SKY's fight night coverage in need of change?

It does have a kind of middle aged politician look to it at the moment to be fair. Like you say no knowledgable old fella, and not really any great insight from current fighters, or at least not as much as I'd like.

 

Froch will be there in a year or two. The biggest complaint I have is they talk crap.. you're not supposed to be friends with these fighters. You're supposed to offer unbiased comments.

Last night they interview Khan and then say he can give Mayweather a run for his money. No. Just no. Why not say it how it is.. Goldenboy KNOW he can't compete with Garcia or Mattheyse and thats why they pulled him out of the mini tournament.

Purdy for example.. call it how it was. He done nothing. It was awful. To say they now know who he is in America is laughable and pathetic.

 

They could definitely freshen up the graphics and studio and especially the pundits. McCrory in particular offers nothing of value. Punditry is a weird business, seems like a job for life, whether boxing on Sky Sports, Match of the Day on BBC, or Jamie Redknapp doing live football.

 

Id rather they hire Jim Watts twitter parody account than the man himself.

 

They seriously need to change the pundits, Football doesnt always seem to roll out dozen years ago retired Players (they do sometimes but they tend to mix it up more than Boxing does)

I liked what BN were doing with Maccarinelli, Smith and Saunders doing the co commentating

Sky would do well to have some fighters that actually fought within the last decade on, keep it more relevant to todays fan, people like Rhodes and Moore have been on and did well

 

i agree think jamie moore is a breath of fresh air on it knows his stuff as does rhodes, piper is poor why they get him on is beyond me

 

I like Jamie Moore and Spencer Oliver on sky. Piper and The rest of the old boys club just arse lick British fighters and think we don't know what is really going on

 

Jim Watt has to go at least from the commentary box he's ****ing terrible, I don't know what fights he's watching sometimes he's so out of touch with whats actually happening in the fights. I like Nelson & McCrory to be honest but they definitely need some brand new faces not guys like Spencer Oliver and Jamie Moore who have been around a while also.

I think Big Audley should be brought on board he's a great character and good to listen to.

 

He wouldn't last 5 seconds without him start talking about himself.

 

The entire setup is boring. The pundits, the awful commentary teams, the British bias, the crap intro, the boring vignettes pre-fight which don't even hype you up they're so mundane. I've got to be honest, watching boxing on Sky is a ****ing chore.

 

what about getting some trainers on who could give a good insight into it, billy nelson jimmy tibbs etc

 

if I was in charge of boxing at Sky I would, get Eubank and McGuigan on as often as possible. The others are quite boring and if I have the fight recorded on Sky + i often fast forward the studio build up and analysis but I would never fast forward Barry or Chris, they are unpredictable, eloquent, compelling and don't just tow the company line like some of the other dinosaurs. The only problem is you would have to manage them both carefully as they both can take ages to make a point and sometimes (particularly Barry) talk over the other guests and sometimes (again mainly Barry) start arguing with other pundits and It can look very un-professional and sloppy especially to casual fans who do not know the personality's involved.

While I am at it If i was head of Boxing I would also get rid of that fat ****ing walrus Dan Raphael form the Ringside section 'A View from the States' as he is an overrated journalist who also happens to have a clear agenda against british fighters and give the slot to Paulie Mallignaggi who I would much rather listen to.

 

Isn't it amazing that something I've been saying months ago is ignored and then repeated. How many times does this continue to happen?

Sky's boxing product and output needs a major shake up, it needs to evolve with the times, meaning, fresh faces, different opinions and honesty. Some say that we now have "New Age Promoting"....but how can that be, when we still have the same old age gits, pundits and production on the TV screen? It needs a change. Its like hitting a brick wall. Its about time Sky realized their comforts and did something out of the box for a change, something new, something adventurous, contemp, fresh, prophetic. Whilst they have a big hold and a monopoly ideology and agenda, their success will not last for ever, that can change in the blink of an eye and we are already witnessing the birth of proper competition.

Across the board Sky Sports needs a shake up, that should be necessary considering the sort of money people are paying for subscriptions. Subscriptions that ever continue to increase in price, but for a product that is basically stationary.

 

Maybe because on ocassions you come across as an internet egomaniac?