Ed Robinson should be used as a pundit rather than a reporter...

He has ridiculous knowledge and is very articulate but is wasted doing objective 'news round-up' features for Ringside.

I would much rather listen to him talk about Boxing than just about any other 'regular' panelist they bring in. i.e McCrory, Piper, Nelson etc.

I don't think Sky realise his value, personally.

 

I could be wrong but isn't he one of the heads of sky boxing or am I getting him mixed up with someone else ?


***EDIT I'm thinking of Adam Smith ***

 

I have to agree. Ed Robinson is very matter of fact and a decent honest reporter but yeh he would be a great pundit. So would the English guy that works for Europ-sport Richie Woodhall. They would be a good combo.

 

Ed is f
Great at his job and very well liked within boxing, plus he has a boxing background as well

 

then you's should get in the habit of downloading the podcast with spencer fearon...he gets the freedom on that to speak unscripted and you can get an idea of his knowledge a lot better....great podcast that....both them lads have an unreal knowledge of all aspects of boxing

 

He's been on less recently though.

His quality on the podcast has enhanced my view that he should be able to speak his mind on a bigger platform, for example on Ringside rather than doing the middle of the road sections on boxing news.

 

its like he's shoehorned in. he should be used alot more.

 

Too boring for the casual viewer. Simple as that imo.

 

Ed is quality he deserves a much larger role IMO.

 

Was also a former pro!

 

Agree 100%. The toe2toe podcasts have really suffered lately since Robinson stopped hosting. The other guy they've got in now is alright but his boxing knowledge isn't anywhere near the level of Robinson's

 

Ed is the best pundit on TV full stop.

He does come across at times like he's lacking confidence which astounds me as he has great historical and current knowledge, liked and respected by all in the business and a great balanced intelligent interviewer.

If ever there was a case Stubstance over Style it is Ed. That's a rare breed.

 

Woodhall's nuthuggery of Froch has let him down badly though. His 'punditry' prior to, and after, Froch-Groves was diabolical. Remember thinking at the time that Froch had better do an absolute number on Groves for Richie's sake the way he utterly dismissed Groves. Especially him stating that Groves wasn't carrying any power!! Carl's got a tremendous chin and recovery powers but I still had Groves down for the KO first time round given Carl's lack of movement.

So found it bonkers that Woodhall could talk shite like this when he should be in the know:

"George is a stiff puncher but he’s not a power puncher, he hasn’t got devastating power. Froch will walk through his shots."

This content is protected

http://talksport.com/boxing/exclusiv...ch-13112269093

 

Wholeheartedly agree, Ed is very knowledgeable and easy to listen to. I don't bother with the toe 2 toe podcasts since he stopped doing them. He was the only one who could rein in that Fearon wopper.

 

As ever ..Look at me i'm different! you attention seeking knob.

Ed is quality.