These guys always suck. Worst case was during the joshua Whyte fight when in round 1 watt was creaming on AJ's **** giving it "joshua is just a different level to whyte" then in round 2 Whyte hit him and suddenly watt was like "joshua has never been tested iaaaan I've been saying this all week he's never been testeeeed" There was another recent one where they had one dude up 4-0 going into the 5th then he lost the 5th and suddenly the other guy was up on their card like WTF.
Jim Watt has retired, Nick Halling has been silenced and it hasn't got much better to be honest. They are obviously friendly with the Matchroom fighters, they see and speak to them a lot at pressers and events and they are "house" fighters and it shows in their commentaries. To be fair I suppose it might be hard not to be slightly bias if you get to know a fighter, you like them, you get on well and then commentate on their fights.
Adam Smith's non mention of the low blow by Tony Bellew on Sat showed this intended bias in full glory. You would have thought with Smith's commentary that Bellew connected square on the chin and not with an uppercut just below the testicles. It really is disgraceful and very poor for the viewers.
It's just convinces the casual that ALL matchroom fighters are the best on the planet. Then they spout the rubbish off as facts so when you call them out on it they get very defensive. Carl Froch has to be the least knowledgeable boxing pundit ever.
To be fair to froch his boxing knowledge has improved the past few months. Still not up to comms standard but has improved
Boxing is subjetive, more so than most sports. Therefore it is easy to follow a narrative, especially if that narrative fits in with what you believed may happen. Boxing is also one of the few sports where in the space of a round a fighter can go from being on the verge of losing to winning. Far too many armchair experts on here who would freeze with a microphone in their hand and ultimately sound like a prized *****.
Can't believe they aren't using Andy Clarke full time- whispers he may do Channel 5 cards going forward.
It's not just sky. Almost every media outlet that reported on the fight either failed to mention the low blow or glossed over it as if it were a footnote in the fight.
That's completely besides the point. Many pundits that don't "freeze" but deliberately call the fight differently as what's actually happening in the ring. And that's not because it's subjective, because in that case it wouldn't be (almost) always in favor of the guy they're rooting for. Just like some people still believe that many judges are incompetent, while they usually favor the featured fighter. Would we do a better job? Depends on the person of course. But chances are they get instructed to favor the home fighter during their commentary if they ever get that job.
a bit unfair. Theres nothing necessarily wrong with Watt saying that. He may have been genuinely impressed with what he was seeing at first, but in a fight things can change very fast. Watt may well have been entirely correct about AJ being untested too. He may have been right on both counts....???
