Tyson Fury

First topic message reminder :

Has this guy completely lost the plot? Don't know if anyone follows him on twitter but he's offered Chisora, Price and Haye a fight in the space of five minutes. Also started spouting how his dad and Maloney have to fight as well.

Any respect he'd started to earn has been lost due to his mental breakdown IMO.

I'm ashamed to say I've never heard of Stiverne or Grano.

I do know who Denis is though.

Ooh yes.

Diggers wrote:I dont see anything contrary about thinking Fury would have a good shot against Price. Or indeed in thinking that Fury is a pretty entertaining charachter, though he does get a tad carried away sometimes.
I find that a lot easier to accept than the theory that somehow Price is now the heir apparent to the K's after a career which has seen him enter the ring as an odds on favourite every time he's fought.
At least Fury has got into the ring in what were seen as a few pick em fights and I would say has benefited from that.

The contrarian comment, diggers, is not regarding how well someone think Fury would perform against Price, but Az's view that people aren't allowed to dislike people if disliking that person is a commonly held opinion. And if someone is universally liked as a nice person then people who hold that view (when in the majority) are derided.

Hence why he's scoffed at people's view in this thread of Fury being an unpleasant oik (just Az's kind of person, apparently, but we're not allowed to dislike him) and why previously he's accused Khan's detractors of being racist as apparently we're not allowed to say he sometimes says silly things that make him look like a bit of a prat.

What nonsense. Do you know Fury? I find him hilarious and take everything he says with a pinch (or more) of salt. But disliking him? I don't see the point. I don't give a hoot if its a commonly held view that he's an unpleasant oik. Regardless, it has no bearing on his skills.

Furthermore its a commonly held view that Price is a dreary and boring guy. I don't hold it against him. And that he is chinny, untested because he's been fighting dross since turning pro.

Many Khan detractors have issues. You know that. To deny it is a lie. Not saying that all are racists. That would be plainly wrong. But many (and some here I reckon) don't like him because of his ethnicity.

The point is not the silly thing Khan says, but how it is blown out of all proportions and when another (likeable) boxer says something similar, it's understood and applauded.

Diggers wrote:

You can certainly tell you are a journalist, a lot of your own conjecture written about his personality expressed as fact. You dont know the guy yet you can give us a full warts and all insight into his personality, very impressive.
You may well be correct in some assumptions but you could equally be miles off. Certainly no more reason to accept your views as fact than your guarantee that Price would knock him out. This is heavyweight boxing and both Price and Fury can bang and if you think Fury cant box and has zero chance of tagging Price then IMO you are simply wrong.
Is Price a marginal favourite, probably. Personally I dont think there would be much in this fight, I've seen Fury get through long tough fights but I havent seen Price have to do the same yet and I think Fury will take him to places he hasn't been yet.
Its great being able to fight to a game plan and Price has been able to do so thus far, we've seen what can happen to good fighters like Degale and Brook when they suddenly find someone in front of them with a fair bit of ability and a desire to win.
I think Fury would have a good chance...but I cant guarantee that.

I don't need to know the guy inside out Diggers to have an opinion on what type of person he is. The fact of the matter is that as a boxer he is in the public eye...now if he wishes to behave in the manner that he does then he is going to be labelled & perceived in particular ways. In my case I think he is a bit of a clown.

My reasons behind this belief is because of how he has come across in not just interviews (which at times I can take with a pinch of salt) but also on his recent twitter messages. His tweets have not just been abusive and distasteful to other boxers & contenders but also to other 'normal' (i.e. us everyday folk) users. Some have deserved it, for being equally ignorant towards his heritage of being a traveller. However some have merely layed claim to the fact they believe Price would beat him...because they have dared say that he has returned comment with spiteful & hate filled messages. If you take a look through his recent twitter messages you will see what I mean.

The fact remains that whilst self promotion is a part of boxing there should always be a modicum of acceptable behaviour. I get that part of his job is to fill arenas...get certain fights etc, but he has come out with some simply awful stuff. Not just this past weekend on Channel 5 but also on the web and in previous build ups to fights.

It's nothing to do with me being a journalist...in all walks of life we judge people. It's natural human behaviour hence the phrase 'first impressions count'. As a person I think Fury is ignorant, lacks class and comes across as uneducated. That is my assumption...but it hasn't just been plucked out of thin air. I arrived at that conclusion based on what I have seen/heard of him as person.

Floyd Mayweather hasn't had to get through many tough fights...the reason being he is far more skilled than most of his opponents. Now before you say anything i'm not comparing Price to Mayweather. I'm merely pointing out that there is a reason Price has yet to come through a storm. He has been far better than his opponents. I'm not sure there is too much difference between the records of either guy (an argument which for some reason always comes up despite neither having a huge name on their record)...but unlike Price, I have seen Fury being confused and out worked (by McDermott in 1st & periods of there 2nd fight)..I have seen him tire (again McDermott & rather surprisingly Firtha (which only went 5 rounds). I have also seen him be dropped once and rocked on at least 3 occasions.

Those 'facts' would suggest to me that Fury isn't as good as some would believe. It is these things which lead me to believe Price would stop him in his tracks if they were to meet.

As far as guaranteeing Price would beat him..of course I couldn't actually do that. If I could I would be a self made millionaire from betting. I merely used the phrase to stress my point that I believe Price is a couple of leagues above Fury and for that reason I think he beats him rather easily.

I'm not as certain as Ozzy on a Price win, although it is where my money would go. However, Fury has won matches before that most of us believed he would lose e.g. Chisora (even though Chisora did not help himself that night) and won in some style. At least it would be a UK fight of two peers, but I doubt it will happen in the next 18 months. I've just seen too much posturing to make me believe that the managers will make this happen.

I say good on Fury. Let him talk all he wants. People will be talking about him and de facto Price. So when the fight happens, it will be a bigger event than if Fury behaved like Price ie boring.

Owen, we can all have opinions but you were expressing your opinion of Fury as fact.
I have no doubt he didn't have a brilliant education, but ultimately he is a product of his environment. They doesn't make him stupid, Ive seen enough of him in interviews to suggest he has something going on upstairs. I've also seen him give credit to his opponents, he was positively gushing about Rogan.
Personally I think he has had tougher fights and he took them sooner, he's a kid in heavyweight terms and I think he has more room for improvement than Price who to me is a bit one dimensional.
Anyway I hope they get it on but it's unlikely to happen anytime soon as you say.

alma wrote:I just hope it doesn't turn into another haye klitschko protracted farce. Hopefully within 18 months one of price and fury will be WBC champion and then the fight would be massive, particularly if both are still unbeaten

Let the trash talking continue and the hype grow. The fight will happen when either is a belt holder. Fury is ahead in the pecking order and he will defend and retain it against Price. A Price win will be terrible for Heavyweight boxing. Nobody wants a K2 clone ruling the roost. Lets have someone with some personality.

Diggers -

I didn't call him stupid, I called him uneducated...your right it is a product of his environment but that doesn't mean it is any less true. In fact given the standard of his tweets I can't see how that statement can't be anything other than fact. In fact here is evidence from the man himself

@Tyson_Fury Also I left school wen I was 10! And hav married my 3 cousin.called my kids after country's and for the record I love dags!bred to fight pit

Your also right in that he gave Rogan credit after the fight but since then he has gone on to question the challenge Rogan brought that night as the following tweet shows:

@BigRogie @peterfury Martin u need to shutdown your engine an go to the skrap yard u never was any good! Done u easy not even a fight!

Below are a few more of his articulate outbursts, plenty more if you go check out his profile:

RT @Tyson_Fury: @EddieHearn your the biggest Tinkywinky in boxing along with tony bell end! U Frak 1 shirt millionaire!

@DavidPrice_1 u gonna need a year off u Tinkywinky when I'm finished with u and a face transplant! I can't wait for u boy! Your getting it!!!!!!!

@mrdavidhaye @Davidprice1 u pair r a joke a lot alike both big hitters both no hart both chinless and both as bent as a nine bobnote!Bringit

@mrdavidhaye @davidprice_1 David gay is a price shagger along with tony bell end! Maybe they can all get together for a gay orgy!

Before I go bed one more time price haye bell end and chisora r all tossers I will fight them all at the same time! I'm the man furious T!!!

As for tougher challenges I'm interested to hear which tougher fights you think he has had?!

So he does a bit of trash talking , big deal. It's pretty much called marketing these days.
When he gets arrested for slapping his wife or something that is actually nasty I might change my mind but it hasnt happened yet.
The Chisora fight is the obvious example of him taking tough fights early on.

Hey Owen, before you go calling someone uneducated and mocking them for it perhaps you should check the difference between your and you're.

Journalist huh?

So a boxer lacks formal education. That has never happened before.

Good points OwenOzzy

Fury is a clown.

Alma, you are in a rather agreeable mood today? Its strange

Well then, there is the difference between us Diggers...whilst obviously hitting a female or any kind of criminal/thuggish behaviour is far worse...

I'm not a fan of the abuse & language he has been using over the past 2 days, which has been aimed at ordinary people who just have a view on the outcome of a fight between himself and Price.

There is trash talking and then there is just bullying & abusive behaviour. As far as I am concerned his has fallen into the latter.

The way he acts in front of the camera/ in interviews etc suggests to me he has a few marble's loose. He has talked about killing somebody (Price) in the ring? I'm sorry but that isn't trash talk.

It's a reflection on society these days that anyone who hurls around some disgusting language, obnoxious statements and generally behaves in a disrespectful manner is seen as exciting and good for boxing...whilst anyone who shows some form of intelligence and a modicum of pleasantness is seen as boring.

As for the Chisora fight, it's not like he showed up in any kind of shape. Ok there isn't much Fury can do about that...but it doesn't mean that fact should be dismissed. Vitali & Haye handled him with much more ease than Fury did....and Tyson believes he is already at these guys level?

Price did to McDermott in 1 round what it took Fury 2 fights to do. Granted again we have to question the shape McDermott was in for the fight with Price...but he was in no better shape in the 2nd fight with Tyson and it still look him 9 rounds to get him out.

Also i'm not knocking him for having a lack of education...what I was actually saying was that he made a point of being dismissive to anyone who showed any sign of an education during exchanges on twitter.

As Azania has pointed out, yes plenty of boxers lack education, but that doesn't mean every 2nd word they use has to be a profanity. Nor does it justify a lack of 'socially acceptable' behaviour which Tyson Fury has shown both on and away from the camera's!

Oh and Hibbz...well pointed out..though I hasten to add, since my job entails me sifting through and editing spelling mistakes all day, be it my own draft work or editing other people's, forgive me for wanting to just get home and debate over a forum without having to be particular over my grammar or slight spelling errors. Just because I am a journalist there isn't a requirement for me to be a spelling genius...if that was the case very few magazine's and paper's would ever exist!

Poor old Tyson is getting murdered on Twitter today.

seanmichaels wrote:Poor old Tyson is getting murdered on Twitter today.

Not a great suprise given the nonsense he has been spouting.

It's a reflection on society these days that anyone who hurls around some disgusting language, obnoxious statements and generally behaves in a disrespectful manner is seen as exciting and good for boxing...whilst anyone who shows some form of intelligence and a modicum of pleasantness is seen as boring.

That's how it always has been mate.

owen10ozzy wrote:Just because I am a journalist there isn't a requirement for me to be a spelling genius...if that was the case very few magazine's and paper's would ever exist!

I see what you did there, very good!

No it's hasn't Az....

Micky Ward...Arturo Gatti...Willie Pep...Floyd Patterson...Joe Louis...Rocky Marciano..Alexis Arguello...Manny Pacquiao...

I'm sure people can point out plenty more.

Union - I have no idea what your talking about...no really I swear

On the contrary, az, it isn't how it's always been. Johnson shocked people by being black, good and defiant of racism, but he wasn't foul of mouth in his public comments. Dempsey was a global superstar, but invariably polite and respectful towards his opponents. Ditto Tunney. Joe Louis? Don't think he was renowned for his range of obscenities.

The problem is that everyone wishes for some of the stardust that Ali acquired via his public pronouncements. The other problem is that Ali's latter-day successors lack his originality, mental acuity, verbal dexterity and general warmth. The practice of declaring that a boxer will "eat an opponent's heart/gang-r*** them/leave them brain-dead" (delete as appropriate) is a modern one, I'm afraid.

Truth is that an exciting or meaningful fight needs virtually no hype. It sells itself. The modern way of matching hopelessly mismatched opponents with champions or protecting an investment's unbeaten record at all costs means that an often sceptical public has to be won over with buckets of hyperbole. The result is someone like Fury or Haye, who are no more than products of the reality TV generation. What is undeniable, worse luck, is that they epitomise a phenomenon with no discernible end.

Union Cane wrote:

owen10ozzy wrote:Just because I am a journalist there isn't a requirement for me to be a spelling genius...if that was the case very few magazine's and paper's would ever exist!

I see what you did there, very good!

haha only just got it too!

very good O. Btw, you look about 12 yrs old on your twitter pic, how long ago was that taken??!

captain carrantuohil wrote:On the contrary, az, it isn't how it's always been. Johnson shocked people by being black, good and defiant of racism, but he wasn't foul of mouth in his public comments. Dempsey was a global superstar, but invariably polite and respectful towards his opponents. Ditto Tunney. Joe Louis? Don't think he was renowned for his range of obscenities.

The problem is that everyone wishes for some of the stardust that Ali acquired via his public pronouncements. The other problem is that Ali's latter-day successors lack his originality, mental acuity, verbal dexterity and general warmth. The practice of declaring that a boxer will "eat an opponent's heart/gang-r*** them/leave them brain-dead" (delete as appropriate) is a modern one, I'm afraid.

Truth is that an exciting or meaningful fight needs virtually no hype. It sells itself. The modern way of matching hopelessly mismatched opponents with champions or protecting an investment's unbeaten record at all costs means that an often sceptical public has to be won over with buckets of hyperbole. The result is someone like Fury or Haye, who are no more than products of the reality TV generation. What is undeniable, worse luck, is that they epitomise a phenomenon with no discernible end.

As always Captain...hit the nail on the head pal! Ali was at times very distasteful, however he brought with it a an angle of intelligence, articulation, humour & class. Something sorely lacking from today's crop.

Tophat - Think I was 17/18...I do look very young. 25 now and still have the ability to get into University student nights. Not that I ever try of course...

Sorry, but all you guys are doing is going back through the ages and coming up with names of people who didnt trash talk. There are people who dont do it now. That doesnt mean it didnt happen back in the day by any stretch of the imagination.
Fury is on his way up, he is trying to make a name for himself. He may never will and become a tiny footnote in the history of boxing, just like all the 1000's of boxers in the past who will have played the bad guy, talked down their opponents, said they were going to kill someone in the ring.
Ali talked plenty of utter rubbish, the vast majority of it was tripe and often derogotary or plain insulting, with a few gems thrown in.
Whats changed now is its easier to get it out there, whereas before if a bloke was the type to mouth off unless it was in the local paper or word of mouth who was going to know ?
Its technology thats changed IMO, not peoples charachters.

owen and cap

It is so. During Johnson's time, the mere idea of a black man shagging a white woman was an insult to God and far worse than any profanities uttered by Fury or Floyd.

Ali took it to another level without the profanities but once again, he was deemed to be uppity and not knowing his place. A bigger threat to civil liberties and the established norm that any swear words utterred by those two.

Then Tyson brought barbaric behaviour to a whole new level which made people want to see more of him and paid through the nose to do so.

The bottom line in boxing, more so that any other sport, is that controversy sells and sells in bucketloads. It covers flawed technique and dull fighters. If Pac had the mouth of Floyd and Floyd had the mouth of Pac, who do you think woul dbe making the bigger bucks?

We can all look at Ali's time with hindsight and say he did it with charm etc. He probably did. But it seriously annoyed the established order so much so that they tried to jail him for it and banned him from plying his trade.

It may well be true that controversy has always been part of boxing but the idea it has always sold is not particularly true. Johnson could not draw flies, the only time he got anything like a crowd in the states was when they dragged Jeffries out of retirement.

Would you be so quick to label Fury's outbursts as great for the sport if there was a racial angle to his trash talk rather than just being a bit homophobic and violent?

djlovesyou wrote:Would you be so quick to label Fury's outbursts as great for the sport if there was a racial angle to his trash talk rather than just being a bit homophobic and violent?

Firstly Im not sure anyone has said Fury is great for the sport.....all Ive said is I find him entertaining. Secondly...he hasn't, so its a bit of a pointless question. A more pertinent question might be why people think its OK to discriminate against him for being a gypsy, traveller, romany, whatever.

1) He's not romany [which actually is an ethinicity]; 2) His gypsy/traveller background is a lifestyle choice nothing more.

It's as open to ridicule as being fat.

And I think DJ's comments were probably actually aimed at Az....

djlovesyou wrote:Would you be so quick to label Fury's outbursts as great for the sport if there was a racial angle to his trash talk rather than just being a bit homophobic and violent?

You are as interesting as turkey 3 days after Xmas. Fury's outburst keeps a fight with Price in the spotlight and will earn them big money when it comes around. He is doing Price a favour as Price himself ecknowledged.

Why are you so hung up on me and race issues? I do not condone him homophobic slurs.

Cheers

Btw - anychance you can answer the question on the athletics board which you steadfastly decided to ignore? See ya.

In the UK, az, Ali was almost immediately adored, despite the whippings that he regularly visited on British boxers. This was in stark contrast to the States, of course. Hindsight isn't required by anyone without an agenda to find Ali a breath of fresh air.

Diggers, you can say that you're going to destroy your opponent, and people always have. The modern type of pre-fight guff, however, is just that - recent. It goes as society does, I suppose, which isn't always marvellous. Fury is no worse or better than a lot of his contemporaries. Entertaining, though? If you find end of the pier stuff funny, I guess.

rowley wrote:It may well be true that controversy has always been part of boxing but the idea it has always sold is not particularly true. Johnson could not draw flies, the only time he got anything like a crowd in the states was when they dragged Jeffries out of retirement.

Generally speaking it always sells. He got a big crowd because 99.999% wanted to see the uppity guy get his ass handed to him.

The UK has always been more civilised than America. Our resident beefster will testify to that. Ali was adored here and I believe the BBBC referred to him as world champ up until the Frazier fight.

TopHat24/7 wrote:1) He's not romany [which actually is an ethinicity]; 2) His gypsy/traveller background is a lifestyle choice nothing more.

It's as open to ridicule as being fat.

And I think DJ's comments were probably actually aimed at Az....

OK, so its OK to discriminate against people for making a lifestyle choice ? Like say being a muslim, thats a choice, should we openly discrimate against muslims ?
They were probably aimed at Az, does that mean nobody else can comment on them, is that a boxing board rule ?

Diggers wrote:They were probably aimed at Az, does that mean nobody else can comment on them, is that a boxing board rule ?

no, would anyone like it to be?

always does to shake the place up a bit

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Union Cane wrote:

owen10ozzy wrote:Just because I am a journalist there isn't a requirement for me to be a spelling genius...if that was the case very few magazine's and paper's would ever exist!

I see what you did there, very good!

haha only just got it too!

very good O. Btw, you look about 12 yrs old on your twitter pic, how long ago was that taken??!

I still haven't got it?

Diggers wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:1) He's not romany [which actually is an ethinicity]; 2) His gypsy/traveller background is a lifestyle choice nothing more.

It's as open to ridicule as being fat.

And I think DJ's comments were probably actually aimed at Az....

OK, so its OK to discriminate against people for making a lifestyle choice ? Like say being a muslim, thats a choice, should we openly discrimate against muslims ?
They were probably aimed at Az, does that mean nobody else can comment on them, is that a boxing board rule ?

Depends about how much of a pansy you want to be really. I am fat, if/when someone quips about it I don't go on about "weight discimination". The D word is thrown around way too liberally for my liking, taking the urine is taking the urine. And yes, I do think any lifestyle choice should be open to free discussion.

owen10ozzy wrote:
Oh and Hibbz...well pointed out..though I hasten to add, since my job entails me sifting through and editing spelling mistakes all day, be it my own draft work or editing other people's, forgive me for wanting to just get home and debate over a forum without having to be particular over my grammar or slight spelling errors. Just because I am a journalist there isn't a requirement for me to be a spelling genius...if that was the case very few magazine's and paper's would ever exist!

If your job entails sifting through and editing speling mistakes all day doesn't that mean you're a sub-editor rather than a journalist?

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Diggers wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:1) He's not romany [which actually is an ethinicity]; 2) His gypsy/traveller background is a lifestyle choice nothing more.

It's as open to ridicule as being fat.

And I think DJ's comments were probably actually aimed at Az....

OK, so its OK to discriminate against people for making a lifestyle choice ? Like say being a muslim, thats a choice, should we openly discrimate against muslims ?
They were probably aimed at Az, does that mean nobody else can comment on them, is that a boxing board rule ?

Depends about how much of a pansy you want to be really. I am fat, if/when someone quips about it I don't go on about "weight discimination". The D word is thrown around way too liberally for my liking, taking the urine is taking the urine. And yes, I do think any lifestyle choice should be open to free discussion.

So you choose to discriminate against people who choose to use the word discriminate.

No Hibbz .. part of my job is editing. I do however also write. My official job title is 'Sports Journalist'. Since I only started about 9 months ago much of my work is what we call the 'donkey load', i.e. either editing other peoples work or doing the research work for the articles themselves.

I do however also do some writing which I thankfully get credited for.

If you feel my job title does not encompass the work I actually do feel free to contact my boss and speak to him about it

Diggers wrote:OK, so its OK to discriminate against people for making a lifestyle choice ? Like say being a muslim, thats a choice, should we openly discrimate against muslims ?
They were probably aimed at Az, does that mean nobody else can comment on them, is that a boxing board rule ?

Box of frogs here - but if you're a muslim, why have thousands of muslims taken to the street to debate someones "choice" in making a film about them?

You can't wear one shoe and not the other. What you're spouting here Diggers is that nothing can be debated by anybody because its their choice? Or it can?

Fury chose to be a traveller. Its not in his heritage - otherwise he'd have been born on a camp site, or in Ireland or have some sort of link other than "my grandmother is irish"

Basically it allows him to sound like he's a normal bloke. He's not, he's a bit of a joke.

It's difficult to know who the real Fury is.

As David Price said, "He has more than one personality. He must have about five different personalities, one for every day of the week."

Thats a fantastic job and career to have Ozzy. Good luck with it.
I remember going on work experience when I was 16 to my local rag, dont remember a lot about it but I do recall the somewhat jaded and disinterested old hack looking over a peice that I wrote up for something that we atteneded together. Think he turned about 400 words into 50 and said to me less is more son, less is more. That might work for some of your posts on here, take a lot of reading on an Iphone.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:

Diggers wrote:OK, so its OK to discriminate against people for making a lifestyle choice ? Like say being a muslim, thats a choice, should we openly discrimate against muslims ?
They were probably aimed at Az, does that mean nobody else can comment on them, is that a boxing board rule ?

Box of frogs here - but if you're a muslim, why have thousands of muslims taken to the street to debate someones "choice" in making a film about them?

You can't wear one shoe and not the other. What you're spouting here Diggers is that nothing can be debated by anybody because its their choice? Or it can?

Fury chose to be a traveller. Its not in his heritage - otherwise he'd have been born on a camp site, or in Ireland or have some sort of link other than "my grandmother is irish"

Basically it allows him to sound like he's a normal bloke. He's not, he's a bit of a joke.

Ah, spouting, great message board word. I think you'll find Im not actually spouting, preaching, banging on about anything, Im merely asking the question. If you can find where Ive said that nothings open to debate feel free to post the quote.
Im no more offended by Fury going off about being the worlds best heavy than I am about people having a go at his lifestyle choice.

I have actually lost all focus in this debate, as you've confused me with your fence sitting.

[quote="JabMachineMK2"]

Diggers wrote:
Box of frogs here - but if you're a muslim, why have thousands of muslims taken to the street to debate someones "choice" in making a film about them?

You can't wear one shoe and not the other. What you're spouting here Diggers is that nothing can be debated by anybody because its their choice? Or it can?

Fury chose to be a traveller. Its not in his heritage - otherwise he'd have been born on a camp site, or in Ireland or have some sort of link other than "my grandmother is irish"

Basically it allows him to sound like he's a normal bloke. He's not, he's a bit of a joke.

I thought hid Dad was a gypo? Gypsy Jon Fury.

Living in a caravan, coursing hares, tarmac-ing drives stealing metal etc, it is all inhis blood.

Is there any chance of this thread finding its way back to boxing any time soon, fascinating though ozzy's career and lazy stereotypes are they are not particularly on topic.

Diggers wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Diggers wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:1) He's not romany [which actually is an ethinicity]; 2) His gypsy/traveller background is a lifestyle choice nothing more.

It's as open to ridicule as being fat.

And I think DJ's comments were probably actually aimed at Az....

OK, so its OK to discriminate against people for making a lifestyle choice ? Like say being a muslim, thats a choice, should we openly discrimate against muslims ?
They were probably aimed at Az, does that mean nobody else can comment on them, is that a boxing board rule ?

Depends about how much of a pansy you want to be really. I am fat, if/when someone quips about it I don't go on about "weight discimination". The D word is thrown around way too liberally for my liking, taking the urine is taking the urine. And yes, I do think any lifestyle choice should be open to free discussion.

So you choose to discriminate against people who choose to use the word discriminate.

Lol

I like what you did there....but no, I just laugh at people who choose to use the D word as and when it suits them.

TopHat24/7 wrote:I like what you did there....but no, I just laugh at people who choose to use the D word as and when it suits them.

Good answer, fatty.

owen10ozzy wrote:No Hibbz .. part of my job is editing. I do however also write. My official job title is 'Sports Journalist'. Since I only started about 9 months ago much of my work is what we call the 'donkey load', i.e. either editing other peoples work or doing the research work for the articles themselves.

I do however also do some writing which I thankfully get credited for.

If you feel my job title does not encompass the work I actually do feel free to contact my boss and speak to him about it :)

I did. He said "learn the difference between your and you're, stop using erroneous apostrophes and buy a crash helmet, I've lined up an interview with Tyson Fury for you"