Why is Haye getting so much hate over the Klit negotiations?

Now poor David will have to fight a mandatory....and he stands a MUCH bigger chance to lose to Chagaev/Povetkin than Wlad stands against Chisora. God forbid if David tears his vagina again during camp or the fight and is on the shelf 7-9 months again

 

Then Haye could fight Vitali, very simple. Adamek has such a contract and it makes perfect sense.

 

Simply, Haye has burned all his goodwill currency with most everyone other than the Brit public. Why should anyone give him the benefit of the doubt?

 

And if Vitali loses?

 

Wlad did the right thing, he cannot wait. But Haye can sign and the fight will be on 2the of july.

 

:happy
brilliant. bravo...a truly epic duck. wow. that is special. you rushman are the ducker in chief of esb. top quality stuff.
:happy

i made 4 points. you are saying none of them are facts. let me go over them again:

1. haye had to arrange a mando or a unification by april 3rd 2011. (this was a ruling made the the wba last november) (true or false?)

2. negotiations with wlad were on-going & very nearly concluded (according to both sides). (true or false?)

3. wlad signed to fight chisora on april 30th. (true or false?)

4. haye could thus not sign a contract for a unification by april 3rd & was obligated to face his mando. (true or false?)

 

All true

 

And if Haye "injures" his back again what if there is an earthquake before the fight and the arena is damaged? Maybe they should never schedule a fight because something may happen...

You dont rely on what ifs you play the cards you have..
The fight is there to be made all Haye has to do is grow a pair and sign..
Also jack what happened to your claim that Vitaly did not want to fight haye:huh

 

Maybe because David Haye promised everyone something that he seems to have no intentions of delivering?

 

There's a bit of difference between taking on a fight you personally say is dangerous and worrying about a ****ing earthquake. Come on.

I didn't say that - I said that if Vitali wanted to fight Haye, he should call him out instead of proceeding with Solis. In between the Wlad negotiations falling apart and the Solis fight being signed, Vitali said nothing.

I think Haye should have called him out anyway, though, even if at the time, he technically wasn't available. Vitali should have done the same.

 

Then Haye simply pays off Chagaev/Povetkin to step aside and moves on. No trouble with the WBA, everyone's happy.

Haye is young, wasting 4-5 months while waiting only to see a big fight fall apart is not a big deal for Haye. I don't understand this time pressure Haye is creating. He should realize his personal plans mean jack**** to the world.

 

But if he has a contract, he still loses out. Let's assume that Wlad loses to Chisora and Vitali loses to Solis. Then what? Haye fights the brothers in a 50/50 split, despite being the only guy with a belt?

I don't see the clear contingency plan if Wlad and then Vitali lose.

Let's ignore Vitali though because it makes it overcomplicated at this stage. Assuming Haye delays his mandatory, which is the only possible way a July 2nd fight will happen, and then the fight with Wlad doesn't happen, he will then be forced to either fight a mandatory or give his title up. He can't give his title up, obviously, meaning that he'd fight Chagaev or Povetkin in his final career fight, whilst Wlad is still dealing with Chisora in a rematch.

Not only does Haye lose time and money, it would then ensure that a fight with either Klitschko couldn't happen, unless he drops the WBA belt, and he retires without facing either. Even if he did drop the belt, both Chisora have a rematch and third fight clause, which could mean that we'd see Wlad/Chisora II, Vitali/Solis II, Wlad/Solis and Vitali/Chisora! And then if Haye dropped his belt and went on to face the Klitschko's, if they have the belts back, they're not going to accept 50/50 with Haye and assuming they lost all three fights against Chisora and Solis, they wouldn't be the two best heavyweights in the world anyway, so why would Haye want to fight them?

And that's not even mentioning Adamek who is at risk of having his career ****ed over by these scandalous contracts the Klitschko's have. Between both brothers, there's a potential of nine fights before an Adamek bout in September! Laughable. Assuming a Klitschko loses at any time, he is ****ed.

It's just ridiculous.

Wlad, like Manny Steward has said, should have rejected the Chisora fight. He should have told him to "**** off" or, at the very least, "prove you're the best prospect in Britain and I'll consider fighting you", and just gone ahead with the Haye fight. Had Haye pulled out after, fine, that's not Wlad's fault in the slightest, but that's what he should have done.

 

Point one: I don't know if is true or false. I know this is what the Hayecamp keeps saying, and it can be true. But I would not take Hayes word for it as sufficient proof alone. You mention WBA. Perhaps you can give me a link to a newsarticle or similar?

Point two: False. Klitschko says it was as a good as a done deal, Booth says it had not reached the contract stage. Here is a link: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...schkos-the-level-of-arrogance-is-unbelievable

Point three: Well, I guess I have to give in on that one, don't I?

Point four: This is point one all over again. Once again: this is what the Hayecamp says. It can be true, but I have not seen it confirmed from any other source (apart from Hayefans, obviously, but they seem to rely on Booth as source, so it is back to the beginning).

 

point 1 & 4: articles from when the wba mandatory (& the date it had to be done by) were put on record.

http://www.*****.net/2010/11/haye-v-chagaev-mandatory-fight-not.html

http://www.boxing*****.com/haye-vs-chagaev-mandatory-wba-issues-ruling--33271 (from a scene if you know what i mean)

2: you say klitschko says it was "as good as a done deal". that seems to back me up.

haye also seemed to think it was close to being done:

"

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

http://www.bet365.com/news/en/betting/boxing/haye-still-hoping-for-klitschko-bout

& (according to your article) booth's reasoning for it not being a done deal was:
"

This content is protected

"

but adds "

This content is protected

This content is protected

"



so yeah...i still stand by my statement that at the time the chisora fight was signed that "negotiations with wlad were on-going & very nearly concluded (according to both sides)".

3. yes...yes you do.

& that is everything. :good

 

Vitaly did before he agreed to fight Solis boothe came out and said theyu dont want Vit after. :deal Point being is you can say what if forever and it doesnt mean **** if you dont try.. Just like what if haye hurts his "back" again what then? you make the fight and plan accordingly.