I would agree with your statement in general, but disagree in this specific case. Hugh has not only a profound knowledge of the sport but he is also a fan. Would you rather listen to McCrory and Piper on Sky or a man who could bring some intelligence to the discussion and give some real insight? TBF, I doubt whether Sky or Hugh could ever work together as I imagine he'd be less inclined to tow the party line. I just find it a bit of a shame that a man of his substance and experience is not used a little more.
He more or less gave up boxing writing because of the conflict between his humanitarian priciples and the inherent savagery of the sport. He still mentions the fights, but I think he finds the sport distasteful. Several of the articles in ...On Boxing cover that feeling.
McIlveny was spot on there.And not a mention of the Scottish mining towns he loves to wax lyrically about.
his brother , william, is a novelist, writer of 'the big man', made into a film starring liam neeson about a bare knuckle fighter....i can also remember hugh interviewing sugar ray leanord on channel four many year ago..i think it was an hour long programme though i may be mistaken...and just to agree with another oster, his admiration for leonard stopped well short of the sycophantic adulation many interviewers use..indeed, to leonards dismay, he ended the interview by saying that he thought hagler beat him....!!! id love to see hugh as a pundit, my point was that a good writer wont always make a good pundit...id certainly rather listen to his beautifully constructed descriptions and analysis than the wittering of some of the guys used at present...
His article about Hagler-Leonard was excellent, describing how Leonard "pick-pocketed" Hagler's title. He gives Ray credit though for his "flawless nerve" and the "grand illusion" he created that night.
Great writer and would no doubt be a great pundit too. But I don't think he'd lower himself to it for all sorts of reasons - and by that I don't mean he's arrogant either. As for the 'why use 3 words when you can use 15' I think this philosophy is missing the point somewhat. Further, I don't think he'd last very long as a pundit anyway, in the same vein as Colin Hart didn't on Eurosport when he rightly called their poster boy Roman Greenberg a load of shite.
with hugh, it was/is generally the case that whilst most of us struggle to find the right three words, he knows at least another twelve that will enhance the description!!
be realistic guys. however well written it was, it didn't tell us anything that isn't posted here every day.
...id rather eat steak than cheeseburgers......both will give you the nutrients you need to survive, but one tastes so much better....