Losers

Why do Brits like losers? You worship losers and give them huge praise. Look at Bruno. More popular after losing to Witherspoon, Smith and even more popular after getting his rear handed to him by Tyson.

Eubank is another. Not very popular even after extremely brilliant displays against Benn and Watson but became more popular after losing. The adjective "brave loser" must have been coined for the Brits.

Contrast that with Naz who was like Marmite and Eubank during his pomp. Any boxer displaying a winning mentality is automatically called arrogant, not humble and many will be baying for some Johnny Foreigner to KTFO of him.

Calzaghe is not Mr Popular even though he is britains only undefeated boxer. Too many people criticise his record, pick holes at him, criticise his social life yet few praise him for being a winner.

Instead you worship Bruno and his ilk. Sad but true.

Richard Dunne got a hero's welcome after getting mullered by Ali. I mean a hero's welcome. This guy spent as much time on his behind than on his feet. Yet he was called a brave loser.

What is it about you brits that makes you worship and isolise losers?

Whoever said "its the taking part that matters" came second in my opinnion.

Spot on, Az. We do seem to like losers that tried and are humble about it, and I hate it! I'd much rather see someone like Hamed give it all the mouth before going to America and handing someone their backside.

However, with instances like that of Haye where he gave it the mouth but then lost in a tame fashion, there will always be plenty waiting to grill him. I personally enjoyed Haye's trash talking, it is what gets boxing popular, like it or not, and no amount of humble losers is ever going to do that.

Actually I could never stand Frank Bruno, liked Calzaghe, appreciated Naz for his skills but hated him because he's a pillock not because he's a winner.

This is an example of quite a shallow article . I can only possible score it a C- , maybe a C at best.

You're not British yourself, Az?

azania wrote:

Calzaghe is not Mr Popular even though he is britains only undefeated boxer.

Terry Marsh, and Truss may well sue you for plagarism when he reads this.

Super D Boon wrote:
This is an example of quite a shallow article . I can only possible score it a C- , maybe a C at best.

Agreed. At least when TRUSS does this exact same article, he does it with a mischievous touch of humour.

He's Seth Efrican...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkTnc3FfcEw

;-)

That explains a lot...

haha - they have cool accents

There is an interesting point here.

Tommy Farr is still remembered with fondness and charm back home. Jimmy Wilde, Freddie Welsh and Jim Driscoll are practically forgotten.

As for Fitzsimmons - it was only recently they erected a plaque to the guy! What he did was impressive enough to merit a place on the £5 note!

We have had this debate to death before by Truss - but I'm sure the big fella wouldn't mind it being done again

Kevin Kelley was at the peak of his powers...

Guess its just how people are here - really strange - when we see people who work desperately hard to get to the top - we like em - if they open their gob we don't. Except Ali who was probably the most arrogant. Then half our celebrities are people from reality tv shows who were put there because they were so obnoxious and stupid its beyond belief then idolize them and copy their fashion.

I hope they pick you for big brother Az. Might even watch the show just to watch what you do to half the people on here in action.

Sorry but this idea we only like losers is just a lazy stereotype, yes there are some people we take to who fall short at top level such as Bruno but there are countless others such as Audley, Danny Williams, Skelton who do not enjoy anywhere near the support, is a question of timing and personality. There are far more losers who most folk have never heard of than those we have chose to take to our hearts for whatever reason.

alma wrote:Personally I would have happily cheered on Naz if he'd actually fought someone in their prime rather than arrogantly acting like the second coming before dispatching some has-been.

The only P4P fighter in their prime he fought was Barrera and he lost and then disappeared only to resurface crippling some motorist and losing his MBE. And get fat.

Yes exactly he's a 24 carat, diamond encrusted pillock! I think in Britain we don't so much like losers but want our winners to be like one of us. I mean Kelly Holmes for example is a winner but also shows a certain down to earth side in her nature which the Brits love. Man, Britain love her to death, too much love even, she's on all the celebrity shows and she does my head in to be honest but you can hardly call her a loser.

As for boxing what about Ricky Hatton? A p4p two weight world champ, possibly the most popular boxer in Britain in modern times, hardly a loser either.

hatton was popular and very succesful also benn. calzaghe has a personailty of a plank of wood and did stay at home, people dont dislike him more frustrated at a his lack of ambition.

its more personaility, brits dont like arrogance which many boxers have, its simply that sometimes the best boxers have alot of arrogance. naz, eubank put many peoples backs up but still gained following after a while.

rowley wrote:Sorry but this idea we only like losers is just a lazy stereotype, yes there are some people we take to who fall short at top level such as Bruno but there are countless others such as Audley, Danny Williams, Skelton who do not enjoy anywhere near the support, is a question of timing and personality. There are far more losers who most folk have never heard of than those we have chose to take to our hearts for whatever reason.

Although is that just because there are more losers Jeff? Ergo there's always going to be more losers forgotten.

Proportionally, Fitzsimmons, Buchanan, Driscoll, Wilde, Welsh should get much more recognition than they currently do.

As for Bruno, Farr and Cooper are popular but they were also heavweights. The fatties have always been more popular.

Oxy the obvious question is how many fighters from the era of Fitz, Driscoll and Wilde are exactly household names in this country. Bruno is often held up as the biggest example of our love of losers but you have to consider the circumstances, nigh on 100 years since we had last had a heavyweight champion and then one who was barely English and few fighters in the intervening period who looked likely to buck the trend, is hardly surprising that when we get a 6ft 4 wrecking machine knocking guys sideways, which is exactly what Frank was doing in his early days, we get a bit excited.

Lazy, lazy article.

You are a wum, without the ability to provide humour. Takes a special kind of person to achieve this.

F.

alma wrote:Personally I would have happily cheered on Naz if he'd actually fought someone in their prime rather than arrogantly acting like the second coming before dispatching some has-been.

The only P4P fighter in their prime he fought was Barrera and he lost and then disappeared only to resurface crippling some motorist and losing his MBE. And get fat.

That is very very harsh on Hamed and very far from the truth, he beat some very very good fighters during his reign, I loved his arrogance as he could back it up but inevitably he was always going to be lambasted as soon as he lost.

azania wrote:Why do Brits like losers? You worship losers and give them huge praise. Look at Bruno. More popular after losing to Witherspoon, Smith and even more popular after getting his rear handed to him by Tyson.

Eubank is another. Not very popular even after extremely brilliant displays against Benn and Watson but became more popular after losing. The adjective "brave loser" must have been coined for the Brits.

Contrast that with Naz who was like Marmite and Eubank during his pomp. Any boxer displaying a winning mentality is automatically called arrogant, not humble and many will be baying for some Johnny Foreigner to KTFO of him.

Calzaghe is not Mr Popular even though he is britains only undefeated boxer. Too many people criticise his record, pick holes at him, criticise his social life yet few praise him for being a winner.

Instead you worship Bruno and his ilk. Sad but true.

Richard Dunne got a hero's welcome after getting mullered by Ali. I mean a hero's welcome. This guy spent as much time on his behind than on his feet. Yet he was called a brave loser.

What is it about you brits that makes you worship and isolise losers?

Whoever said "its the taking part that matters" came second in my opinnion.

But no-one likes you Azania so your article now appears to be nothing more than pointlessly inflammatory nonsense. However, the irony of it all is that by writing this, you've suddenly leapt up the "loser" rankings to occupy top spot...wonder if people will begin to revere and worship you now...5...4...3...2...1

NOPE!

Fists of Fury wrote:Spot on, Az. We do seem to like losers that tried and are humble about it, and I hate it! I'd much rather see someone like Hamed give it all the mouth before going to America and handing someone their backside.

However, with instances like that of Haye where he gave it the mouth but then lost in a tame fashion, there will always be plenty waiting to grill him. I personally enjoyed Haye's trash talking, it is what gets boxing popular, like it or not, and no amount of humble losers is ever going to do that.

Same here. I like boxers to have a bit of lip. Be larger than life and for goodness sake, get the sport back on the back pages and not a footnote. Who will remember Ricky Burns. Lovely bloke, but for heavens sake, he is dire.

Loved Naz. Everything from his ring entrance to his arrogance after he stopped the opponent. Plus his interview at ringside with Kelly was hilarious..

Also like Haye's trash talking. Pity he didn't back it up although credit should go to Wlad for not allowing him to do much.

Also Wlad and Vit. Are there any more boring fighters on the planet? I'm talking about out of the ring. For heaven's sake, these guys are supposed to want to take their opponents off and not party with them. Wake up and do something funny or attention grabbing.

But ultimately we are left with loveable Frank and his brave but losing attempts.

oxring wrote:He's Seth Efrican...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkTnc3FfcEw

;-)

Classic stuff. Never seen that before.

Union Cane wrote:You're not British yourself, Az?

Jammer maat, ek is nie die Britse en verwys asseblief nie vir my as Britse

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:He's Seth Efrican...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkTnc3FfcEw

;-)

Classic stuff. Never seen that before.

Glad you enjoyed it. I particularly love the extra big-game animal being added at the end of every verse.

Maybe I'm going soft - but of all the articles you've posted on here - I reckon this is your best. Commendations sir.

From my perspective - surely if a boxer is winning that's all that matters?

Tyson Fury receives an incredible amount of shtick on here. Thus far, he hasn't lost a fight. He talks a lot of trash and he comes out and tries hard. So why the hate? Is it his gypsy background? If so - that's racism. Is it that he talks himself to be better than he is? So why not hate on Haye during his HW reign. Or Hatton in the run up to the Floyd fight/during his WBU reign.

Its all a bit strange really.

DAVE667 wrote:

azania wrote:Why do Brits like losers? You worship losers and give them huge praise. Look at Bruno. More popular after losing to Witherspoon, Smith and even more popular after getting his rear handed to him by Tyson.

Eubank is another. Not very popular even after extremely brilliant displays against Benn and Watson but became more popular after losing. The adjective "brave loser" must have been coined for the Brits.

Contrast that with Naz who was like Marmite and Eubank during his pomp. Any boxer displaying a winning mentality is automatically called arrogant, not humble and many will be baying for some Johnny Foreigner to KTFO of him.

Calzaghe is not Mr Popular even though he is britains only undefeated boxer. Too many people criticise his record, pick holes at him, criticise his social life yet few praise him for being a winner.

Instead you worship Bruno and his ilk. Sad but true.

Richard Dunne got a hero's welcome after getting mullered by Ali. I mean a hero's welcome. This guy spent as much time on his behind than on his feet. Yet he was called a brave loser.

What is it about you brits that makes you worship and isolise losers?

Whoever said "its the taking part that matters" came second in my opinnion.

But no-one likes you Azania so your article now appears to be nothing more than pointlessly inflammatory nonsense. However, the irony of it all is that by writing this, you've suddenly leapt up the "loser" rankings to occupy top spot...wonder if people will begin to revere and worship you now...5...4...3...2...1

NOPE!

Awwwww, so you want to be liked? Is that why you always follow the crown like a sheep? Where are your opinions or are you waiting for someone to tell you what they are?

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:He's Seth Efrican...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkTnc3FfcEw

;-)

Classic stuff. Never seen that before.

Glad you enjoyed it. I particularly love the extra big-game animal being added at the end of every verse.

Maybe I'm going soft - but of all the articles you've posted on here - I reckon this is your best. Commendations sir.

From my perspective - surely if a boxer is winning that's all that matters?

Tyson Fury receives an incredible amount of shtick on here. Thus far, he hasn't lost a fight. He talks a lot of trash and he comes out and tries hard. So why the hate? Is it his gypsy background? If so - that's racism. Is it that he talks himself to be better than he is? So why not hate on Haye during his HW reign. Or Hatton in the run up to the Floyd fight/during his WBU reign.

Its all a bit strange really.

Its not just about winning. Its the whole package. Naz had it. Benn and Eubank had it. They had that something extra. Fury may be undefeated, cocky and arrogant and talks a lot. But lets get real. The moment he steps out of his class he will get it handed to him. But having said that, how popular is he?

I like Chisora. Dont know how popular he is or how liked he is. He is arrogant, talks smack when he needs to and probably has a screw loose somewhere. I mean the man is borderline buts.

Kell Brook has that something also, but without the lip. Pity he is not on terrestial TV though.

Haye had it and many people wanted him to lose or get KO'd. More were happy that he lost. If he was humble, gracious and classy, he would be loved and his display would be called brave.

Its more how unpopular Fury is az. What's he done to deserve the hate?

oxring wrote:Its more how unpopular Fury is az. What's he done to deserve the hate?

Maybe him talking smack with little world class talent has something to do with it.

Him being completely out of shape seems to be the main reason Oxy.

[quote="azania"]

oxring wrote:Its more how unpopular Fury is az. What's he done to deserve the hate?

Maybe him talking smack with little world class talent has something to do with it.[/quote

And Chisora isn't guilty of this? Chisora doesn't come in for the same degree of abuse and Fury whipped him. Groves has done the same - yet is still not a pariah.

And Ghosty - as for shape - Hatton is loved. His shape was frequently dreadful. Danny Williams was also widely liked and respected - yet frequently monstrously fat.

I ask again - in light of these examples - aren't we exhibiting double standards when it comes to Fury?

[quote="oxring"]

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:Its more how unpopular Fury is az. What's he done to deserve the hate?

Maybe him talking smack with little world class talent has something to do with it.[/quote

And Chisora isn't guilty of this? Chisora doesn't come in for the same degree of abuse and Fury whipped him. Groves has done the same - yet is still not a pariah.

And Ghosty - as for shape - Hatton is loved. His shape was frequently dreadful. Danny Williams was also widely liked and respected - yet frequently monstrously fat.

I ask again - in light of these examples - aren't we exhibiting double standards when it comes to Fury?

Chisora's smack is amusing. I mean kissing your opponent in the weigh in. The guy is a road crash. Fury tries hard to be amusing but he can't cut it.

Williams didn't have a big mouth while Hatton was always in superb shape when it came to fight night.

So because Fury is ambitious, talks a hard game, without being as funny as Ali and isn't cut to shreds - that's reason for the hate?

Williams promised a lot before the Vitali fight - and failed spectacularly to deliver. Hatton put in several lethargic performances at 140 - see Lascano - where he'd cut too much, too soon.

Fury hasn't delivered a dull fight yet. He's also British and Commonwealth champion - and he won the belt in the ring. He has done nothing to deserve the level of abuse he receives - unless he's been killing kittens in his spare time and no-one told me about it.

As for Fury's mouth - frankly, I find him pretty entertaining. The interview (can't remember which newspaper) where he was arguing with his wife about what to name their son was frankly genius.

I suppose it has something to do with his being a gypsy - at least a little bit. I throw them off my sites or prevent em coming in and occasionally it gets rough but i've never felt the way some people do about gypsy. Always find em entertaining.

oxring wrote:So because Fury is ambitious, talks a hard game, without being as funny as Ali and isn't cut to shreds - that's reason for the hate?

Williams promised a lot before the Vitali fight - and failed spectacularly to deliver. Hatton put in several lethargic performances at 140 - see Lascano - where he'd cut too much, too soon.

Fury hasn't delivered a dull fight yet. He's also British and Commonwealth champion - and he won the belt in the ring. He has done nothing to deserve the level of abuse he receives - unless he's been killing kittens in his spare time and no-one told me about it.

As for Fury's mouth - frankly, I find him pretty entertaining. The interview (can't remember which newspaper) where he was arguing with his wife about what to name their son was frankly genius.

You dont have to be as funny as Ali. Its just his smack talk isn't amusing.

If he killed kittens at least that would be a step up. I remember reading an interview of someone who interviewed Duran. He asked Roberto what he did as a child. Duran picked up a cat and threw it against the wall killing it. Not that I want to see animal cruelty, but lets see something different.

ShahenshahG wrote:I suppose it has something to do with his being a gypsy - at least a little bit. I throw them off my sites or prevent em coming in and occasionally it gets rough but i've never felt the way some people do about gypsy. Always find em entertaining.

I dont think that has much to do with it. Saying he is the dogs gonads and then punching yourself in the face has more to do with it.

hahahaha - i love that video

Its pretty simplistic to divide things into "winners" and "losers". Its about personalities and preferences. Arrogance in general seems to be less popular in Britain than the America perhaps but gutsy losing efforts are appreciated more. Although I think this traditional outlook is changing over the last couple of decads.

Lets not pretend the likes of Naz or Haye didnt have support either. They were very popular in Britain at their peaks. Just because they werent universally popular doesnt mean they didnt have support. Hatton and Calzaghe were very popular at their peaks aswell.

Some people want boxers to be cartoon-esqu, WWF like characters. Others prefer to to see them as genuine people.

azania wrote:If he killed kittens at least that would be a step up. I remember reading an interview of someone who interviewed Duran. He asked Roberto what he did as a child. Duran picked up a cat and threw it against the wall killing it. Not that I want to see animal cruelty, but lets see something different.

I genuinely despair at you sometimes...

If you want something different - then a boxer NOT talking himself up to be the dogs Love sacks is the way forward. Because every boxer does it.

If you want the extremes of smack talk brutality - then we're talking animal abuse and Cuddle in a bad way.

Have to say Shah, I'm coming round to the conclusion that a lot of the dislike for Fury has unpleasant racial undertones.

If you want evidence for this - take a look at some of the threads post-Fury fights - coxy's comments are a prime example of what I mean.

oxring wrote:

If you want evidence for this - take a look at some of the threads post-Fury fights - coxy's comments are a prime example of what I mean.

Lets not take 606v2's version of Richard Littlejohn as typical of our work please.

rowley wrote:

oxring wrote:

If you want evidence for this - take a look at some of the threads post-Fury fights - coxy's comments are a prime example of what I mean.

Lets not take 606v2's version of Richard Littlejohn as typical of our work please.

He makes Littlejohn look like a guardian reading, bearded, sock'n'sandal wearing, socialist.

If he were alone, jeff, I'd find him easier to overlook. He isn't so I can't. A Fury fight doesn't go by without a reference to "Pikey's", "caravans" - and given that we're supposed to be a non-racist society these days (I appreciate the ludicrous nature of that last statement by the way) - I find it somewhat odd that we can be racist towards certain minority groups without censure.

Fury said he would be British and Commonwealth champion. Most people said he wouldn't. He is. He's said he'll be World Champion. He'll need to improve some - but why not enjoy the ride? Why hate?

Its not like any of us are going to be British/Commonwealth HW boxing champions any time soon...

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:If he killed kittens at least that would be a step up. I remember reading an interview of someone who interviewed Duran. He asked Roberto what he did as a child. Duran picked up a cat and threw it against the wall killing it. Not that I want to see animal cruelty, but lets see something different.

I genuinely despair at you sometimes...

If you want something different - then a boxer NOT talking himself up to be the dogs Love sacks is the way forward. Because every boxer does it.

If you want the extremes of smack talk brutality - then we're talking animal abuse and Cuddle in a bad way.

Have to say Shah, I'm coming round to the conclusion that a lot of the dislike for Fury has unpleasant racial undertones.

If you want evidence for this - take a look at some of the threads post-Fury fights - coxy's comments are a prime example of what I mean.

A humble boxer is boring. People say Hatton was humble. He was anything but humle. Plus he had a self depricating sense of humour which was endearing. He played "one of the lads" game and crossed over. Credit to him.

I doubt Fury is disliked because he's a gipsy. Michael Armstrong/Gomez was also a gipsy but was popular. Using Coxy as an example of general consencus is daft to the extreme. In fact I demand an apology.

Would you say Khan is disliked because of his race/religion? The vitriol he gets here is insane and far worse then any other boxer I've seen.

There is some for Khan but much less here than anywhere else i've been. A lot of it was Julius and onetwo on the old 606 and some football yobs but it doesn't seem to have carried on here. Its why I prefer it so much 90% boxing 9% banter and 1 % bumholes. Rather than 40% 60% bumholes on most other sites.

oxring wrote:

rowley wrote:

oxring wrote:

If you want evidence for this - take a look at some of the threads post-Fury fights - coxy's comments are a prime example of what I mean.

Lets not take 606v2's version of Richard Littlejohn as typical of our work please.

He makes Littlejohn look like a guardian reading, bearded, sock'n'sandal wearing, socialist.

If he were alone, jeff, I'd find him easier to overlook. He isn't so I can't. A Fury fight doesn't go by without a reference to "Pikey's", "caravans" - and given that we're supposed to be a non-racist society these days (I appreciate the ludicrous nature of that last statement by the way) - I find it somewhat odd that we can be racist towards certain minority groups without censure.

Fury said he would be British and Commonwealth champion. Most people said he wouldn't. He is. He's said he'll be World Champion. He'll need to improve some - but why not enjoy the ride? Why hate?

Its not like any of us are going to be British/Commonwealth HW boxing champions any time soon...

Let me say from the off. I have no hate towards Fury whatsoever. I dont know him or anything. But in his interviews he comes across as someone trying hard to make a statement and trying to get noticed. Perhaps that's why coxy dislikes him as they are both attention seekers. Its just that one has talent and the other is a talentless internet troll (no offense to Fury).

No mate - Khan gets it light compared with Tyson - although a bit heavy given that he was a world champion.

I'm using coxy as an example. I'm standing by it - I haven't accused you of racism Az, nor would I (on this topic).

"Humble boxers are boring" is one of the biggest myths in boxing today.

Pacquiao - at his peak - was very humble (bit brasher now) - and he was anything but boring. One of the only boxers alive that I will always tune in to watch, he could be fighting Santa Claus - I'd still be in the audience.

Wladimir and Vitali - are both extremely humble - and I find Wlad's interviews pretty entertaining. He was engaging and affable on the BBC breakfast couch (so much so that my girlfriend and I were late to our respective workplaces from watching the interview). As for their popularity - they could fight a Berlin roadsweeper and they'd sell out Germany.

Jon Bones Jones comes across as a pretty down-to-earth guy - and he's electrifying to watch!

So that's codswallop Az.

If Fury were delivering Johnny Nelson-esque borefests - I'd see the point. But domestically - he's been in the running for fight of the year the last 2 years.

ShahenshahG wrote:There is some for Khan but much less here than anywhere else i've been. A lot of it was Julius and onetwo on the old 606 and some football yobs but it doesn't seem to have carried on here. Its why I prefer it so much 90% boxing 9% banter and 1 % bumholes. Rather than 40% 60% bumholes on most other sites.

I think much of the dislike for Khan is because of his race. More so than his religion. He's been criticised for wearing the Pakistani flag on his shorts, criticised for wearing the Pakistani colours on his gumshield/ People want him to lose and dislike him because of his ethnicity. They just will not acknowledge it in public and hide behind his percieved arrogance. The same people who will say they like Naz but hate Amir. They use Naz to hide behind it.

The irrationality of their hate is obvious.

Personally I shouldn't like Chisora. The guy's a Shona. A fake Zulu. They capitulated to Chaka.

Wasn't that just because Chaka realised that when you throw long spears at the enemy - they can throw them back - thus inventing the assegai?

Given how revolutionary those tactics were - you can let the Shona off, surely?

For the record - I disliked Naz - probably because he was northern - but quite like Amir, although I have gone on record as describing him as a classless buffoon when he behaves like one.

oxring wrote:No mate - Khan gets it light compared with Tyson - although a bit heavy given that he was a world champion.

I'm using coxy as an example. I'm standing by it - I haven't accused you of racism Az, nor would I (on this topic).

"Humble boxers are boring" is one of the biggest myths in boxing today.

Pacquiao - at his peak - was very humble (bit brasher now) - and he was anything but boring. One of the only boxers alive that I will always tune in to watch, he could be fighting Santa Claus - I'd still be in the audience.

Wladimir and Vitali - are both extremely humble - and I find Wlad's interviews pretty entertaining. He was engaging and affable on the BBC breakfast couch (so much so that my girlfriend and I were late to our respective workplaces from watching the interview). As for their popularity - they could fight a Berlin roadsweeper and they'd sell out Germany.

Jon Bones Jones comes across as a pretty down-to-earth guy - and he's electrifying to watch!

So that's codswallop Az.

If Fury were delivering Johnny Nelson-esque borefests - I'd see the point. But domestically - he's been in the running for fight of the year the last 2 years.

I'm not referring to their styles. Lennox Lewis needed Iam wright to carry him through "An Audience with Lennon Lewis". Very boring person. Paq is incredibly boring out of the ring. Floyd is anything but boring out of the ring, but I'd rather watch Paq fight because he's more exciting.

Tyson in the early days was very humble outside, but because he was destructive inside it, he made waves.

Ottke could fight coxy and it would sell out anywhere in germany. Means little. When I say boring, I mean boring people. I couldn't sit through an interview with them. A cure for insomnia. There are very few personalities left.

Bones is playing the game. I've seen him caught out a few times with Rashad Evans but he gathered himself and more sponsorship deals came in. He's ideal for MMA. A very violent sport whose primary audience are testerone fuelled drunks and trailer trash needs a humble superstar to balance things out.

I dont think the criticisms of Khan are anything unusual. The arguments for the race card are flimsy. Khan isnt as popular as Hatton..... therefore it must be race. Few fighters have been as popular as Hatton its a ridiculous benchmark to choose.

I guess criticisms of Haye or DeGale must be thinly disguise racism hidden behind their percieved arrogance. Haye wears a Cypriot flag on his shorts after all.