Barker vs Macklin HAS to happen!

no ****ing chance. When has eddie put on a stellar fight? Dont mention froch vs bute as its easier to make fights for a household name. ****ing eddie can't even make competitive fights when the division is filed with top domestic talent.

 

I hope Barker beats Macklin if they ever fight, same if with Murray. Martin and Darren seem to be level-headed blokes. Macklin is (as Murray put it bluntly) a complete tit.

Thinks because he has an American promoter he's the bees' knees and is a level above other middleweight contenders. He's a good fighter don't get me wrong, just I'd like to see him come down a peg or two.

 

macklin will ko barker, another reason for eddie to not make the fight.

 

:deal

Yep, Macklin loves giving it the Johnny big time.... I'd quite enjoy seeing Barker school him.

There's genuine needle between these 2 as well.... Will make for a very good build up & fight

 

He is a level above at the moment though. His 2 best wins are better than anything Murray or Barker have to their name, plus Sturm if you think he won that one.

 

The only chance we have of seeing a big fight between any of these middleweights is when one wins a world title or a couple suffer a bad loss. Right now, there's too much risk and not enough reward, which is a shame.

 

How do you know he's a level above? It's not like he did miles better against Martinez than Barker did. He has a better names on his record because he's not been blighted by injuries and had his career stunted like Barker and has been around a lot longer than Murray as a pro. That's all, not because he's better and the other two are playing catch up. He beat Sturm but I had that fight 115-114. Had Murray beating Sturm too by the same margin (a better performance from Sturm it must be notied).

He should stop giving it the "I'm too famous to fight the likes of you" act and settle who the best UK middleweight is once and for all.

 

Having better wins= Being a level above. Billie Jo Saunders may turn out to be better than the whole lot of them but he's yet to prove anything with the opponents he's faced so is a few rungs lower on the ladder than all of them.

It's not hard to work out really.

 

That's different. If he was older than them and had showed us more against world class opponents for years then yes, you could make that argument. Same with saying Froch is better than Groves because he's fought better fighters.

This is different though, Murray, Barker and Macklin are all the same age, all in their peaks now and all in the same position (top contenders snapping at the champions' heels). All Macklin really has on them so far is experience because he got his opportunity before them.

Just because a football player who has played for Chelsea doesn't mean he's automatically better than a player who plays the same position for Swansea.

 

Macklin couldn't deal with Barker's slick new hips man.

Take that **** to the BANK...

 

they should start making these fights while they can - it can all go tits up quick enough shock defeat injurys whatever

 

Macklin's engine and aggression are his biggest weapon. He has a decent dig too and overwhelms his opponents. He could struggle against Barker's slick style of boxing like he did when he fought Martinez but equally Darren could struggle with Matthew's high tempo. We've seen Barker's body give out in him in the later rounds of fights.

Goes back to the original point, stop ****ing around and get this fight made! We all want to see it so strike whilst the iron's hot.