Calzaghe: "Carl was fortunate...I think he should give him (Groves) a rematch."

spot on Joe!

 

Talk about double standards!

Seems some of you on here just use situations to berate one fighter while defending another fighter for similar career decisions. This is why the ESB forums are on the decline. Too many idiots being subjective to suit their own beliefs.

 

He didn't want that rematch but would have lost his belt if he didn't (so he says in an interview at a recent fight)

 

Eubank was 31

 

What are you blithering on about? Froch was 36 and 4 months when he fought groves.

Stop making stuff up!

 

If Eubank wasn't interested in winning the WBO Super Middleweight title then he would not have taken the fight in the first place. True, he was at a higher weight division - Light Heavyweight preparing to fight Mark Price on the Collins/Calzaghe undercard, not Cruiserweight - but given the opportunity to fight for a world title against an unproven fighter who hadn't had a single fight above domestic level or a single fight that went distance in the pros he leapt at the chance. He believed Calzaghe would be easy work, he didn't know how good Calzaghe was, so he had no problem taking the fight at short notice.

Futhermore, Eubank was only two fights removed from coming out of retirement. He was looking to rebuild his career, to start again a higher weight and try to recapture some of his past glory. In no way was he "preparing for a retirment fight" when he stepped in for Collins in 1997. He would still have the ambition after losing to Calzaghe to move up to Cruiserweight and challenge the WBO Champion there in two grueling contests, only coming to the decision to retire perminently after his second failed attempt convinced him that he couldn't cut it anymore.

 

The rematch will defiantly happen but I think both will have one more fight first and it will take place around November 2014

 

No, the "World" didn't "DEMAND" the Veit rematch, but the WBO did, and as long as Calzaghe was WBO Champion he had to fight his mandatory. You dont get to **** on a fighter for fighting his mandatory no matter how inferior those mandatory's might be. Fighting your mandatory is an unavoidable part of being a champion.

 

Undoubtedly Eubank was not as good as he used to be, and nobody should ever try to claim that the 1997 version of him was a great fighter to beat. But he was still a dangerous fighter and a game competitor, and it was a great win for a Calzaghe who hadn't had a single fight in his pro-career go the distance before and hadn't had a single opponent above domestic level before.

So the issue I take with people who **** on Calzaghe's win over Eubank is that, while it is true that Eubank was near the end of his career and was an old fighter with niggling injuries and would retire the following year, Eubank was still dangerous and he still had it in him to trouble world level fighters, and for where Calzaghe was at the stage of his career when they fought Eubank was a very difficult and very credible opponent.

 

Did Reid win his next fight? No
Did Reid give Calzaghe a shot when WBC champ? No

 

yeah wouldnt want to lose that WBOgus strap he hid behind

 

The Mario Veit rematch was such a joke that it got Calzaghe booted off SkySports

 

Cazaghe is right, there should be a rematch. Stupid, irrelevant arguments about how prime Eubank was etc, isn't going to change that.

 

No, whether.