Whyte, Ruiz and Joshua: Rematch clauses

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by CutThroatFade, Aug 11, 2019.


  1. CutThroatFade

    CutThroatFade Boxing Junkie booted Full Member

    11,669
    16,850
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 25, 2015
    I know this topic has been discussed on a few threads now but I thought I’d start it as a stand-alone topic given that it seems now that Ruiz won’t sign the Saudi rematch until he is giving more than the $9m he has been contractually assigned in the rematch clause.

    A few months back Dillian Whyte turned down the chance to box Joshua and a lot of posters here were slating him for “ducking”. When you look back the reason why he turned down the fight was not because the money was too low for the fight but it was the rematch purse split that was the reason why he turned it down. It was still stacked in AJ’s favour and even when Hearn compromised to 50/50 in the rematch Whyte was still unhappy and said no, he needs the lion’s share in a rematch. (Ok I accept that now a potential alternative reason is the Dianabol cycling but let’s not get into that here!)

    Far too often on this forum and on Twitter the Matchroom FC online forum patrol are very quick to slate any fighter to turn down Joshua, particularly Wilder. They see flat fee figures and purse splits, get AJ’s pound signs in there eyes and make bold proclamations about how X is ducking Joshua. They do this without thinking about how Hearn stacks the rematch clauses in Joshua’s favour even if he is to lose the original fight.

    It’s a disgusting practice from Hearn and really not too dissimilar from restraint of trade covenants in employment contracts that regularly get struck down in employment tribunals.

    Now Ruiz finds himself in a vulnerable contractual position earning a paltry £9m from an $84m+ pot despite being the winner and unified champion.

    @Hattonmad has made a valid point in other threads about how the governing bodies need to mandate a certain purse split for rematch clauses to ensure champions and winners get paid fairly.

    Just making the thread to point out that next time you read about a certain fighter turning down a seemingly good offer to fight someone like AJ, don’t just listen to a crook like Hearn parrot on about how it’s a great offer he has made, obnoxiously bragging about the money he has offered and how the fighter in question is a “ducker”. Think about what sort of unfair clauses will apply in the contract and think about it from the fighter’s perspective. I bet most of the great fights Hearn talks about fall through on these sort of terms and he’ll be doing it with regards to all his fighters’ contracts, not just Joshua. Whilst he is looking after the interests of his own fighter he is basically attempting to completely shaft opposition fighters financially when the next fight could be there last, such is the brutality of this sport.

    I’ve said before that I don’t care much about the “boardroom” side of boxing and I don’t tbh, but just making this point next time anyone rushes to their keyboard to call X a ducking coward for refusing to fight Z when the “money is so good”. And that applies to me too. We don’t know jack **** about what goes into these contracts except for the spin that crooks like Hearn put on them in the public domain.
     
    cole27, Jamzy ⭐, 305th and 5 others like this.
  2. ryuken87

    ryuken87 Active Member Full Member

    1,410
    746
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Mar 8, 2014
    When it comes to these sums of money, I find it all a bit petit because even with a low split you are still being set for life. What does it matter what the other guy gets if you have $9 million?

    And on the flip side, what is it to Joshua if he gives the other guy another couple of million? He won't miss it.
     
  3. Puroresu_Fan

    Puroresu_Fan Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,367
    4,106
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Apr 6, 2016
    There goes the Anti Hearn agenda.

    Your post would have more credibility if you didn't simply call out Hearn and Joshua.

    Do you want us to believe that Canelo doesn't have rematch clauses where he regardless if he loses still takes the most money in a rematch?

    Am I expected to believe that Wilder doesn't not have a rematch clause for his Ortiz fight where he takes the majority of money if he loses?

    Floyd had it, Oscar had it and its been a thing for long before Hearn and Joshua got into boxing.

    Personally I see no issue with it as if you don't like it don't agree to it. Nobody forced Ruiz to agree to the terms of a rematch but he did and should now meet those obligations.

    You can't simply just hold a belt and suddenly the roles get reversed as their are too many other things in play. Being the champion simply means you hold a title, it doesn't mean you actually generate the money which you want to be paid.

    It's no different to when Bruno was champ and fought Tyson. His purse was $5 mil and Tyson got $30 mil. Now just looking at it on paper one would say but Bruno was champion but the reality was nobody gave a damn about Bruno and people wanted to see Tyson. With that being the case why wouldn't he get a much larger purse.

    As for the Ruiz deal. I have sympathy for Ruiz in the sense they were probably 1. Not even thinking about a rematch and 2. If they were it was likely just going by what the fight generated and his purse would reflect that with a slightly higher upside due to winning.

    Now clearly some Arabs wanting to pay crazy money to host the fight changes things but again I would argue thats far more something to do with AJ and not Ruiz.

    Should Ruiz get more of the pot? I would say not more or even half but yes he probably should get more but if he has signed off on his purse already one can't really then start complaining.

    I don't think you could have governing bodies mandating what splits should occur simply because they don't promote fights. They don't fund the money for fights so why should they get to decide who earns what outside mandatory defences?
     
  4. Trafford

    Trafford Active Member Full Member

    796
    697
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Sep 29, 2018
    This is the exact truth. There are no slave contracts.

    Ruiz team should have negotiated a better rematch clause in the first place. Did they not atleast say a 60/40 split in AJs favour? Would now be walking away with £33m but they took the £9m.

    You have to remember Hearn was up against it to find an American opponent on 6 weeks notice. Ruiz team clearly felt the deal was too good to turn down. It’s only now in hindsight they ****ed up.

    Rematch clauses apply to all voluntary defences. Not just Matchroom and AJ only difference here is we are talking millions instead of thousands.

    Do we think Harrison is going to be paid more than Charlo in the rematch??? Nope
     
    Holler and im sparticus like this.
  5. CutThroatFade

    CutThroatFade Boxing Junkie booted Full Member

    11,669
    16,850
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 25, 2015
    Imagine I was your boss and I took you and one of your colleagues, Dave to the side. I say “look guys if you do this piece of work for me you will earn millions of dollars. @ryuken87 you will get paid £1m. Dave, you’re getting paid £10m”.

    How would you feel if this was the way I was allocating the earnings even though you had the more productive year?
     
    305th likes this.
  6. CutThroatFade

    CutThroatFade Boxing Junkie booted Full Member

    11,669
    16,850
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 25, 2015
    When Ruiz signed the rematch clause he would have had no clue that there was an $80m+ pot in the rematch. That’s why it’s unfair on him.

    The reason why Hearn is at the centre of my post is because he’s the one who claims he is giving out amazing offers and he is the one shafting Ruiz here. Of course my post applies to anyone who tries to shaft fighters with rematch clauses.

    And just because someone has signed a contract doesn’t mean it’s lawful. That’s why I mentioned restraint of trade covenants.

    If the governing bodies in the sport actually wanted to make things fair they would step in here and regulate.
     
    pow, 305th and im sparticus like this.
  7. BigStiffIdiot

    BigStiffIdiot Safer than Adam Smith's laptop password. Full Member

    581
    662
    Sportsbook:
    800
    Sep 4, 2018
    Or Hearn and AJ never gave him the chance and he wouldn't have ever earnt what he did in the first purse or the second purse. If he has an issue with what he is getting from the purse, he really needs to speak to his management team, promotional company and lawyers.
     
    TonyHayers likes this.
  8. Degale

    Degale Member Full Member

    294
    236
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Nov 24, 2013
    Horrendous post.

    Ruiz signed the contract, if he wanted more money he shouldn't have signed the contract.

    It is that simple.
     
    Snowy1989, Special one, Furey and 5 others like this.
  9. Aydamn

    Aydamn Dillian Whyte #CLEARED like I said he would be Full Member

    7,048
    4,498
    Sportsbook:
    589
    Jul 31, 2018
    Well well well...like I didnt say any of this earlier
     
    UKboxingfan likes this.
  10. TonyHayers

    TonyHayers Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,896
    1,431
    Sportsbook:
    1,549
    Nov 1, 2018
    Boxers are largely paid on the basis of how much income they generate. It's not just a case of better at boxing = paid more money. Same with loads of sports.

    Plenty on here clearly hate the fact that Joshua earns a fortune.
     
  11. Puroresu_Fan

    Puroresu_Fan Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,367
    4,106
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Apr 6, 2016
    Ruiz isn't getting shafted. Shafted would be Hearn agreeing to pay a certain amount and then trying to pay less. Ruiz is being paid what he agreed too and that's on his team.
     
  12. Citizen Smith

    Citizen Smith Active Member Full Member

    815
    559
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jul 12, 2019
    If those splits are correct then it's so lopsided that you could argue that Andy/Al signed it with the intention of never doing the rematch on those terms. What did Andy get for the first one? 6m? The rematch clause might not have actual dollar numbers but would have had a percentage split so it would be obvious that they were signing a dud.

    They have AJ and Eddie over a barrel. Eddie can't get the massive payday without Andy saying yes, so they will have to up the offer. Wilder and Fury are tied up for the rest of this year, Whyte is seemingly out for a bit or at least has some issues, so who else is AJ going to fight for such massive amounts? I reckon Haymon has run circles around Eddie here.
     
    CutThroatFade likes this.
  13. TonyHayers

    TonyHayers Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,896
    1,431
    Sportsbook:
    1,549
    Nov 1, 2018
    People are prepared to offer massive money for Joshua because he creates money for everyone else. The TV companies love it, the advertisement companies love it, and as nice a guy as he is, that just doesn't happen with Ruiz.

    Think of it like being able to attract customers. It's really that simple.
     
    im sparticus likes this.
  14. CutThroatFade

    CutThroatFade Boxing Junkie booted Full Member

    11,669
    16,850
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 25, 2015
    The whole reason why there is an $84m pot for the rematch is down to Ruiz. That’s the whole point. It’s not just down to Joshua. People this time are actually paying for Ruiz.
     
    cole27, channy and 305th like this.
  15. Aydamn

    Aydamn Dillian Whyte #CLEARED like I said he would be Full Member

    7,048
    4,498
    Sportsbook:
    589
    Jul 31, 2018
    This is hilarious, I said all this stuff and argued for weeks about how it ain't about the 5 million offered its about how much was in the pot... and all the blonde airheads on this forum masquerading as geezers couldn't comprehend that concept.

    It hurts being one of the few smart
    People sometimes.... no one to reciprocate
     


Sign up for ESPN+ and Stream Live Sports! Advertisement