Is it Sky or Khan who’s burning their bridges?

No its not. Television cards (as opposed to PPVs) in America are at best one main and one supporting bout. Look at Saturday night - HBO had Ortiz-Berto and Khan-McCloskey, and that was it.

 

I think Adam Smith is quite good in his running of sky's boxing, but, I find his terrible to watch, he's a creepy ****er. I think Johnny Nelson and Ritchie Woodall should do ringside and get rid of the creep from in front of the camera!

 

Its PPV im talking about as Primetime are a PPV channel. In the states they are more often than not PPV's and always show plenty of the action.

 

You claimed that SKY, if they could not have the event would do their best to prevent someone else having it, which is a load of bollocks.

 

No they're not

The number of ppvs has been cut down in America - most of the B-level fights are now shown on television. Morales vs. Maidana was the first HBO ppv of the year, Pacquiao vs. Mosley will be the first branded Showtime ppv of the year (although they did distribute Cotto's last fight). If you look at most of the American fights shown in this country last year, most were televised specials. To name ones shown on Primetime; all Super Six fights and Hopkins vs. Pascal were broadcast on Showtime in the states. Other televised fights include HBO broadcasts of Khan vs. Maidana, Bradley vs. Alexander, Khan vs. Paulie M, Martinez vs. Williams, etc etc

 

And you obviously don't watch Sky closely enough because when they do broadcast Americans ppvs they show all the fights, just as they did recently for Action Heroes.