Khan tried for Marquez fight

Correct on all accounts:good Plus its easy to say "aw, I wanted to fight him" after the fact, idiot Khan. It's like me saying I'm challenging Tyson next, he's retired!, oh **** lucky for him then cause I would have butt****ed him rotten:silly

 

**** off you silly ****.


At 140 Khan will be very hard to beat and JMM is so very small. JMM is class but this weight is far too big for him.

 

You really are some sort of village idiot

 

Ha ha ha, what a ****in bellend you are, JMM would totally smoke Khan, he is one of the best counterpunchers going, get your head out of Khans arse, clown:yep

 

Hows that, by saying JMM would smoke Khan? Then most of the people on this site must be the same bud, head up arse, please take it out cause your spouting some pish, are you and that poster clown buttfriends or what, or the same clown with 2 names

 

JMM would not be a good idea for Khan at this stage, he still looked very sharp and dangerous against Mayweather, and Khan aint exactly Mayweather.

JMM would end Khan's career at the moment.

The winner of Diaz-Paulie fight is the best option and the one I assume they're go for.

 

Too many clowns on this site, time for a clear out, please start with Abbott and Costello here. As I now OWN both of you guys, please stop saying Khan is the greatest, thanks you, no need for further discussion:smooch

 

Thank you, an educated man, at last:yep

 

Listen. Khan has two mandatories. It's not that uncommon. When a fighter wins a vacant belt sometimes the governing body will make him fight two mandatories. Maidana shouldn't even have a belt anyway; Kotelnik was entitled to make a voluntary defence after beating Maidana, and was making the third defence of his belt in 16 months. That's a pretty standard/reasonable level of activity; if the WBA were so adamant that the Kotelnik-Maidana rematch was of immediate concern they should stripped/threaten to strip Kotelnik if he didn't comply.

 

****

The

Belts.

 

Sorry, I should have highlighted the "after the fact" statement, because thats what I am commenting about...You obviously have an agenda, thats fine, I don't have a problem with that, but if your argument is to stand up please don't make **** up.

 

Ah, you missed an important bit out then, I accept your unreserved apology:good:yep

 

You need to be careful tiger, you're so sharp you'll cut yourself

 

God I pray for Malignaggi/Khan or Witter.