Did anyone else think that last nights FNF showed a change of attitude from Sky? They seemed more critical than normal both in the commentary and after fight interviews even Nelson at one point said the standard of opponent was poor.I hope they carry on like this as it must of been obvious to Maloney that Sky were well pissed off at this card.The acid test though is will they be as honest at a Fat Frankie card.
Frankie needs them more than they need him. Trust me - they call the shots and if they're not getting what they want in terms of broadcast worthy fights, they will shut him out. Especially if it's true that a certain LWW champion is going to be separate to the main Sky TV deal...
I'm fed up with the UK Tv attitude of giving promoters contracts instead of giving fighters contracts . i don't know how many terrible fights I've seen involving fighters like Johnny Nelson , Lee Haskins Howard Eastman and others over the years only for their next fights to be televised as well. These types of fighters shouldn't be on TV.Boxing is in the entertainment industry and fighters must come to fight and in particular entertain. Promoters must learn as well , the Jeffries and Price fights (???) were a disgrace. No excuses - they're killing the game.
all of them at some point. We must all remember though, that there aren't enough opponents out there that will provide consistent tests for the established stars, plus the up and comers
Good. They need to tell it like it is. There must be checks and balances. It's the commentaries team job to scrutinise poor shows, fights etc
Darke instead of Smith always makes a huge difference. The interviewer pushed the interviewees as well which is something we don't often see from Sky. Back to the usual shite tonight though with Smith and Watt.
Ed Robinson is a very good interviewer, particularly his ones with a loser after a fight where he nailes the tone and the types of questions to ask perfectly. Ideally Smith presenting as I don't like his commentating, and he seems to do a decent job when presenting, Darke commentating and Robinson reporting. I guess they'll use that format this friday when dave darts is at the ally pally doing the darts.
Price and Jeffries are more than capable of beating tougher opposition and will have had far tougher tests at the top level of the amateurs... They can only box what is put on front of them... In time it will tell if they are been undermatched, I bet they both would have wanted to go for a run or do a good sesh on the pads to burn a bit of steam off... It would be interesting to know how long these fighters are tied into contract for...?:think Is it true that some promoters have a clause where if they lose two consecutive contests they can be ditched...?:think
There was a clear change in the Sky commentary last night - and for the better. I recall watching Jeffries fight an absolute bum on a Sunderland bill (just before the Hatton-Pac card) and the pundits in the studio were desperating trying to pick the positives out of it. I hope this new stance lasts - if it is a stinker - just say so.
I might be wrong but did neither the studio nor the interviewer who spoke to haye/booth in gemany talk about roach story? If so, this shows just how far they have to go. Does dave darts not look at the Internet before presenting? This is where setanta was so good as bunce and andy would both do their research. Starting to slate **** fights is a great thing but need to give presentation of fights context - which is what bunce was so good at doing. Only Darke tries to do this at all on Sky.
Judging by the snazzy clothes Haye was wearing and the colour of the ring, I'm pretty sure that his and Booth's interviews were both filmed at the Khan fight last week, mate.