Triple Coward called out by best 154 (Lara) but drags up a 147 13 pounds SMH

The point I'm trying to make is that although it's a disappointing fight, it's only due to circumstances and not it's like Canelo-Khan.

The HBO date has been in place for a while, and GG wants to fight another 2 fights before the end of the year.

You say shame on GG, I say shame on Oscar, Jacobs and Eubank Snr for this mess.

GG thought he'd got the Eubank fight that HBO were happy with, and it gave him the opportunity to fight in Britain in a big PPV fight, giving him the chance to widen his fan base. Then the wheels came off. But Brook stepped in and signed the same contract.

Yes, it's disappointing. But HBO were happy and GG still gets to fight in Britain in a big PPV fight. So why on earth should they have walked away from that? To fight who, and on what date? What would have been the point?

Jacobs, Saunder's, Canelo and Eubank were off the table.

If he'd have fought a mandatory he'd have got criticised.

If he'd fought a JMW he'd have got criticised.

Who else could he have fought at MW?

Why would he dip his toes in the SMW division when he's got 3 of the 4 MW belts and he's said he won't move up until he's got all of them? Even if he was willing to move up now, who would he fight? The SMW champs all want to fight each other.

He made the best of a bad situation.

These Canelo-Khan comparisons are BS. Canelo asked for a voluntary, chose Khan, and then gave everyone the impression that he was willing to negotiate a fight with GG afterwards. The circumstances are completely different to GG-Brook.

GG didn't have any other better options open to him.

Did HBO put a gun to his head and force him to fight on the 10th of September? Probably not. But again, that date has been open since he fought Wade. They have a contract, and again, they're happy with the Brook fight. So why risk fighting twice in the next 5 months, to fight probably only once under terms that aren't as good? Again, it would be pointless.

I don't think anyone in GG's shoes would have turned down a big money fight against Brook, especially as they were no other viable options open to them.

It's a disappointing fight, but in my opinion, GG shouldn't be criticised for it.

 

atsch

 

[QUOTE="TKO";18077173]I don't think some people understand what the term "calling someone out" actually means. A lot of supposed fans are under the impression that answering a direct question about your willingness to fight a particular opponent constitutes "calling them out".

You can see here an example of exactly how Jacobs "called out Golovkin". http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/426871-danny-jacobs-wants-to-face-gennady-golovkin-for-my-legacy . Basically, he was asked about the possibility of a fight with Golovkinn during the course of an interview where he also answered questions on Quillin, Saunders and Mora amongst others . Ring have cleverly manipulated the material to make the comments on Golovkin the headline. But if you actually read the material, Jacobs makes it clear that the Mora rematch is in negotiation, that he won't fight Golovkin for the same money he got against Quillin and that he wants to face Saunders first because of he took Saunders' title he could command more money for putting it on the line against Golovkin. In other words, he would consider a Golovkin fight but has no intention of doing it immediately or without significantly more money on offer.

Of course, some look for ammunition to suit their prejudices, whilst others simply lack the intelligence to understand journalistic license.[/QUOTE]

:deal

Great post.

 

:good

 

A silly post.

 

It was a last minute replacement to salvage his long standing HBO date.

If you're upset that he's not fighting the other MW champs, that's on them.

If you're upset he's not fighting Eubank Jnr, that's on Snr.

GG made the best of a bad situation.

If he'd have walked away from the Brook negotiations to fight either a JMW, a MW mandatory, or a low level MW in a keep busy fight, what would you have done?

Answer = You'd have bashed him for it.

You were never going to be happy whatever the outcome.

 

This is an utterly re****ed post. Are you even sure that you quoted the right poster?:huh

 

always a bad situation for lowercase gee...always bad luck...never his fault

This content is protected

10 posts in a row probably defending lowercase gee....glad hes on ignore

 

Look, the ret@rd is back, hip hip hooray!

 

served your suspension, now back to being a broken record. shocking...

 

Don't be so naive... Team GGG could have made the Eubank fight with a bit of extra work, fact is Hearn has been in discussions with them about a Brook fight since February. Eubank Sr being difficult was nothing more than a convenient excuse for them to sign to fight Kell. Brook was the fight they wanted all along.

 

atsch

What are you talking about?

 

He's an absolute joke.

Who makes 26 threads about the same guy?

He put me on ignore for asking him too many questions that he couldn't answer.

Pathetic.

I don't even want him to be permanently banned anymore.

I'd rather watch people ridicule him instead.

 

speaking of a broken record

"no one will fight lowercase gee....what other options did he have...wahhh wahhh...brook is big for a ww...wahhh wahh no one else would fight lowercase gee so I don't blame him....lowercase gee is so unlucky....its not his fault"

 

Take on board your own advice.

Although I'm not a huge fan of Eddie's, I believe him 100% when he says Eubank Snr was impossible to deal with.

Again, do some research.

There's various interviews with Eddie and Barry, as well as with Frank W who used to promote him.

Do you seriously think Eddie is lying when he says that Eubank Snr wanted to control every aspect of the promotion?

Why?


Eddie has confirmed the following:


He wanted to double the ticket prices.

He wanted to double the PPV.

He wanted more money than Brook and Joshua.

He wanted to control the undercard.

He wanted Barry McGuigan to commentate.

He wanted to chose the hotels etc.


Think about this:

This was disclosed TEN days ago, and to my knowledge, Snr hasn't refuted any of it yet.

Why do you think that is?


You are the person who's been naive.