I know, I know...STOP THE PRESSES! It's not exactly news that Kellerman's knowledge can be a bit sketchy at times, but one thing stood out in his commentary last night. He stated (with confidence) that Calzaghe "Was put down by Eubank earlier in his career and got up to win by decision". :huh Did he even watch this fight? Calzaghe was not put on his arse in that fight at all! In fact it was Calzaghe who put Eubank on the canvas in the very first round! Also, why didn't Jim Lampley and Emmanuel Steward correct Kellerman? Is is possible that they too paid no attention to Calzaghe's earlier career? It's pretty obvious that when Calzaghe beat Lacy that they started to take notice and then did some (clearly lacklustre) research. And when Kellerman said to Calzaghe at the end of the fight something like "Here you had to overcome adversity and an early knockdown, just like you did all those years ago against Eubank". Calzaghe looked more than a little puzzled....:yep Anyone else notice this?
if this wsas larry merchant saying this it would be laughed off as larry being drunk old etc because its kellerman its because he has no knowledge kellerman made a mistake get over it
Erm..."Get over it?". It doesn't really bother me, just gave me a wry smile when he said it to Calzaghe in front of everyone. As a supposed 'expert' wouldn't that be a little embarrassing? I'm not from the US so I've only been able to actually see American commentary on fights for the last couple of years. I have no bias against kellerman. And I couldn't give a **** about Larry Merchant. Oh, and Calzaghe put Eubank down twice in that fight, and did not hit the canvas himself.
i remember him saying that twice also & thought hang on...that didn't happen. i like the guy but abit cringing when he said it to joe. glad some1 spotted it
Hahaha yeah but I've noticed a lot of screw ups with the Lampey as well lately. Like in the Cotto fight Lampley was trying to impress upon the viewer by saying that Cotto retired 3 of his last 8 opponents. I was like WTF are you talking about?
Larry at his drunken worst would never screw up like that....but i'll go easy on Kellerman cause he's impressed me lately. He is young to the game, compared to Larry and he has many other things to do so probably doesn't have as much time to research this ****.
I was wondering about that too. :huh I was disappointed that someone didn't correct Kellerman when he said it the first time. Joe didn't correct him either... Maybe he was thinking about Byron Mitchell, who knocked Joe down in the second round of their fight. Then moments later Joe floored him, and then landed about 30 unanswered punches, had Mitchell out on his feet, falling back on the ropes, so Joe won a TKO! :bbb Kellerman has made similar mistakes in the past - he does seem a bit sketchy by times! For the most part, however, he did a good job last night.
the man is getting well paid to do his job - thats an amateur mistake to say the least.If he's such an expert he should get his facts straight
I dunno about knowledge but that lip fungus he's got is really giving me the creeps. I bet even the people he interviews wished he'd stand a little farther back.......yuck!! JET
He meant that 3 of the 8 haven't fought since they lost to Miguel, insinuating that they chose early retirement after their losses. The only that may be true for though is Urkal. Every one else has fought or plans to fight again.
Kellerman's logic is limited to some old tapes that he watched as a child and remembered the way he wanted......................