Sick to my back stomach

nobody likes you.

 

I'm probably in a minority here, but good. I don't miss the plethora of dire small hall shows with one passable fight as the main event on top of an undercard of absolute mismatches. They're shite and don't do boxing any favours. If I had a choice between four awful cards, like the ones Frank provides, or one big show every four weeks, I know which I'd choose. Boxing fans should demand quality not quantity. In an ideal world, you'd have four good cards but that isn't going to happen, so it's a choice between quantity and quality. That's not a tough pick for me.

And I can't see why people hate Sky for this either. If I was running a company which needed TV ratings to make me money, I'd want good quality TV shows. Go back a few years ago and look at the dross we had on a weekly basis. Those shows would have done ****ing awful TV ratings so why should Sky accept that? Why should they show cards that nobody was interested in when they could show a much better run sport in, say, rugby league or something like that? It's not popular to defend the big companies, but Sky deserve a return on their investment which they weren't getting. Frank, Hatton and Maloney are the people at fault here because they provided a shower of shite which nobody cared about and they are the ones who ****ed up.

I hope we do get more boxing but I hope we've seen the last of the terrible cards which have plagued Sky in recent years. They are awful for the viewer, they don't bring in good ratings, fans who buy the tickets are given **** shows, they don't attract sponsors and they won't generate interest in boxing. Quality is the way to go, not quantity.

 

I said people who don't like football are either;

a) strange
b) **** at sports

the 3 of you in this thread have all confirmed that you are in fact strange. your own words.

so i was right! lol

 

well said. i have been really happy with the quality of the cards Hearn has been putting together.

you also think peiple who dont like football are strange right?

 

You're not alone, great post. :thumbsup

 

like allot of other people, i really dont like you and wish you would go away.

 

No, it just comes from finding it dull. This is not complex.

Pilger's one of the best journalists ever. The "extreme" slur has been applied by much of the right wing press and regurgitated by idiots like you.

I have no issue with someone rescinding their citizenship, but you need to know why Murdoch did it and why it was such a big deal. Go read about it and you'll see.

Well, 1) as someone who often complains about boxing journos being biased, this is a remarkable thing to say. So it's ok for Murdoch to deliberately lie and misrepresent the truth to damage the reputation of the Democrats? Hardly fair and impartial news.

2) various research agencies found that the media largely let Bush off the hook when he invaded Iraq. There was very little negative coverage. In fact, only a few papers actively stood against him.

I don't read much mainstream news any more, because the clear bias is just boring. But even two weeks in the US showed the clear bias of FOX towards Romney and the Republicans, and this was generally upheld by the other channels. The only notable exception was MSNBC.

You need to do some research rather than just spewing out your own limited observations.

 

Good retort Jonsey, first class.

No go back inside now playtime is over.......... atsch

 

No, YOU don't like me because I make you look like the idiot you are. The fact you think this is personality competition, or that I would really be upset by anything you have to say, shows how you hate that.

Really, it's a compliment when you try to argue with me. Because even over the internet, I clearly bother you so deeply.

Considering the best you could do was to say I was unwashed and unkempt tells me exactly what a child you are.

 

Fair enough, but nothing wrong with strange.

Strange people like me tend to think anybody who watches football are either:

a) dull
b) **** at sports

 

Give him a break, he's operating at the limits of his intellectual capacity.

 

I never said its ok for him to go against the democrats, i questioned how Murdoch can be accused of controlling the british press when the british press and notably his outlets are paticuarly negative and biased against the political party he supports so strongly?

just because my opinion is different to your own does not mean its ill informed. to say that MSNBC is the only pro democratic channel is laughable. please remember i have actually lived, am going to live and have a fiance who is from the US. so i have watched for more US news that you did in 2 weeks.

 

i am smarter than you. and my girlfriend is better looking than yours. going to bed. night

 

That's what happens when you take away promoter competition and use just one promoter.

 

Misinformed again, Rob. I watch a LOT of US news because the business I work for has a huge operation there. In fact, I probably see it more, and in more depth, that you ever will living there. I read most of the US papers a couple of times a week, I watch MSNBC, FOX, CNN, Bloomberg when I'm at my desk and seeing what's happening, and we get regular briefings from press analysts on the key political stories across the UK, US and Asia.

You are ill-informed because you know ****-all about what you're talking about. Seriously, look up Media Matters and their report on the representation of Democrats versus Republicans.

You think Sky or The Sun are pro-Obama? REALLY!?

This is the same Sky that nearly jizzed itself over Romney's debate performances and slated Obama's while ignoring how consistently Romney lied. This is the same Sky that nearly jizzed itself when the Israelis slaughtered innocent women and children in Palestine.
This is The Sun that lovingly described how impressive Romeny had been and cooed over Clint Eastwood's cameo at the conference.