oct 3, 2011
    Thought he was ok myself, He saw Mitchell loading up with the left hook and Burns with the right hand but when you compare him to say Tarver, Malignaggi he just doesn't compare for me.

    He's made a decent start mind, but i do get what you mean when he said ''No disrespect to Burns'' i found that a odd comment personally.
     
    SkillspayBills, Sep 26, 2012
    SkillspayBills, Sep 26, 2012
    #12
  13. BlackBrenny

    BlackBrenny Guest

    He was stupendously biased (after the fight "that result doesn't surprise me at all" :lol:) he clearly wanted Mitchell to win, however, I did think Burns looked nervous
     
    BlackBrenny, Sep 26, 2012
    BlackBrenny, Sep 26, 2012
    #13
  14. KidJackal

    KidJackal Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,898
    4
    May 15, 2012
    The box nation commentators always do my head in
     
    KidJackal, Sep 26, 2012
    KidJackal, Sep 26, 2012
    #14
  15. BlackBrenny

    BlackBrenny Guest



    I really like Barry Jones
     
    BlackBrenny, Sep 26, 2012
    BlackBrenny, Sep 26, 2012
    #15
Page 1 of 2