Wlads demanding the WBA belt be on the line knowing very well it won't be sanctioned

Don't be so sure mate. They didn't sanction Golovkin v Brook either, while they bend over backwards to accommodate the likes of Broner.

It seems they want criminals as the face of their brand rather than guys who handle themselves as professionals.

 

Well, I guess he's certainly far more confident of beating Browne than beating Joshua.
What's the problem with that?

 

Seems like you could be right. Would really have to questions Wlad decision if he goes ahead with Browne instead of Joshua. Beating Browne proves nothing and does nothing to reinstate him as the clear number 1 in the division. Wlad would just be another title holder if he beats Browne, not exactly the kind of statement you really want to end your career on.

 

Most would agree that guys ducking the best fights in their division is a problem. This behaviour kills the sport so i'd say its a pretty big problem.
In what other sport would a doorman compete at elite level?

 

Has it been confirmed that the IBF would sanction a fight against someone outside of their rankings?

 

Jesus wept.

I mean, loathe as I am to start defending the IBF, the WBA have certainly been worse in recent years with their multiple 'world champions'. You've got the ridiculous situation with Browne failing a drugs test post beating Chagaev for some dubious heavyweight title they've invented. You've then got Oquendo in the mix somehow as a contender for one of the belts - of which I'm not sure as Ortiz apparently holds a strap too. It's an absolute ****ing mess.

Then you've got the WBC and their handling of Wilder which has been at least on par with the IBF's stupid decision - at the time anyway - to stripe Fury after he beat Wlad.

 

Where exactly did AJ say that he was ok with this fight if the belt isn't on the line? What I read was that both guys want the belt up for grabs which is understandable.

 

Obviously the WBA ratings are as worthless as the IBF's, or worse, and the second-tier champions thing is ridiculous.

But foremost you have to judge them by the first-tier champion they recognize. I'm talking about the last 12 months.
The WBA were correct to recognize Klitschko and Fury, while the IBF jumped ship and consider Glazkov-Martin-Joshua-Breazeale as the championship league, which is as bad as the WBC's situation with Wilder (and worse considering the WBC never have recognized Wlad anyway).

It's all bullsh!t though, I agree. The alphabet organizations are all jokes.

 

Joshua's never faced a genuine top 10 contender in his entire career.
If Wlad beat him you'd all say he was a hype job fraud anyway, or a green novice.

 

The interview Hearn did last night suggests the IBF isn't an issue so forget what the WBA does and just take the fight.

 

Aye, assuming the IBF were happy for it to be on the line then I agree. I get the WBA is the original org and all that stuff but I don't think many people really see it as a superior belt. I consider the IBF probably the best org in terms of enforcing their rules and such, although their rankings are one of the worst.