Sky Box Office - Ever get the feeling you've been ripped off?

I have never found myself getting overly wound up over the whole PPV thing on Sky. My opinion has always been that it’s £17, it’s the price of three drinks were we to go out for TSMR and I. This is not an insignificant amount but at the risk of sounding big time is not likely to push anyone into poverty.

However watching this weekend’s fight and thinking about what PPV represents in 2016 I find myself being less disinterested and slightly more frustrated. In 2016 there have been four PPV cards, Frampton Quigg, Joshua vs Martin and Braezeale and Golvkin vs Brook. It also seems a fair bet Joshua’s November run out will be PPV and so that will make five, at 17 quid a pop another £85 quid on top of your already reasonably hefty Sky bill. Given Fury and Klitschsko are tied up and Wilder has not even been mentioned it seems equally fair to assume Joshua’s opponent is unlikely to set the pulses racing.

However as the fight has not been announced and it is unfair to slate something, the details of which we don’t know, we’ll focus on the four PPVs we have had. Of those four I would argue only Frampton Quigg gets within 100 yards of being considered a competitive or a 50/50 fight. If I was to have said to anyone here you can have 500-1 on the other three fights and all you need to win is for any two from three of Martin, Braezeale or Brook to win, how many on here would back it? By back it I mean not just chuck a couple of quid on, on the thinking well you never know, but back it on the basis that looks attractive, I’m lumping onto that? I would guess none of us would touch it.

If my instinct is right and none of us would touch those odds I think it is reasonable to call the fights involved absolute mismatches. It then also follows that it is reasonable to ask if it is really good enough that of four PPV fights a year 75% of them being mismatches is really value for money.

The problem with having so many mismatches on PPV is it taints and impacts on the whole product Sky produce. As Hearn is not stupid and he wants everyone to buy, the guys who are fully on the Joshua hype train and will shell out for him irrespective and the hardcore fan. What this means is to prop up the main event he tends to have put decent fights on the undercard. Take Murray Groves for instance, a good solid matchup between two decent fighters, it would and should have made a good headline fight on a Saturday night, but unfortunately it is needed to prop up a poor headliner on a PPV card.

Similarly as the “experts” on the Sky team know the main event is average so rather than providing analysis or insight they just spend their times selling their soul by trying to convince you an opponent without a snowball in hells chance can win. Whilst this can lead to some amusement, such as watching McGuigan dying on the inside trying to pretend Harrison had a chance with Haye it is a bit of an insult.

What makes it really stick in the craw is the brazenness of it all. In the run up to the fight at the weekend not one person said Brook would be too small, the narrative was Brook had finally moved into his natural weight, looked a beast at middle and GGG was dead at the weight, looked ill, would need assistance getting up the steps to the ring etc. Once the fight finished, in the manner pretty much everyone other than the Sky “experts” said, they all stand there and say Brook was too small, as if this was obvious all along. They’re right, it was obvious from the outset, but why none of them articulated this before the fight seems a reasonable question.

I can bemoan the hype involved in this show but at least GGG was someone they had heard of, at least two times during the Breazeale fight two of the Sky panel admitted they did not know much about him. What this means is one of two things, either you’re promoting a guy so obscure he has no place headlining a PPV main event or your experts are unqualified to do their job. Neither paints a particularly positive picture of the product being sold by Sky.

It has reached the point now where the expectation for main events on PPV have reached such a low ebb, Brook landing a few on his way to getting a hiding or Breazeale managing to hang around a few more rounds than expected before getting stopped are almost seen as justifying them as main events.

I will say Sky present the show very well, it is slick, well produced and generally well presented, but I can’t escape the feeling there is a lot of turd polishing being done. I found myself losing count of how many presenters, analysts, experts and commentators were actually working this weekend, I seriously doubt the BBC used as large a team to cover the recent Olympic Games. There is a sneaking submission a lot of this is done to distract from the Emperor’s nakedness in my opinion.

The last fury vs klitschko fight was sky box office too. Do we know if the next one is and if it was, would you consider it competitive?

Yes, I agree entirely. I didn't resent paying to watch Brook vs Golovkin on PPV, despite essentially knowing the outcome before the first bell had even sounded, because they're both top level fighters, I wanted to see how Brook fared, and I think it right that Brook be adequately compensated for the beating was obviously going to endure.

That said, there is little satisfaction to be derived from watching a sporting contest in which the outcome is near enough pre-determined. I too have noticed the propensity of Matchroom to put on compelling, competitive undercard fights in order to prop-up their mismatched headliners. And it is frustrating. Unless Joshua's opponent is able to pose a genuine threat to him then I'd rather not pay for it (if, as expected, it is on PPV). However, it seems likely that, if I don't shell out for the card, then I'll miss a few domestic fighters in competitive bouts which I'd otherwise be interested to watch.

The irritating thing is that; like you say, £17 really isn't a huge amount, especially split between a few of us, so, despite what I've just said, I may well end up paying and thus help to perpetuate the trend towards PPV, which is starting to become the norm.

It's Boxnation. I do consider it a competitive fight

Rowley wrote:It's Boxnation. I do consider it a competitive fight

Would you pay £17 for it?

Mr Tom wrote:The last fury vs klitschko fight was sky box office too. Do we know if the next one is and if it was, would you consider it competitive?

That is a British fighter defending his unified Heavyweight title belts against a dominant former champion in a highly anticipated rematch. So yes, that is definitely a fight I'd consider competitive in the sense that I would not be confident of predicting the outcome.

Regardless of how close the fight is, or how entertaining it is, that is a contest which could (and almost certainly will) justifiably be on PPV.

Mr Tom wrote:

Rowley wrote:It's Boxnation. I do consider it a competitive fight

Would you pay £17 for it?

Probably, it's a genuine pick em for the legitimate heavyweight championship of the world.

Gentleman01 wrote:

Mr Tom wrote:The last fury vs klitschko fight was sky box office too. Do we know if the next one is and if it was, would you consider it competitive?

That is a British fighter defending his unified Heavyweight title belts against a dominant former champion in a highly anticipated rematch. So yes, that is definitely a fight I'd consider competitive in the sense that I would not be confident of predicting the outcome.

Regardless of how close the fight is, or how entertaining it is, that is a contest which could (and almost certainly will) justifiably be on PPV.

Although it's not  (depending on your views on box nation)

I agree, but Sky do provide more than just boxing for the 27.50 a month

PPV should be for special events only, but the only PPV stars for Hearn are Brook and Joshua and Brook may not be in his next fight

Heavyweights always are a big attraction and if there is a market then people will pay

For example Crawford vs Postol did really low numbers, so there wasn't the demand and Bob Arum won't do that again

Great article.

I was left dissapointed on Saturday night. I paid for it which I don't normally do to be fair so more fool me on this occasion. Won't make the mistake again.

The problem is Sky do a great job of marketing these events. They've roped the 'casuals' (I hate saying casuals) right in and they are happy to just see big names fight. Hearn has basically said 'joshua is PPV', meaning Joshua is PPV regardless of who he fights which is ridiculous when you think about it. PPV fights should be reserved for big fights, nobody should automatically be PPV. For me, with a decent undercard Crolla Vs Linares is more justifiable as PPV event than Brook GGG. At least they are two top guys in their division, Crollas got the under dog story going on, and based on Crollas last three fights it should be a good watch.

Another thing is, it wouldnt be so bad if the undercard was decent. Some may disagree but Saturdays undercard was very poor IMO. i'm tired of seeing - One of Eddies men vs TBC when theres only a week or so to go until fight night. Tired of seeing the likes of Callum/Paul Smith drafted in last minute against nobodies to fill the card out. The Ward v Townend fight was alright but it wasn't a pick em like Smith was trying to sell it as and I enjoyed Haskins Hall to a degree but it wasn't exactly world class boxing. An aged hall trying to hunt a pop shotting Haskins, predictable although it did win me £50 (Haskins on pts). Watching Callum Smith fight another bum of the week did nothing for me, whats the deal with that guy. There are loads of fights at SM for him and he's just hanging around fighting nobodies. Watching flabby Paul Smith wobble around the ring listening to commentators talking about world title shots is embarassing.

I would disagree re the quality of skys production aswell personally. I find it a bit boring and theres not much in the way of objectivity.

Eddie has his business model firmly in place now though so it won't change. We better get used to it!

Mr Tom wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Mr Tom wrote:The last fury vs klitschko fight was sky box office too. Do we know if the next one is and if it was, would you consider it competitive?

That is a British fighter defending his unified Heavyweight title belts against a dominant former champion in a highly anticipated rematch. So yes, that is definitely a fight I'd consider competitive in the sense that I would not be confident of predicting the outcome.

Regardless of how close the fight is, or how entertaining it is, that is a contest which could (and almost certainly will) justifiably be on PPV.

Although it's not  (depending on your views on box nation)

Well, I consider BoxNation PPV personally purely because I don't currently subscribe to it, and have no intention of subscribing to it for any longer than necessary to watch a big fight. Although, I appreciate that if a person already subscribes then they aren't likely to consider it PPV.

But regarding Fury vs Klitschko, I'd pay £17 for that one, for sure.

EX7EY wrote:Great article.

I was left dissapointed on Saturday night. I paid for it which I don't normally do to be fair so more fool me on this occasion. Won't make the mistake again.

The problem is Sky do a great job of marketing these events. They've roped the 'casuals' (I hate saying casuals) right in and they are happy to just see big names fight. Hearn has basically said 'joshua is PPV', meaning Joshua is PPV regardless of who he fights which is ridiculous when you think about it. PPV fights should be reserved for big fights, nobody should automatically be PPV. For me, with a decent undercard Crolla Vs Linares is more justifiable as PPV event than Brook GGG. At least they are two top guys in their division, Crollas got the under dog story going on, and based on Crollas last three fights it should be a good watch.

Another thing is, it wouldnt be so bad if the undercard was decent. Some may disagree but Saturdays undercard was very poor IMO. i'm tired of seeing - One of Eddies men vs TBC when theres only a week or so to go until fight night. Tired of seeing the likes of Callum/Paul Smith drafted in last minute against nobodies to fill the card out. The Ward v Townend fight was alright but it wasn't a pick em like Smith was trying to sell it as and I enjoyed Haskins Hall to a degree but it wasn't exactly world class boxing. An aged hall trying to hunt a pop shotting Haskins, predictable although it did win me £50 (Haskins on pts). Watching Callum Smith fight another bum of the week did nothing for me, whats the deal with that guy. There are loads of fights at SM for him and he's just hanging around fighting nobodies. Watching flabby Paul Smith wobble around the ring listening to commentators talking about world title shots is embarassing.

I would disagree re the quality of skys production aswell personally. I find it a bit boring and theres not much in the way of objectivity.

Eddie has his business model firmly in place now though so it won't change. We better get used to it!

Don't you enjoy boxing being at the forefront again

Your work colleagues having an interest in it and talking about it

When Warren was on Sky, no one could care

SKY is great value for money...

But I agree with the OP that we are slowly being lulled into believing any decent fight = 17 beans a throw..

It's not the money it's the principle...I think the OP should put this thread into the stored section after the debate.

Bellew v Cleverly was a pivotal moment..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:SKY is great value for money...

But I agree with the OP that we are slowly being lulled into believing any decent fight = 17 beans a throw..

It's not the money it's the principle...I think the OP should put this thread into the stored section after the debate.

Bellew v Cleverly was a pivotal moment..

Still haven't forgiven myself for buying that one, had the first one not been so good I wouldn't have!

But I really enjoyed the PPV this weekend and went home happy

Not said that a lot recently mind...

BoxingFan88 wrote:

EX7EY wrote:Great article.

I was left dissapointed on Saturday night. I paid for it which I don't normally do to be fair so more fool me on this occasion. Won't make the mistake again.

The problem is Sky do a great job of marketing these events. They've roped the 'casuals' (I hate saying casuals) right in and they are happy to just see big names fight. Hearn has basically said 'joshua is PPV', meaning Joshua is PPV regardless of who he fights which is ridiculous when you think about it. PPV fights should be reserved for big fights, nobody should automatically be PPV. For me, with a decent undercard Crolla Vs Linares is more justifiable as PPV event than Brook GGG. At least they are two top guys in their division, Crollas got the under dog story going on, and based on Crollas last three fights it should be a good watch.

Another thing is, it wouldnt be so bad if the undercard was decent. Some may disagree but Saturdays undercard was very poor IMO. i'm tired of seeing - One of Eddies men vs TBC when theres only a week or so to go until fight night. Tired of seeing the likes of Callum/Paul Smith drafted in last minute against nobodies to fill the card out. The Ward v Townend fight was alright but it wasn't a pick em like Smith was trying to sell it as and I enjoyed Haskins Hall to a degree but it wasn't exactly world class boxing. An aged hall trying to hunt a pop shotting Haskins, predictable although it did win me £50 (Haskins on pts). Watching Callum Smith fight another bum of the week did nothing for me, whats the deal with that guy. There are loads of fights at SM for him and he's just hanging around fighting nobodies. Watching flabby Paul Smith wobble around the ring listening to commentators talking about world title shots is embarassing.

I would disagree re the quality of skys production aswell personally. I find it a bit boring and theres not much in the way of objectivity.

Eddie has his business model firmly in place now though so it won't change. We better get used to it!

Don't you enjoy boxing being at the forefront again

Your work colleagues having an interest in it and talking about it

When Warren was on Sky, no one could care

Yes it's good that boxing is becoming popular again. Doesn't mean I agree with the means though. I still think boxing has a long way to go to become truly mainstream. And Hearns 'stacked' cards (stacked if you consider multiple 1/100 favourites to be a stacked card) and mismatch PPV headliners won't keep boxing in the spot light long term IMO.

Surely the recipe for success is genuine match ups and competitive PPV events?

Was discussing this at work this morning and I think Eddie's current USP is getting fans to "be part of history"

Froch/Groves II - largest UK post-war crowd?
AJ - HW history in the making?
GGG/Brook - Can Kell make history?

Hate to suggest that the majority of people going to these shows are know nothing casuals but there does appear to be an element of "I was there" about some of these people. Rowley touched on it a few years ago when people were in audiences overheard asking why fighters from different weights and eras have never fought "Why doesn't Hamed fight Froch, mate?"

Also compounding the issue are things like David Haye's "Haye Day" shows with seem to attract the sort of crowds for whom boxing appears to be a very distant second to just being on a night out with the chance to be on the telly and photobomb a few celebs.

Pretty much head and nail Dave. For lot of people at these events (maybe the majority of) it's just a big night out and something to look forward to for a few months. Nothing wrong with that, each to their own. The good thing about boxing is that you don't need to know all the rules regs and whos whos to actually enjoy it.

But for genuine fans, i.e people that keep up with boxing daily, understand weight classes, alphabet titles and watch pretty much all of it, it is detrimental to the quality of cards / PPV events we receive.

Great posts Rowley & Dave.

It seems very short sighted from Eddie Hearn to be putting on these PPV mismatches for quick money but potentially alienating fans who consistently go home disappointed, isn't this the kind of thing that made everyone sick of all Frank Warren shows? Also I don't think we should regard Kell Brook a PPV star, he has one very good win on his record, thats it. I like Kell as a fighter but when did getting one alphabet belt make you a PPV star?

bellchees wrote:It seems very short sighted from Eddie Hearn to be putting on these PPV mismatches for quick money but potentially alienating fans who consistently go home disappointed, isn't this the kind of thing that made everyone sick of all Frank Warren shows? Also I don't think we should regard Kell Brook a PPV star, he has one very good win on his record, thats it. I like Kell as a fighter but when did getting one alphabet belt make you a PPV star?

I'm sure the multi millionaire Eddie Hearn has many sleepless night wondering whether or not he's doing right by the fans

This has been going on for years at this stage. I think been obvious the direction Matchroom and Sky are going, after an initial honeymoon period of sorts. I think by now most genuine boxing fans can see past the flash marketing stuff. Hearn is becoming much less of a "boxing fans" promoter and more of a pantomime villain promoter.

The Matchroom approach sucks for regular boxing fans. They are not really interested in boxing. Just in creating big extravagent events to make a killing on via overpriced tickets, advertising and ppv. Good competitive boxing cards on Sky are drying up because Matchroom see them as being too small profit margins to be worth the hassle. They pump more into their promotions of the behind the ropes and gloves are off stuff than in putting together good cards.

Boxing have become louder and flashier with Matchroom but from my perspective as a fan its no better. Id rather see a good card put together that nobody in work or on the street are chatting about than Joshua against a stiff on ppv thats the talk of the office. Plus the fans are paying for all the extra hoopla indirectly at a premium. In that regard in think Boxnation is a better model. If Im going to pay a premium on boxing I would rather get a more boxing orientated no frills attached product than a handful of third rate ppv events.

Its wasnt any better prior to Matchroom. The disappointing thing is that Matchroom and Sky have them platform to really deliver a good, reasonably priced boxing poduct but dont deliver it.

catchweight wrote:This has been going on for years at this stage. I think been obvious the direction Matchroom and Sky are going, after an initial honeymoon period of sorts. I think by now most genuine boxing fans can see past the flash marketing stuff. Hearn is becoming much less of a "boxing fans" promoter and more of a pantomime villain promoter.

The Matchroom approach sucks for regular boxing fans. They are not really interested in boxing. Just in creating big extravagent events to make a killing on via overpriced tickets, advertising and ppv. Good competitive boxing cards on Sky are drying up because Matchroom see them as being too small profit margins to be worth the hassle. They pump more into their promotions of the behind the ropes and gloves are off stuff than in putting together good cards.

Boxing have become louder and flashier with Matchroom but from my perspective as a fan its no better. Id rather see a good card put together that nobody in work or on the street are chatting about than Joshua against a stiff on ppv thats the talk of the office. Plus the fans are paying for all the extra hoopla indirectly at a premium. In that regard in think Boxnation is a better model. If Im going to pay a premium on boxing I would rather get a more boxing orientated no frills attached product than a handful of third rate ppv events.

Its wasnt any better prior to Matchroom. The disappointing thing is that Matchroom and Sky have them platform to really deliver a good, reasonably priced boxing poduct but dont deliver it.

Would still rather have panto villain Eddie over the village idiot, Hennessey

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:SKY is great value for money...

But I agree with the OP that we are slowly being lulled into believing any decent fight = 17 beans a throw..

It's not the money it's the principle...I think the OP should put this thread into the stored section after the debate.

Bellew v Cleverly was a pivotal moment..

Sir, nail on head.

Hearn has done a great sales job, has people acting like sheep getting used to paying extra 4 times a year moaning then sleep walking into doing it again. You don't have to get used to it, stop paying they'll soon get the message, yes I can afford it as mentioned it won't break the bank but if it's not good value walk away otherwise 4 times a year will be 6 and/or £17 will be £20 all to be part of A.N. Other's "journey". Got to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

I listened via Radio and watched thereafter via You Tube (other sites I am sure are available), admittedly I could have done without Mr. Haye however imho Mike Costello is the best commentator in the UK by a country mile.

DAVE667 wrote:

bellchees wrote:It seems very short sighted from Eddie Hearn to be putting on these PPV mismatches for quick money but potentially alienating fans who consistently go home disappointed, isn't this the kind of thing that made everyone sick of all Frank Warren shows? Also I don't think we should regard Kell Brook a PPV star, he has one very good win on his record, thats it. I like Kell as a fighter but when did getting one alphabet belt make you a PPV star?

I'm sure the multi millionaire Eddie Hearn has many sleepless night wondering whether or not he's doing right by the fans

i went to brook v GGG at the weekend courtesy of a surprise birthday present from the missus, the main even was fun for a few rounds but i can tell you that I left that arena disappointed, as a boxing fan i seen through it all, the poor undercard and the mismatch of a main event, i know the missus bought the tickets from stubhub as apparently almost 20k tickets can sell out in less than 30 seconds!!!!, i didn't even ask how much she paid as i knew i'd only get annoyed and that would take the goodness out of the gift.

I'm sure Eddie Hearn doesn't give a flyin hoot about what i think, he's said it on numerous occasions in interviews that he measures success as a business man would and that's by profit, if he's earning more profit then he defines that as being more successful, he obviously genuinely doesn't care about the quality of fights or that genuine fans have to go through stubhub to have any chance of going to his 'events' otherwise he'd do something about it, Saturdays card from the undercard to the main event was a joke, could anyone here honestly tell me that they had heard of either smith brother opponents before Saturday and these two are meant to have world title ambitions, only thing i took from attending on Saturday was the fact that i seen GGG in the flesh for what thats worth.

For me its now about the 'event' rather than the actual sport, its not about who Joshua is fighting its about seeing Joshua fight at the o2,  that's the matchroom way and as boxing fans we can like it or lump it.

I'll no longer be looking to buy tickets to big matchroom events - not that there's much chance of landing them anyway.

Looking for good fights on small bills now. Was going to try Taylor vs Ryan in Edinburgh but quite fancy Conlan vs Nelson 2 in Belfast instead (should Nelson sign on for it).

British boxing was great for the hardcore fans in 2011 - when promoters had to put bills together in order to land a Sky date. There were a lot of fights between the best two fighters in each division. British boxing is undoubtedly bigger, though, today. More people are following it and there's more money around as a result.

We discussed at the time of cleverly bellew 2 that if he could sell that as Ppv he'd lowered the bar and proved his business model.

His dad has managed to make darts, a pub activity, popular with the masses, Eddie is doing the same with WWW style panto villains and heroes, choreographed grudge matches etc. It sucks for hardcore fans but the casuals don't care. The formula of headline bout, alphabet world title between cheap guns for hire and a stock of keep busy fights for his stable against assorted nurses and roadsweepers, that gives the appearance of a 'stacked undercard'. 

I knew what I was getting, Haskins hall was the only competitive fight, on paper and that's how it panned out, although the main event briefly threatened to get interesting (in my eyes if not others).

It was my first Ppv for a while, I didn't feel cheated because I got what I expected. Can understand why others would feel differently.

I went on the lash all day - got the last bus home and caught it in the local. Cost me nothing (and I didn't have the commentary to put up with). Perfect (apart from the fact I fell asleep on the bus, which resulted in my head rattling off the window for 10 miles).

Sounds like you got the right bus and made your stop. Must have been a half hearted day on the lash.

Sky just picked up Usyk vs Glowaki!!!!

AWESOME FIGHT!

I think the worrying thing from hardcore fans perspective is I seriously suspect was you to sit down with the heads of Sky or Sky Sports they would almost certainly say they have never been happier with their boxing output. They have a relationship with a promoter who delivers 20 odd shows a year and around four to five PPVs. One assumes, and the rumours seem to support this, that the viewing figures are alright as well.

Not only this but Matchroom seem to have avoided the things that have blighted previous promoters, there are very few unseemly contractual disputes or court cases for fighters not getting paid. Also there was always the perception with a lot of promoters they were criminals masquerading as legitimate businessmen. The worst Hearn can be accused of is being a public schoolboy masquerading as a cockney wide boy. Irritating but hardly something likely to scare off the corporate sponsors. I think any chances of the current model changing any time soon are extremely unlikely.

Rowley wrote:I think the worrying thing from hardcore fans perspective is I seriously suspect was you to sit down with the heads of Sky or Sky Sports they would almost certainly say they have never been happier with their boxing output. They have a relationship with a promoter who delivers 20 odd shows a year and around four to five PPVs. One assumes, and the rumours seem to support this, that the viewing figures are alright as well.

Not only this but Matchroom seem to have avoided the things that have blighted previous promoters, there are very few unseemly contractual disputes or court cases for fighters not getting paid. Also there was always the perception with a lot of promoters they were criminals masquerading as legitimate businessmen. The worst Hearn can be accused of is being a public schoolboy masquerading as a cockney wide boy. Irritating but hardly something likely to scare off the corporate sponsors. I think any chances of the current model changing any time soon are extremely unlikely.

Wasn't Adam Smith part of that team dealing with boxing and telling people how to pronounce Kosststtststtsyaaa Tztstststtstssyyyyeeewww correctly.

As 3G would say, they're tapping into big drama show. They have a formula that works for them. They'll milk it until the figures drop. Big brother is still running. Half the country are addicted to celebrities in a ball room dancing competition. They say you can't polish a turd but I'd suggest with TV you pretty much can.

Don't hold your breath waiting for boxing coverage aimed at boxing fans back on sky, whilst they can peddle grudge matches, super heroes  and panto villains.

milkyboy wrote:As 3G would say, they're tapping into big drama show. They have a formula that works for them. They'll milk it until the figures drop. Big brother is still running. Half the country are addicted to celebrities in a ball room dancing competition. They say you can't polish a turd but I'd suggest with TV you pretty much can.

Don't hold your breath waiting for boxing coverage aimed at boxing fans back on sky, whilst they can peddle grudge matches, super heroes  and panto villains.

Nope....all you can do is sprinkle some glitter on it and light it in an arty fashion.

milkyboy wrote:Sounds like you got the right bus and made your stop. Must have been a half hearted day on the lash.

You're not wrong. Newcastle were away so town was dead. Saying that, found a pub serving pints for £1.50 - so surprised I made it home at all!

BoxingFan88 wrote:Sky just picked up Usyk vs Glowaki!!!!

AWESOME FIGHT!

One of those fights I'm looking forward to in which I've never seen either of the two fighters fight. You just sense it could be a good fight. You read people rate Usyk while others say he's overrated and obviously he hasn't got anything approaching the Huck win. So can he raise his game? Cruiser weight looking up a bit

hazharrison wrote:

milkyboy wrote:Sounds like you got the right bus and made your stop. Must have been a half hearted day on the lash.

You're not wrong. Newcastle were away so town was dead. Saying that, found a pub serving pints for £1.50 - so surprised I made it home at all!

Alcohol transport mishaps were something of a speciality for me in my earlier life. In my London days I've got night buses in the wrong direction and ended up in places I've never heard of, been carried off at the end of tube lines, hours from where I'm meant to be... and once slept through my stop in Clapham on a train, waking up in Southampton. On each occasion, with no way of getting back that night. I certainly wasn't paying £1.50 a pint. Donald Duck knows what would have happened if I had been.

DAVE667 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:As 3G would say, they're tapping into big drama show. They have a formula that works for them. They'll milk it until the figures drop. Big brother is still running. Half the country are addicted to celebrities in a ball room dancing competition. They say you can't polish a turd but I'd suggest with TV you pretty much can.

Don't hold your breath waiting for boxing coverage aimed at boxing fans back on sky, whilst they can peddle grudge matches, super heroes  and panto villains.

Nope....all you can do is sprinkle some glitter on it and light it in an arty fashion.

Celebrity turd lighting. Think you're on to a winner there Dave... Though roger Mellie might have copyrighted it first.

milkyboy wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:As 3G would say, they're tapping into big drama show. They have a formula that works for them. They'll milk it until the figures drop. Big brother is still running. Half the country are addicted to celebrities in a ball room dancing competition. They say you can't polish a turd but I'd suggest with TV you pretty much can.

Don't hold your breath waiting for boxing coverage aimed at boxing fans back on sky, whilst they can peddle grudge matches, super heroes  and panto villains.

Nope....all you can do is sprinkle some glitter on it and light it in an arty fashion.

Celebrity turd lighting. Think you're on to a winner there Dave... Though roger Mellie might have copyrighted it first.

I believe it's called "Loose Women"

The last Box Office fight I watched was the Mayweather Paquiao farce and what a let down that was.I had decided to give it a miss going with the general flow that it was five years too late but a non boxing fan friend of mine offered to go halves on the cost.I vowed then that I would think very long and hard before I parted with my money again and though I expect Klitshko to win the rematch I'll wait for it come on You Tube and save my money.