Haye vs Bellew

blade1 wrote: »

It feels like some people never saw the build up to a boxing match before.
People on about being conned with the fake animosity.
That's been going on with donkeys years.
Bellew riles his opponents.
Tyson Fury does it.
Mike Tyson done it.
Ali done it.

Mike Tyson biting Holyfield's ear was all part of the con job so was it? He's a nutjob, it wasn't contrived. Tyson Fury is the same. By being themselves they naturally make headlines.

Bellew did it with Cleverly and it's well regarded as the worst PPV of all time. Eddie Hearn being part of that, again, is no coincidence. It's the WWE model. Haye did it with Audley Harrison too. Again, one of the worst PPV's in recent memory.

Sometimes it isn't fake. Groves v Froch rivalry was 100% legit for example. They still can't look at each when in the same room.

Charlo v Williams was a big rivalry in the US last year. When Charlo knocked Williams out, he told him to **** off after, there was no embrace. Again, a real hatred, nothing contrived.

There's a trend where the fake rivalries usually lead to **** fights. Why? Because if its a poor fight you need to make up a fake hatred between the fighters for it to sell. That's Hearn all over. Prioritising marketing over good matchmaking every single time.

blade1 wrote: »

where did I say that?
Plenty of times Tyson came up with stuff before a fight to get at his opponents.
Like when he said he wanted to eat Lennox Lewis' children.

Yeah but it's not fake. Mike Tyson is a well established nut job. He's being himself for the most part in the build up to all those fights. He didn't preplan stuff the week of a fight for an extra few thousand PPV buys. There's a difference.

Everything Matchroom is planned to the finest detail.

Well, I watched the fight the other night anyway. I'll confess I didnt realise Haye was carrying an achilles injury untill I read the reports today.

My impressions were that Haye didnt want to be there from very early on. Once he realised he wasn't going to blow Bellew away, his eyes seemed to glaze over and he just gave up. I've seen a lot of commentary of how Haye was very heroic but frankly I was embarassed watching it.

Bellew grew and grew in confidence, and knew Haye was there for the taking. He just tired himself out and couldn't land that killer blow.

Haye should retire for me, but that would be a sad way to end his career.

Bellew has good heart and is tough, but he isn't a particularly skilled fighter and has poor stanima.

Morrison J wrote: »

I think one could assume from his life both inside and outside the ring that he's not that calculated in his approach to things..

I didn't see him biting anyone's ear in the ring when he was winning.
Not that much of a nutjob when there was more at stake.

blade1 wrote: »

where did I say that?
Plenty of times Tyson came up with stuff before a fight to get at his opponents.
Like when he said he wanted to eat Lennox Lewis' children.

That was the veteran Tyson. Post prison. Prime Tyson riled nobody up. He simply walked into the ring and terrorised them. That's why he had such awe and menace. There was nothing but bad intentions, with no frills, heirs and graces or contrived nonsense.

I don't really know why people have an issue with boxers hamming it up. If you don't like the show, don't buy a ticket.

Panto sells. Especially when it comes to fighting. It's why Conor McGregor is very rich.

In his fight with Wlad he had the boot off in the ring, no? To show us the toe? Maybe at the post fight presser.

Maybe not. I can't recall.

Unless his Achilles injury did not affect him in the slightest. But it looked like it really did affect him.

The only way Haye can save face is his coming out publicly to say that the injury had no effect whatsoever on his performance. I am betting that not only does he not, but you will hear how it did affect him, and for him and Sky to keep quiet in the ring when we all knew something was up, that is shenanigans...

Wake up, fellas. And when you do, google "lie by omission."

pac_man wrote: »

Boxers are not in the right frame of mind straight after a fight with a camera and mic shoved in their face. It's up to the interviewer to ask the questions.

I thought he showed great sportsmanship and was very complimentary to Bellew. Had he said, "I would have won that fight but I got injured half way through it", you'd probably accuse him of being unsportsmanlike. The chap can't win either way.

I am looking at this objectively. Both he and Sky were dishonest in not addressing it. It was so bloody obvious.

No way would I have dissed him for bringing up something so bloody obvious.

The issue here is that if he did not address it in the ring then he cannot address it outside the ring. But he has, and you can bet he will make it out that it cost him a chance to win. There lies the dishonesty

I am sick reading about how classy he was not to bring up this injury. It's nothing to do with class. It has to do with addressing what blatantly happened in front of the eyes of the fans and viewers.

BTW, Haye seemed very lucid and relaxed and open in the ring afterwards. Nothing to do with right frame of mind. The interviewer is as bad for not asking the obvious question. Simple: It's deception. It would have been great sportsmanship had he not deliberately failed to mention what happened him in the ring.

Wait for it. When Haye starts talking about how the injury affected his performance, will you then see what I mean?

But, maybe, just maybe the injury did not at all affect Haye. It seems unlikely, but if he comes out and says this, then so be it.

This guy earned millions from this fight. He owes it to the people who paid to explain his performance. Saying nothing yet "saying everything" via his tweets and post on social media doesn't explain it.

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

If Haye bring up the injury in the post-fight interview, everyone rolls their eyes and thinks 'typical', regardless of how obvious it was.

The interviewer could and should have asked but if Haye brings it up, people will give out about him bringing it up.

Some will. Some won't. I certainly would not. The fact that it was such an obvious injury, I would think it more odd that he did not bring it up. He can be complimentary and sportsmanlike whilst also being fully honest and truthful and inclusive of the facts.

But like I said, if he comes out and says that the injury did not at all affect his performance then he gets somewhat of a pass from me. However, one would have to think that he is telling fibs, either that or he just turned to mush from rd 6 onwards

I agree about the interviewer. Shambles.

blade1 wrote: »

I'm not disputing Tyson was an animal but if anyone thinks that wasn'tused to sell tickets,well that's a bit naive imo.

Of course he was used. But he himself, his natural persona and presence sold the tickets. Very little had to be done. His look alone was the seller, and of course, his ring performances and fighting style, all natural and not at all embellished. That's a bit different than what I believe you are trying to show.

StringerBell wrote: »

There is no way he takes any major flak from simply acknowledging his lack of mobility in there hampered him, he didn't have to say "Oh I'd have won if it were not for the injury"

The injury was plainly obvious to anybody watching, by completely ignoring it he is being dishonest, to say that was him at 100% was blatantly a lie and then to start using the injury, his team were mentioning it within 24 hours of the fight as an excuse, and now him with his social media, which is only the beginning of this excuse believe me, I can't see how anybody can fail to spot the con job.

Even when he does start speaking bluntly about how the injury cost him the fight, it will be spun to try make him look heroic, that he didn't want to let the fans down who paid that hard earned money, that he felt like he could still get the job done but sadly it just wasn't to be.....next time though!

Well I am glad that I am not the only one to see this as the con it is.