To be clear and put some needed context into all of this... I actually like Joshua.
In comparing his fight against Wlad with Fury's fight against Wlad... I've gone on and on about how the AJ-Wlad fight was a real fight... whereas the Fury-Wlad fight was the borefest of the century.
I defend Joshua's choice of opponents vs Fury's because Fury has had the maddening record of fighting bums. It seemed totally out of character for him when he chose to take the Wilder challenge. Must've seen something some of us didn't.
The only time I've criticized Joshua severely was after his embarrassing soliloquy following his 2nd loss to Usyk.
BUT... facts are facts.
Maybe many here have selective memory... but I remember being totally frustrated at the soap opera that was the Joshua-Wilder negotiations for a fight that never happened.
Whether people want to say it was Wilder who ducked Joshua or vice versa that's neither here nor there. It's all fanaticism dressed as objectivity anyway.
Fact is the fight was never going to happen.
Then Fury swooped in and spared us further punishment. He took the Wilder fight and thus began the trilogy. At least SOMEBODY was fighting.
So let's all dispense with our knee-jerk protective reactions about Joshua. The guy doesn't walk on water, and has as many chinks in his armor as Wilder does.
In fact... that's another reason why they should STILL face each other. They've both been blown off their pedestals of invincibility... and their styles would promise a totally entertaining clash.


Thanks:
Likes:
Dislikes: 




What's the common denominator here?
Reply With Quote

Bookmarks