Is it just me, or were announcers during Ali's time incredibly biased toward him?

Howard Cossell was very unbiased and well balanced in my opinion.

 

You're not wrong.

Commentary was embarassingly biased towards him.

 

It isn't just you. The announcers were there the sell Ali as a brand and they did so far beyond his actual declining abilities deserved. One of the reasons the 70's heavyweights are so very over-rated.

 

But in the 60's it was the other way around.

 

Ali got a lot of credit for showboating and running around the ring
instead of just fighting.

But he won virtually all of his fights by KO or TKO in the 60's, so it made really
no difference.

 

Are you talking about the commentary for Norton-Ali I that was done by Ferdie Pacheco (Ali's doctor)? I think it was done long after the fight actually happened. He was being very biased, obviously.

 

This ^

(Beat me to it)

 

They were very biased full stop.

 

Oh the announcers, who were mostly liberal loved Ali. He wasn't just a fighter to them, he was part of a political movement.

I can forgive an announcers being fond of a fighter, but not the judges. Ali had some gift score cards in fights he won prior to the stoppage, and might have won 2-3 decisions he should have lost is his name wasn't Ali.

 

Here's a surprise . Tell me again how the ref's favours saved him when Foster was jabbing his face to shreds. :hey

 

A lot of the superbouts stuff is done years later and is laughable: "Look at Ali's smothering, he's one of the best smotherers in the game".

 

You should have watched ESPN Classic the other night.....

John Rawling commentating on Tommy Hearns's run of KO's after turning pro.... the sound was so clear it was like he was on the sofa next to you rather than shouting down a broken microphone 30 years ago atsch

 

Yeah, I saw it mate. ESPN classic spoil everything with their new commentary added with loads more emphasis on anyone famous. The football is even worse.