HBO commentators too quick to bury guys?
Paulie wins the first round, and they start saying "well Paulie is a very live underdog", ect ect. Hatton takes over and they start burying Paulie, saying he is where he is because of great management. I thought that was a terrible cheap shot, because Paulie is a really slick, tough kid who payed his dues and beat some tough opposition, and was finally getting a big money fight. Ricky Hatton schools him and they bury Paulie to the public and paint him out to be a fraud.
I really wish they wouldn't do that to guys. How is boxing supposed to produce new stars when the main voices of boxing are quick to bury guys whenever they have a shit showing? They did the exact same thing to Wlad when he lost to Sanders.
Praise Hatton because he fought a brilliant fight, but why bury Paulie like that?
Re: HBO commentators too quick to bury guys?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Paulie wins the first round, and they start saying "well Paulie is a very live underdog", ect ect. Hatton takes over and they start burying Paulie, saying he is where he is because of great management. I thought that was a terrible cheap shot, because Paulie is a really slick, tough kid who payed his dues and beat some tough opposition, and was finally getting a big money fight. Ricky Hatton schools him and they bury Paulie to the public and paint him out to be a fraud.
I really wish they wouldn't do that to guys. How is boxing supposed to produce new stars when the main voices of boxing are quick to bury guys whenever they have a shit showing? They did the exact same thing to Wlad when he lost to Sanders.
Praise Hatton because he fought a brilliant fight, but why bury Paulie like that?
They did praise Hatton, but Paulie fell apart in there, he didn't show anything amazing or slick (which he has done before). This isn't the first time Paulie has looked sub-par either his second fight with N'dou was questionable, and at a bare minimum his fight with Ngoudjo should have been a draw. Paulie hasn't looked great since he was on ESPN2. Surviving beatings isn't the mark of a great boxer for sure. None of this is meant to slight how Hatton looked he was phenomenal in there. HBO writing off Malignaggi has been a long time in the coming.
Re: HBO commentators too quick to bury guys?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Paulie wins the first round, and they start saying "well Paulie is a very live underdog", ect ect. Hatton takes over and they start burying Paulie, saying he is where he is because of great management. I thought that was a terrible cheap shot, because Paulie is a really slick, tough kid who payed his dues and beat some tough opposition, and was finally getting a big money fight. Ricky Hatton schools him and they bury Paulie to the public and paint him out to be a fraud.
I really wish they wouldn't do that to guys. How is boxing supposed to produce new stars when the main voices of boxing are quick to bury guys whenever they have a shit showing? They did the exact same thing to Wlad when he lost to Sanders.
Praise Hatton because he fought a brilliant fight, but why bury Paulie like that?
Paulie has not beat anyone! Who has Paulie beat? :-\
I watched the Sentanta version and the British commentators were calling for the fight to be stopped from round 8 and every round after. I did not want the fight to be stopped but then again a punchers chance only applys to a puncher and Paulie is no puncher so he really had no chance in hell to do anything so I can understand why it was stopped if you hit like a girl and you are not winning any rounds, might as well call it a night ;D Paulie is just a human punching bag now that can barely hit back. I still cant believe the feather fisted cunt lumped up and bruised Hatton's face ;D Now that is too funny.
Re: HBO commentators too quick to bury guys?
IMHO, the problem here stems from the fact that commentators are paid to comment. So they have to keep talking, regardless of whether or not they have anything worthwhile to say. What comes out is sometimes pretty useless.
