Buncey, just listened to the show. I think you are very good at the work you do - that likable blokey bluster – it’s not as easy as you make it look and it does much to promote the sport of boxing. However, there are some times when likable blokey bluster is not what is needed; what is needed is serious, introspective journalism. The aftermath of Haye-Harrison was one such occasion and you failed to step up to the mark. It was highly unedifying to hear you and Rob Smith, two men who acted in small ways to make Haye-Harrison what it was and with vested interests in failing to unpick the pieces, slapping each other on the backs in mutual self-justification. You started the show, asking, “Was it really so bad?” before reeling off a list of disappointing heavyweight title fights from the past. What kind of argument is that? Other bad **** having happened does not justify this bad ****. Analyse the bad **** that happened last Saturday! You also described those past losing opponents as “the bums of the month.” I think we could accept Haye fighting poor opposition occasionally if he fought regularly. In 2009 and 2010 Haye has fought three times. We can only dream of having a bum of the month club. Regardless, your facile argument was just an evasion of the issues and a waste of time. You then played a promo from David Haye hyping your show. That hardly bolstered my confidence that an objective analysis was on its way. You went onto the betting issue, calling Haye’s comments “rather flippant,” and failing to really take the issue seriously. I would not call comments that bring the sport into disrepute “rather flippant.” You didn’t unpick the important issue here: did Haye deliberately manipulate the result of the fight so his friends/family could win their bets? I was then astonished at the conversation that progressed concerning if Audley had earned the right to a world title shot. Rob Smith justified it like this: “Audley, as far as I was concerned was an undefeated European champion. It doesn’t matter how he won the European championship.” You agreed, saying: “That’s irrelevant.” No, no, no! You and Rob Smith aren’t children, don’t insult us with an insincere naivety about the legitimacy of boxing titles. To become “undefeated European champion” Audley Harrison beat Michael Sprott. That’s it. Is beating Michael Sprott enough to earn a world title shot? If the answer to that is no then winning the European title is not inherently enough to earn a world title shot. Audley was ranked below Derek Chisora and Sam Sexton by most people in the UK alone, let alone someone like Dimitrenko. He was not European champion in any meaningful sense and you know it. Don’t let Rob Smith get away with that kind of bull****. RS: “It’s easy for a lot of people to say after it was a mismatch.” You didn’t come back at him on that either to point out that a lot of people said that before. Haye himself said it would be “as one-sided as a gang ****…as one-sided as a boxing match can be.” The real issues were: should Haye have taken the bout? Should Haye have been allowed to take the bout, and call it a heavyweight title fight? In the future should similar bouts be authorised, or have we learned something from Saturday night? These issues were not discussed. Now, if you are content with being a mere cheerleader for boxing, that’s fair enough - so long as you have no pretensions to be considered a serious journalist.
Buncey, why do you keep comparing last weeks fight to the worst ever and using that as a reason the fight was justified? Would you accept me playing up front for Arsenal because I'm better than Ali Dia?
wow listening to the show and feel sick after the first 2 minutes from the bull**** excuses from Bunce. When you gonna just slag Haye off like he deserves??
Robert Smith and Bunce never heard of a fixed fight.....just talking ****. other than that though Smith came across well. I think he needs to look into Sky. Over hyped the event and omly showed 2 live fights on a PPV show. regulations needs to be put in place.