Gerald Mcclellan

This always cracks me up when I see it...."the hood"...grow the **** up

 

Sad that this thread has degenerated into a character assassination of Gerald McClellan and his family, even 16 years after the events of Benn vs McClellan. Both he and his family have suffered immensely. That doesn't mean we have to pretend Gerald was an angel, but I think it is wrong to viciously kick people when they are down.

As he was before his injury...McClellan was a bad man. Hard, mean and ruthless. Sociopathic, perhaps. I wouldn't have liked him as a person or associated with him back in the day. He should have been prosecuted for animal cruelty.

But many great fighters have been bad men: LaMotta, Monzon, Liston, Tyson, even Robinson badly beat his wife, apparently. We could make this a very long list indeed, of fighters we should all hate and hold in utter contempt. I'm not sure how much would be left of our sport if we banned rational discussion of all these men. Yet it seems easier to discuss these other fighter's sporting achievements without vilifying them. Why? Is dog fighting really so much worse than **** or beating your wife until she miscarries?

Boxers are often underprivileged, undereducated kids, from a world where violence is normal and surrounds them. From a world where engaging in controlled violence is their best bet to claw their way out of dire poverty. Hardly a recipe for sensitive, cultured souls to flourish. Dog fighting will be more popular than stamp collecting or watercolour painting among young men from this background, unsurprisingly.

As boxing fans, it is in bad taste for us to lambaste McClellan at this stage. He was undoubtedly a great warrior, who almost died giving every ounce of himself to the sport. He has been harmless since 1995 and unable to hurt a fly.

I read a vivid, factual book called 'Claret and Cross-buttock or Rafferty's Prize Fighters' about an Irish/British fighting family in the 18/19th Century, and it was normal then that fighters were involved in dog fighting and ****-fighting. (Not banned in the UK until 1835) It was all part of the same thing. The casual brutality in that book is appalling, but it is part of the origins of our sport.

The very civilized ancient Romans loved to watch animals and humans tear each other apart in the arena. Even today, in some parts of the world, bear baiting, bull baiting, dog fighting and **** fighting are immensely popular and perfectly normal entertainments.

I am completely against such sadistic spectacles, and fully support Western bans on animal fighting as a sport, and would like to see such bans made worldwide. But I am realistic enough to know that as a species, we have an intrinsic flaw that means we are attracted to barbaric spectacle, and as boxing fans we have to recognise that fact.

Benn vs McClellan degenerated into a brutal, human dogfight, which is why it was an awesome and terrible thing to behold. It wasn't 'The Sweet Science.' The parameters of it being classed as a sport were unraveling. There was a bloodlust in the crowd that the ancient Romans would have recognised.

When our civilization starts to crumble around the edges, expect to see a big comeback of animal blood sports.

Read 'War Baby: The Glamour of Violence' by Kevin Mitchell, for detailed coverage of Benn vs McClellan and thoughtful analysis of our attraction to violence.

 

Yeah I've already been through a lot of that. Good post though.

 

defensively he obviously had flaws.

rated him as a boxer/puncher though.

obviously benn's pace took him out of that comfort zone.

cos king had the fish eyes tie up he went straight for the benn fight.

in retrospect going for another title at 168 first would have made sense.

but what's done is done as they say. :-(

 

Actually, your comments on page one of this thread were some of the reason why I was compelled to write my long post. You came across as cold and spiteful. I'm glad you toned it down a bit after that.

As I say, Gerald was no angel, but it's wrong to kick a man when he's down. He and his family are suffering in ways it's hard to imagine. You haven't got to like the guy, or even forgive him, if you choose not to. But there's no reason at this point in time to launch vitriolic attacks on him.

 

That's fair enough, I haven't 'toned it down' either just gone to explain my point further.

I also don't think my opinions, on an Internet forum, mean much in the grand scheme of things. And I'm sorry if I came across as 'cold' but I am quite blunt I agree and I felt the tone fitted what kind of posts I was replying too.

 

I don’t like War, Baby. Mitchell always strikes me as a bit of a hack. He allowed Johnson’s “stories” about McClellan to stand without seeking much corroboration (or any, for that matter).

It does cover what happened and the two men’s careers in much more depth (and is a good account of the fight too), but there’s something about it that always leaves me bothered. And not for the reasons Mitchell intended.

All that said: it IS a good book and a very interesting analysis of the sport’s appeal.

 

Well, you're not down the local pub chatting with your mates. The ESB General forum is international and is one of the most popular boxing forums on the internet.

It's not inconceivable that one of the McClellans knew the date the documentary was being aired in the UK, and clicked on the ESB British Forum out of curiosity, to see what we were saying.

 

I don't really care if they do. Maybe they should apologise to Benn for making accusations of steroid use.

It's sad, yes, but I won't pussyfoot around trying desperately not to say anything that might offend. My opinion, which more often than not I've backed up with reasoning, is just my opinion. There is no strict moral code on this, so if it differs with your opinion (and there are plenty of others who have taken even harsher standpoints than me) then so be it.

 

You make an excellent point here. After watching the ITV documentary last night, I have concluded that Johnson is a very unreliable witness. I'm not saying useless...he was close to Gerald and privy to a lot of the events. But after seeing last nights performance, (after all this time, the steroid accusations are ridiculous without hard evidence) everything Johnson says should be taken with a large pinch of salt.

So I'm not saying the book is perfect. But even flawed, it's still an excellent read, recommended to those who want a deeper analysis of the fight and the fighters.

 

Mclellan vs Froch?

 

I don't like Froch's low guard, slower hands and slower reactions right there

 

G-Man early stoppage IMO. Frochs style plays right into his hands IMO.

 

And Froch has no chance whatsoever of even hurting McLellan. It would be a massacre, one of the worst matchups I could ever think of for Frochy!

 

Agreed, Frochy is fearless.

But Froch won't be able to outbox G-Man, and the American also has the far more proven and solid chin and hits ten times harder. Froch would get blasted early.