Biased commentary

Not sure. But ever since I remember, It's always been biased based on hometown crowd, territory/venue where the fight is held. And you can also include the judges decision on this.

 

Fighters and promoters signed to the specific network in charge of broadcasting, and thus announcing, the fight.

Combined with careers being more manufactured and an environment where star power is more important to the television ratings.

 

Good question...

 

In Britain I feel the commentary is often pretty terrible in this regard. It sometimes feels like they're underinformed about foreign opponents and overenthusiastic about homegrown talent. I remember when I was watching Brook-Spence in the pub, they were introducing Spence in a way that made it seem like it was our first chance to see what he was about. "So, let's see just how good Errol Spence is" kind of thing. No, dickhead, you're supposed to know already! Tell me things I don't know about him! We're not on a journey of discovery together, you're supposed to be educating me.

Whilst there are things about American sports coverage that annoy me, you can't deny that their presenters are usually well-informed. A perfect mix would be the calmer attitude of the British with the nerdy knowledge of the Americans.

Anyway, my point is that this seeming lack of knowledge sometimes translates into what appears to be bias. But I never feel like British commentators are under network pressure to talk **** about British fighters, opponents.

 

Exactly. I remember telling casual fans before the fight how Brook picked the wrong fight (I live in Brook’s hometown of Sheffield, where the fight took place). British commentators take on the stance of a casual fan when truthfully, they have more of a duty to educate.

You’ve only got to see when Malignaggi started working for Sky Sports and everyone, including the pundits at the studio, were so impressed with his insightful commentary.

It’s fine to promote your home based fighter, but that doesn’t stop networks promoting fighters from abroad. This is how you can convert casuals to hardcores, which in the long run should be their objective. If Pacquiao and Golovkin can become household names amongst casual fans, it can be done!

 

I don't know if you watch football but the ex-player pundits are terrible for this a lot of the time. They riff through their lists of inane clichés without ever threatening to say something insightful. These same players go over to American to peddle their expertise on the US networks, and it makes me feel embarrassed. Here comes Steve McManaman, about to impart some gem like "he needs to be putting that in the net", or "at this level you can't make silly mistakes like that". I think the Americans are supposed to feel grateful just to be blessed with the presence of a British ex-pro or something.

 

Yeah, I see that a lot in British fights but you see a ton of stylistic favoritism in the States. Pressure fighters with power are gods. Knockouts are king. Technical and defensive fighters get dogged. This might be generational though. Lampley and Merchant could be insufferable but I enjoy Kellerman (when he talks boxing only) and Maglinaggi.

 

It has been there as long as I watch boxing (since the early to mid 80's), but it seems to have gotten worse overtime.
Bad, biased judging has always been there, and has always been as bad as nowadays as far as I can remember though, which is much worse as biased commentary

 

Cliches in football are brilliantly bad, especially internationals. My old favourite, “you can’t afford to do that at this level, or you’ll get punished.” I don’t think commentators have quite grasped that high end club football is on a superior level to international football.

Anyhow, back to boxing. I really started to notice it on quite a severe level when Lewis started to dominate. A lot of the U.S pundits didn’t seem to like it. Larry Merchant would then have to educate his colleagues with the unbiased truth.

 

I think that's a common approach by commentators, they leave the expert analysis to the co-commentator, usually a former boxer. Unfortunately sometimes they don't do their job well, particularly if they're in the same stable as the guy in the ring. They're either too kind to him or they've not done the homework on the opposition. You'd have to go back to Harry Carpenter era for commentators that were giving their own opinions.

 

Watch Julio Cesar Chavez vs Meldrick Taylor, as competitive a fight as you can get, yet Lamley and the HBO broadcast team call it one sided in favor of Meldrick Taylor who took a beating that night.
I'd say that was the turning point fight as far as HBO bias commentary to favor their own in-house agenda.

 

I watched their 2nd fight just a few nights ago.....was a very satisfying ending for me