Shields Vs Marshall

Interesting cultural appropriation. Boring personality though.

 

It s not just people on ESB.It s all over.Literally.
Not a single decent person likes Shields’s attitude.
Not one.

 

So all the people who like Shields highly respected and respectable are not decent but you are. Perhaps they are not the issue maybe it’s your prejudice that is the issue if you examined your bias.

 

I didnt say I am,I wasnt talking about me.
I was talking about the people who like Shields outside of the ring.
She is universally recognized as a vile ghetto uneducated unlikeable person.
Great boxer yeah but not much likable.
Lets say your right and I am prejudice.What about the rest of the world?

 

Being born in the ghetto (i.e. a low-income, rough and ready area) isn't tantamount to an obligation to style yourself as pondlife.

With that said,

and bearing in mind that I generally find Odessa Swords to be an unlikeable, entitled brat,

the Flint Fishwife has actually been coming off better than Gabbana Stanshall through these last few months of build-up.

Nobody notices (or a blind eye is turned), because, outside of her interactions with Swords, Stanshall projects the image of a shy and retiring 'nice' girl, but she's shown a more uncouth side of herself and emerged as quite the Hartlepool Harpy where her main rival is concerned (not as boorishly foul-mouthed as her tagalong friend, the smelly August Munter, but still). And she hasn't just been 'clapping back', she's actually positioned herself as the aggressor/catcaller. A good example can be found in the immediate aftermath of Swords' last fight, where Odessa seemed positioned and prepared for a more genteel exchange of words (something closer to [url]this[/url] than [url]this[/url]) and was instead promptly met with a boast about wiping the floor with her (Swords then, naturally, brought out the Flint Fishwife). Stanshall may train under a Fury, but she isn't a Fury, doesn't have that mercurial charm. The disparaging and trash-talking is unbecoming of her, and it undermines this;

I also find myself in some agreement with a particular point you've mentioned, i.e. possible weakness in Stanshall's mental make-up, in so much as I get a sense that a lot of that big talk is being fuelled and encouraged by people gassing her up behind the scenes. Her conduct toward Swords would appear to be uncharacteristic, unless true colors are emerging (which, I suppose, is a possibility, but I tend to think the pleasant Stanshall is closer to who she really is).

I do also think guys are kidding themselves and seeing what they want to see when they talk about Swords being intimidated or scared in Stanshall's presence. It isn't the case. Swords is coming to win and believes there's no other outcome.


More to the point, Olu,

why are you emotionally invested in a female boxer?

You're all kinds of goofy, but I would've expected you to be too fundamentally unrecontructed to be cheering for a laydeeboxer.

I myself would be quite pleased for Swords to win and win in dominant, demoralizing fashion, though not because I give a tin **** about either one of these women having a successful career, but because it will bury another of the UK's great estrogenic hopes and deal a big blow to Sky's hopes of advancing their woke laydeebox agenda. Swords would then go back to the States to resume with laboring away in obscurity, whining about her inability to generate interest from US networks (who have learned that she's must-miss TV), because Sky know she's impossible to market to the British public outside of this one fight — whole event is in aid of trying to make Stanshall a star.



Incidentally, it's amusing that Sky/Shalom are pushing to do this 'big' fight in the world-renowned fistic Mecca of Newcastle, because they're terrified that Stanshall can't sell a ticket outside of the toilet that is Tyneside.

 

Like I said your comments says a lot more about you and your world view than it says about Shields.

 

That may or may not be right bit that’s neither here bor there.
I am RIGHT in my comments and that is the point.Shields is unlikeable which leads to your original laughable point of saying Marshall is unlikeable.

 

You make some solid points despite not everyone getting your humour. It’s not about wonen’s boxing rather I am about boxing. Canelo ‘s mantra No Bixing No Life applies to me just as much. I have studied Marshall closely over a period of time and see her weaknesses. There is a reason she and her team are pushing for the fight in Newcastle hoping the crowd would lift her. Whereas Shields is for the Azumah Nelson school whereby I will beat you up in your hometown or bedroom and your Mum and Dad can be the referee or judges, you still going to get your ass licked.

 

Yes it is. My comments are spot on. This is about you as a person not Shields. I know your type.

 

You said Marshall is unlikeable and Shields is.
That is generally wrong.
Factually proven.
Not your opinion of mine but generally.

 

Interesting Gareth Davies interview with Peter Fury the other day (on YT). He says Savannah won't fight Claressa like she did Hermans. With Hermans Savannah soon decided she wasn't impressed with what was coming back so she took more chances- she missed and got hit- in order to hunt her down in the 3rd. With Claressa it seems Savannah will be much tighter and seek to outbox Claressa. Peter is contemptuous of just relying on being the bigger puncher. I fancy Savannah will try to command Claressa boxing-wise and only then try to beat her up. Claressa on the other hand is talking of going to war with Savannah and stopping her, showing her she is really the bigger puncher, despite the stats. I guess her (2) trainers will try to steer her away from this ego- led strategy and to be in and out with ones and one-twos (no flurries), relying on her excellent speed and reactions.

 

I'm not familiar with her Twitter timeline, beyond the handful of missives I've seen embedded here, but I don't doubt your testimony. What I do know of Swords is enough to cross her off my babysitter list.

Be that as it may, she's clearly attempted to put her best foot forward with the Sky Sports/BOXXER opportunity and has approached it with professional intentions, has put on her best ladylike airs for the tea-sipping redcoats, only reverting to type (indignantly shaking her big ol' ass and clapping back) when provoked by Gabbana, whose instigations (seemingly uncharacteristic boastfulness and catcalling) have undermined her public image, whether the three men and a dog who follow womens' boxing choose to turn a blind eye to it or not.

What's more, in her haste to goad and belittle her rival, Gabbana spoke quite contemptuously of Swords' last opponent (whose body of work seems respectable enough for a laydeeboxer) in referring to her as an "absolute child". Throwing shade at Swords is one thing, but casually putting down her innocent sister in suffrage, her ally in the righteous struggle to force laydeebox upon a disinterested audience? That's not at all congruent with what she's supposed to be about.

So, whatever one might think of Olu, he has some justification for calling phoniness in Stanshall's conduct.

I don't care for Swords in the least, I'm just shooting straight. Be it a product of guys gassing Stanshall up behind the scenes (which is my firm suspicion), or be it true colors coming to the surface, there is a clear dissonance in the juxtaposition of her conduct throughout these last several months of promotional build-up and the 'unassuming assassin/nice girl/so lovely, so sweet, so innocent' image she carries around.

Since this fight became a tangible prospect, with the advent of Swords' deal with Sky Sports/BOXXER, Stanshall has been the clapper.

 

Dude…….hahahha I am a fan of women’s boxing and even I dont put that much thought into it haha.