What would all of the bull*****ers hating on Ricky Burns have said if...

Please someone tell me when is the last time Rucky Burns has fought in the U.S. or outside of the UK? It's already bad enough we would have to watch the fight when the sun is still shining where I am...Ricky Burns has no chance against Broner...none, he has no power and that would be the thing that will ultimately see him stretched against Broner, British fighters stay at home and fight just as much as US fighters, this entire argument is baseless and when Broner absolutely walks Burns down and destroys him, you same dudes will downplay the victory yet again...

 

It's not a double standard. Broner just has so much more going for him that gives him the right to tell Burns he has to travel. There have been about four other posters who have pointed out the same thing but you just don't seem willing to listen.

 

At first i though burns was ducking but like broner he was too big & out grew his division so don't be hypocrites.He's said he'd have no problem fighting broner anywhere a ring is a ring.Respect to burns.Burns,gamboa are only interesting fights broner should be in,anybdoy else is unworthy & he'd be downgrading if he does.

 

Ricky has the title that Guerrero vacated. As usual for the Brits, it's the WBO and he wants to sit on it. Sound familiar?

Broner just beat the #1 lightweight in the world who was coming off of a much more impressive streak. At this point, he is the man in the division.

Broner has the HBO deal, the legitimate belt, and enough skills to beat Burns no matter where the fight takes place. Burns best shot is to get a hometown decision and Broner knows it.

I take things on a case by case basis, and in this case Burns should travel.

 

If the tables were turned and Broner went back on what he said twice, I would think he was scared of getting a butt kicking.

I would suggest he just not say anything, decide what he was really willing to do, before speaking, and then backing out.

 

Ricky Burns? Seriously? All this bickering over Ricky ****ing Burns? This dude has done zilch, Brits are always bitching about big name American fighters not wanting to fight in the UK, when so many UK fighters don't travel themselves, Burns has never fought outside the UK, it's all about the U.S. when it comes to boxing...

Put it this way, if British boxers were banned in America and vice versa, who do you think would lose out more? Sorry it's the UK, I wouldn't miss out on any current Brit who fights currently if they never fought again, but on the other hand if the UK couldn't get U.S. fights you guys would be missing out on dozens of great fighters who fight here on American soil...

America is where boxing reigns supreme, deal with it people...

 

Last year he backed out of a scheduled HBO date.

http://www.badlefthook.com/2011/8/2...-november-26-cincinnati-hbo-boxing-after-dark

As recently as just a few months ago, around the time of the Mitchell fight, he said he wanted to face Broner, and it did not matter where.

http://www.12rounder.com/video-burns-wants-broner-demarco-winner-after-december.html

Like I said, best just not say anything. Then you have to worry about being called out on it.atsch

 

I knew that didn't look right.

Pity, you're a solid poster and in many cases I think your point would be valid. In this case, though, I don't see a double standard.

For example, if Dirrell picked up a vacated belt and called out Froch, I'd say he needed to travel to the UK.