Amir khan's bizarre kell brook blast: "there's talk about him being gay"

Khan dragging up old dirt again.....

"How much confidence does this guy have? I’ve been told by numerous guys that he’s not a confident guy...There's talk about him being gay,” Khan said in the video interview. “If you are a real man, come out and say it, 'you know, I'm gay and it is what it is.’ Come on out and tell the truth....If he's a confident man, he needs to come out and tell the world who he really is...”

http://www.fighthype.com/news/article36384.html

That is very low for Khan to get so personal especially when he has a lot of skeletons in his closet.

This fight is not going to happen as this is getting too personal.

I have it on pretty good information that he is at least bisexual.

So fucking what? It's none of my business what he does in his private life.

I also have to say that Amir Khan is thick as shit and is somewhat of a cunt.

Even if he is, so what? It's better to be bi than completely thick. If Khan has an IQ above 80 I will be amazed.

It's a weird one for Khan to drag up as in no way is it bait to get Brook to fight him as Brook has been desperate and vocal about fighting him for years now.
Its just a cheap shot probably designed to get Brook angry if they do meet in the hope it throws him off his gameplan.

No one really cares about anything Khan says do they? He's demonstrated time and again that he's as thick as two short planks and never really in control of anything that comes out of his mouth.

He's also morally bankrupt, which is funny because when his Mrs eventually bins him off he'll be financially bankrupt too. He knows it's coming, he needs the dough. Maybe not now but down the line he will. He'll fight Brook.

Sounds like Khan is angling for a date rather than a fight.

Who gives a fuck

Khan makes me laugh , he seriously does. I saw this a few days ago and I'm amazed that:
a. it didn't create an almighty stink and
b. That Brook never replied.
but the thing is , I think that everybody in the Boxing World knows that these irrational outbursts like this and the "AJ Fucked my missus" one, are down to the fact that this cunt is definitely on drugs.
nobody is this thick, he is definitely on some serious shit.
for the record, I don't really want the fight anymore. Why should we feed Khan and Brook's pension fund with this meaningless bullshit of a fight.

Let’s get this right..Khan doesn’t need Brook.

Brook is more famous for his two losses than the fights he won.

Solid fighter, but his constant calling out of Khan is cringeworthy.

Khans legacy is already cemented and he can do what he wants..no matter what we all think of him..he creates excitement and people always seem to pay to watch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Let’s get this right..Khan doesn’t need Brook.

Brook is more famous for his two losses than the fights he won.

Solid fighter, but his constant calling out of Khan is cringeworthy.

Khans legacy is already cemented and he can do what he wants..no matter what we all think of him..he creates excitement and people always seem to pay to watch.

---

Nice cheerleading:p They both need each other as it’s the most bankable fight that is winnable for either in the near future. It’s a fight that should have happened years ago, but still makes the most sense for both as far as I can see. I would’ve said khan had a very slim chance, but brook didn’t look good to me last time out, who knows, khan hasn’t looke great either for years. Khan is just as known for his losses though, and he never beat anybody Brook wouldn’t have(granted he fought lighter for most of his career. The talk is of him fighting Crawford instead of Brook. Either that’s a ploy to negotiate, or just a terrible decision, he’d get clowned in that fight.

I do think Brook, or his people, were foolish to leave it so long to start chasing big fights. If he is on the decline now, he really shortened what could have been a much better career imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Let’s get this right..Khan doesn’t need Brook.

Brook is more famous for his two losses than the fights he won.

Solid fighter, but his constant calling out of Khan is cringeworthy.

Khans legacy is already cemented and he can do what he wants..no matter what we all think of him..he creates excitement and people always seem to pay to watch.

---

When was the last time Khan won a meaningful fight?

Yes, Brook's career has been strange considering his talent.

He was avoided for years on the way up, because he was big, good and very very difficult to look good against.

He always struggled with making weight, and he hated dieting so did binge a bit between fights. He never seemed to get the big breaks, but probably didn't help by taking far too much time off between fights (although some if that was due to his wild lifestyle)

To this day, I really do not know what they were thinking by throwing him in against Golovkin

Jumping up TWO weight divisions to fight a genuine middleweight destroyer and the most feared man in boxing at the time. Pure madness.

Maybe they calculated that Brook had nothing to lose, and he could come again after a loss ..... but nobody has ever been the same after being defeated by GGG. And Brooke has not been the same either.

Kell Brook should still be so much more now than what he is considered...Khan was given everything on a silver platter and just kept getting chinned. Brook should be in the thick of things at 147-154 right now instead of taking this kind of All British fight he's only 32 he should be king of a division right now.


That GGG fight was just atrocious management I have no idea what they were thinking there. Now Brook vs Canelo at 154 would have been better but still very dangerous.

Khan has been running a long con for quite some time. He's the definition of being on borrowed time and grasping at straws for relevance and now he's grasping at horse shat stereotypes. Brook legitimately has the substance and more well rounded game of the two and while the Golovkin jump was not terribly smart and proved long term costly.. he didn't skirt around top competition on the come back he faced the 147 top dog Spence and he nearly dominates his showcases. Khan is a random grab bag on consistent uncertainty who hasn't looked spectacular in about 8 yrs and needs to worry more about getting sucked into wars with a Samuel Vargas and repeatedly punched in the face.

You boys have no idea why Brook fought Golovkin at a packed 02 in a 500,000 selling PPV event? Try thinking of a few million reasons he took the fight. And for context - his purse for travelling to the States to beat Porter for the IBF title was $200,000. These guys are not on astronomical dough, most fighters will take on anyone for a huge payrise.

Did he really slide so much after the fight?

Would the best version of Brook ever beat Spence? He fought great in that until the relentless Spence cracked him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Let’s get this right..Khan doesn’t need Brook.

Brook is more famous for his two losses than the fights he won.

Solid fighter, but his constant calling out of Khan is cringeworthy.

Khans legacy is already cemented and he can do what he wants..no matter what we all think of him..he creates excitement and people always seem to pay to watch.

---

This is spot on

What is khans legacy though? He's defined by his losses too... It's not as if he's bound for the HOF, or that beating brook wouldn't be the highlight of his career. Could be wrong, but he probably sells a lot of tickets for the fact that he's Muslim/from Pakistan? I give him credit for taking challenges, but if that's what he intends to do from here on, why not brook? Its as good a time as any, brook looks like he could be slipping and making the weight could be hard on him. Who makes more sense from a risk reward standpoint?

Khan was famous before he turned pro, he was Britain's only representative at the Olympics where he got a silver medal. And yes a 17-year-old British/Asian kid was an obvious ticket to stardom. His amateur rematch with Kinedelan (the gold medalist) was primetime live saturday night in front of millions on terrestrial tv. He was PPV when still British title level.

Khan doesn't have a great legacy but certainly a solid world-level one. He has plenty of proven world-class wins (Maidana, Zab, Kotelnik, Paulie, Peterson, Collazo and a bunch of exciting fights). He might get in the HOF, as he's a crossover muslim star - headlining several Vegas shows - who has done shitloads for charity in Pakistan/middle east and the UK/US.

But ultimately his career went from hero to zero.

Without doubt he'll be remembered for being ironed out, getting up to all kinds of embarrassing shit outside the ring and ducking Brook.

His fights were NOT PPV level though. They were journeyman career set ups fleecing fans due to hype. This is why many did not like him. It was like how a boyband is presented. It is absurd how British fans are fleeced. I even think the price of Whyte/Chisora is a con job. How much must it cost to be a fight fan? If the fans have to pay PPV they should vote who fights who.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

What is khans legacy though? He's defined by his losses too... It's not as if he's bound for the HOF, or that beating brook wouldn't be the highlight of his career. Could be wrong, but he probably sells a lot of tickets for the fact that he's Muslim/from Pakistan? I give him credit for taking challenges, but if that's what he intends to do from here on, why not brook? Its as good a time as any, brook looks like he could be slipping and making the weight could be hard on him. Who makes more sense from a risk reward standpoint?

---

I would still rather watch Khan vs Crawford.

Khan is exciting and has the worldwide appeal.

Did Brook even beat Porter?

After Porter, why was he not calling out all the other top guys at 147?!..it was the perfect time.

Brook is known for the two courageous losses that nearly lost him an eye.

Khan can do anything he wants..Brook needs this fight as he isn’t very confident about attacking the top guys at 154.

I do want to see the fight.. but I totally understand the business side of things and the fact that Khan loves being arrogant in this situation as he knows he could easily loose.

After Brooks dubious win over Porter he went on a run of fighting piss poor fighters... Jo Jo Dan is one pathetic example.
He was happy to tread water and keep his belt by taking easy fights.
Just compare Khan and Brooks best wins, Khan wipes the floor with him for name scalps.
Its not even close.

Khan has more name wins for sure, do think Brooks win over porter(yes he clearly won) is as good as any between them though. I definitely agree brook had a weird career path, as has been said. You could’ve argued he wasn’t confident of fighting top opposition, but then he moves up for ggg in his prime and takes on Spence... it didn’t make a lot of sense. His performance against Spence was also extremely good though, better than khan has ever looked arguably.

Why are you lot talking about boxing?

This thread should only be used for discussing if Brook is a massive bumder or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

His fights were NOT PPV level though. They were journeyman career set ups fleecing fans due to hype. This is why many did not like him. It was like how a boyband is presented. It is absurd how British fans are fleeced. I even think the price of Whyte/Chisora is a con job. How much must it cost to be a fight fan? If the fans have to pay PPV they should vote who fights who.

---

There's no such thing as "PPV level" and nobody whose ever enjoyed a night of boxing has been fleeced. Journeymen produce classics and all-time greats snoozers. It's always been the way, it's unpredictable, that's the beauty. And you have a choice.

Lets be honest, virtually everyone who moans about PPV and boxing on TV isn't really a fan, they just like to watch the odd fight now and then. Anyone not interested in Chisora-Whyte because it's PPV wouldn't have been interested regardless.

Just because it has always been the way does not make it right.

There should be standard for PPV level which should be world class fighters fighting one another or unification of major belts. Greedy promoters and their personal rivalries have resulted in poor PPV’s fights which have gradually got worse and now they are putting them on at the same time. There is no real choice for boxing fans who want to watch the fight live on the screen - pay or stream it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Just because it has always been the way does not make it right.

There should be standard for PPV level which should be world class fighters fighting one another or unification of major belts. Greedy promoters and their personal rivalries have resulted in poor PPV’s fights which have gradually got worse and now they are putting them on at the same time. There is no real choice for boxing fans who want to watch the fight live on the screen - pay or stream it.

---

No real choice for boxing fans? Is that a joke? You watch illegal streams every single week regardless of whether or not it's the most famous fighters in the world - Canelo, AJ, Fury, Wilder, GGG - or these "greedy shows" you consider a con.

You moaners don't buy anything, never have and never will, don't even pretend two PPV's at the same time effect you, or the "standard" matters. You'll be here Saturday night posting to yourself and Batman regardless :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Just because it has always been the way does not make it right.

There should be standard for PPV level which should be world class fighters fighting one another or unification of major belts. Greedy promoters and their personal rivalries have resulted in poor PPV’s fights which have gradually got worse and now they are putting them on at the same time. There is no real choice for boxing fans who want to watch the fight live on the screen - pay or stream it.

---

No real choice for boxing fans? Is that a joke? You watch illegal streams every single week regardless of whether or not it's the most famous fighters in the world - Canelo, AJ, Fury, Wilder, GGG - or these "greedy shows" you consider a con.

You moaners don't buy anything, never have and never will, don't even pretend two PPV's at the same time effect you, or the "standard" matters. You'll be here Saturday night posting to yourself and Batman regardless :D

---

I have paid in the past for ppv shows but the standard is progressively getting worse. As a boxing fan the only way to watch them all now is through streams as it would cost a fortune to watch them all.

Of course watching 2 fights at the same time is going to be a big inconvenience as I will be jumping from the computer to the TV to watch both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Just because it has always been the way does not make it right.

There should be standard for PPV level which should be world class fighters fighting one another or unification of major belts. Greedy promoters and their personal rivalries have resulted in poor PPV’s fights which have gradually got worse and now they are putting them on at the same time. There is no real choice for boxing fans who want to watch the fight live on the screen - pay or stream it.

---

No real choice for boxing fans? Is that a joke? You watch illegal streams every single week regardless of whether or not it's the most famous fighters in the world - Canelo, AJ, Fury, Wilder, GGG - or these "greedy shows" you consider a con.

You moaners don't buy anything, never have and never will, don't even pretend two PPV's at the same time effect you, or the "standard" matters. You'll be here Saturday night posting to yourself and Batman regardless :D

---

Not too sure on that one Fenners, my flat flooded the other day so I'm having to stay at me mom n dads at the minute, it'll be tough and go as to whether I'm back home to watch either fight

with me and PPV's , it's a principle thing. I'm not destitute , I could pay for some. I don't like this live streaming and Kodi bollocks , because it always either freezes or is a shit picture. I would rather wait and watch it properly.
i have paid for plenty of PPV's in the past, but I WILL NOT pay for PPV's that I don't think deserve it. I know I'm not going to change the World, but why should I line the pockets to excess of the likes of Bellew, Khan , Eubank Jr. , Chisora , Whyte etc. just because they're panto villains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

with me and PPV's , it's a principle thing. I'm not destitute , I could pay for some. I don't like this live streaming and Kodi bollocks , because it always either freezes or is a shit picture. I would rather wait and watch it properly.
i have paid for plenty of PPV's in the past, but I WILL NOT pay for PPV's that I don't think deserve it. I know I'm not going to change the World, but why should I line the pockets to excess of the likes of Bellew, Khan , Eubank Jr. , Chisora , Whyte etc. just because they're panto villains.

---

IPTV works a treat for me mate, never had it freeze up on me or if it has it is very rare for it to do so.

I spent hundreds on PPV but being in a low paid job and living alone it was simply too expensive for me to keep it up.

I pay £8 a month and get everything now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Batman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Just because it has always been the way does not make it right.

There should be standard for PPV level which should be world class fighters fighting one another or unification of major belts. Greedy promoters and their personal rivalries have resulted in poor PPV’s fights which have gradually got worse and now they are putting them on at the same time. There is no real choice for boxing fans who want to watch the fight live on the screen - pay or stream it.

---

No real choice for boxing fans? Is that a joke? You watch illegal streams every single week regardless of whether or not it's the most famous fighters in the world - Canelo, AJ, Fury, Wilder, GGG - or these "greedy shows" you consider a con.

You moaners don't buy anything, never have and never will, don't even pretend two PPV's at the same time effect you, or the "standard" matters. You'll be here Saturday night posting to yourself and Batman regardless :D

---

Not too sure on that one Fenners, my flat flooded the other day so I'm having to stay at me mom n dads at the minute, it'll be tough and go as to whether I'm back home to watch either fight

---

Maybe you can go round to Kell brooks house :S

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by palmerq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Batman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Just because it has always been the way does not make it right.

There should be standard for PPV level which should be world class fighters fighting one another or unification of major belts. Greedy promoters and their personal rivalries have resulted in poor PPV’s fights which have gradually got worse and now they are putting them on at the same time. There is no real choice for boxing fans who want to watch the fight live on the screen - pay or stream it.

---

No real choice for boxing fans? Is that a joke? You watch illegal streams every single week regardless of whether or not it's the most famous fighters in the world - Canelo, AJ, Fury, Wilder, GGG - or these "greedy shows" you consider a con.

You moaners don't buy anything, never have and never will, don't even pretend two PPV's at the same time effect you, or the "standard" matters. You'll be here Saturday night posting to yourself and Batman regardless :D

---

Not too sure on that one Fenners, my flat flooded the other day so I'm having to stay at me mom n dads at the minute, it'll be tough and go as to whether I'm back home to watch either fight

---

Maybe you can go round to Kell brooks house :S

---

No need, I should be back home tomorrow, I was gunna call our Nige

You don't half talk some rubbish sometimes, Fenster. I am sure many bought into the early Khan hype and wondered why they had paid extra to see him fight a journeyman after a ridiculously easy contest.

PPV is a privilege and thus should be no less than 2 elite fighters going at it. For a worker on minimum wage in the UK watching boxing legally is likely beyond reach for many. Whyte Chisora is not PPV worthy. It is a fun fight. But it is not a marquee event. Those early Khan fights were 50 times worse.

Maybe you have the money but a lot of people who buy into hype like PPV, Chrismas, gambling, etc cannot really afford it. It is a form of fleecing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smashup

After Brooks dubious win over Porter he went on a run of fighting piss poor fighters... Jo Jo Dan is one pathetic example.
He was happy to tread water and keep his belt by taking easy fights.
Just compare Khan and Brooks best wins, Khan wipes the floor with him for name scalps.
Its not even close.

---

Was thinking about that prior and didn't know much of Brook until coming over to fight Porter. But keeping to 147 comparison and relevant scalps faced, for both Porter and Spence win-loss they remain top dogs in the yard right now. And he's just positioned himself to face other top names in another division most recently. Boxing can be a 'what have you done for me lately' gig. Khan can hang his hat on Collazo and Alexander who already lost to the same Porter but he wasted just as much time squealing for a Mayweather fantasy as he did doing relevant work.