Board of Control suspends Stephen Smith

[Strongback]

First topic message reminder :

"LIVERPOOL’S former British super-feathweight champion Stephen Smith has been suspended by the British Boxing Board of Control.

Smith, who claims to have terminated his contract with Frank Warren to sign with Eddie Hearn at Matchroom, had relinquished his belt (on October 30) after the Board informed him that he had to defend it against Gary Sykes on the December 7 bill in Liverpool, promoted by Warren.

He instead opted to fight on the November 23 show in Manchester, headlined by Carl Froch and George Groves, but the Board has suspended his licence until his dispute with Warren has been heard.

There is no date yet for a hearing.

Robert Smith, general secretary at the Board of Control, said they are dealing with a number of disputes at present, involving Hearn, Warren, Dennis Hobson, Jamie McDonnell and Smith.

Two Smith brothers, including Paul and Liam, still hold British crowns while Callum is the reigning English champion."


http://boxingnewsonline.net/latest/news/board-of-control-suspends-stephen-smith




I have to admit I did smile when I read the headline.  

[Seanusarrilius]

Sky is the platform. Hearn has three years so he needs to use them wisely. Personally, I think boxing is on the up. It's competing with hundreds of sports nowadays, can't expect it to be like it used to be, but we can be more than a fringe sport. Need characters like Naz, Hatton, Calzaghe (ok, not all character) to help keep the sport in the limelight

[Guest]

I remember watching Nigel Benn on terrestrial tv with my dad when he first came on the scene and sported that ridiculous haircut that all the kidz seem to find fashionable today - trailblazer our Nige.

I would have been about 15 or 16 and would ask whether or not, even with his fan friendly style, Nigel would have been anywhere near as popular without exposure on terrestrial telly.

Let's face it, his early fights rarely went beyond a couple of rounds and the buzz about him was still huge. Would he be a household name had he started out on Boxnation?

[joeyjojo618]

Thats not true Truss, the channel will live and die based on its ability to bring in new customers. If it is marketed correctly, and gets big fights regularly then I think it could grow the fanbase.

If its a tinpot operation then it will sink, and we are back to square one anyway.

[TRUSSMAN66]

It'll bring in Boxing fans.......But it won't be them that makes them.........

That's the problem with subscription only channels........

[catchweight]

If Sky sports was able to offer the level of coverage a dedicated subscription channel could then that would be fine but this isnt going to happen. Its coverage will be limited. At the moment its Hearns own boxers which he has a Sky monopoly on and a handful of international fights. If thats where your interests lie then it would be fine but there a huge number of other boxers that arent being shown and there just isnt the capacity to show them all. Obviously more people will be aware of fighters if they are shown on sky but their boxing programme is too small to offer a dedicated fan extensive coverage. There are dozens of ways boxing could be improved and if all these ifs and buts became a reality and as a result Sky or BBC or whatever decided to invest full time then there would be no need for a subscription channel but there is more chance of Audley Harrison becoming a twenty weight world champion. Hoping subscription channels fail and in the meantime waiting for boxing to solve all its problems and become a big fixture doesnt seem very practical.

[Guest]

Thats not true Truss, the channel will live and die based on its ability to bring in new customers. If it is marketed correctly, and gets big fights regularly then I think it could grow the fanbase.

If its a tinpot operation then it will sink, and we are back to square one anyway.

Outside of this forum, the only place I see adverts for Boxnation is.....on SKY during the football. Now, whether I'm considered a "proper" fan or not even I don't think, "brilliant, I'll sign up to that" I think, "Huh, shame it's not on regular SKY." So I doubt there are many armchair fans going to sign up even to a small monthly fee just "on the off-chance that it's good"

Does anyone know how many people have signed up to the Formula 1 channel? Is Formula 1 more popular now or when the likes of Nigel Mansell were plying their trade on ITV/BBC?

[joeyjojo618]

Who's to say that if you were a little beefster growing up today you wouldnt be watching boxnation like you did with sports channels in the past? Im just saying its an extra option available to all. It is in competition with conventional channels but thats not a bad thing, and it doesnt mean that other channels will support boxing less.

Dave - that just means the channel is marketed poorly, or the fights it was showing were not good enough to interest you. It would definitely be preferable for everything to be shown on sky (or even better on terrestrial), but thats not going to happen. At least you saw an advert for boxing at all with boxnation existing. You have the choice.

[Rowley]

Reality is he probably would not get picked up Joey and I get the channel from that perspective and get that the channel is a reaction to the increasing apathy to the sport shown by the major TV networks. However think a far more valuable question for promoters and governing bodies to be asking themselves is why this apathy exists. It exists because promoters have made bad matches for joke belts for years and have refused to work in collaboration with each other to make exciting fights irrespective of the wishes of fans and TV companies. Tough for us fans but many promoters are just reaping what they have sown for years.

Truss has hit the nail on the head for me, boxnation will bring in boxing fans but it will not create them and that is the root cause of my issue with the channel. I care about the sport passionately and want it to be around long after I have bought the farm, I care about this more than I care about whether I get to see Donaire’s next fight.

There is a lot resting on Hearn right now. Would seem fairly obvious he has been told that his continued presence on Sky will be based on him not repeating the mistakes of the past such as huge mismatches, guys unwilling to leave their own backyard and no undercards worthy of the name. Can only hope if Hearn can avoid these things and bring in the viewers by doing so further down the line Sky may look a little more favourably on other promoters.

[catchweight]

The ills of boxing cant be blamed on a subscription channel. If anything they are they ones trying to show it extensively when other wont. Sky sports might create more boxing fans but those fans are then constrained by its limited coverage and fleeced in future by ppv. There isnt really any downside to a subscription channel they way things are now and boxings porblems in relation to belts and promoters wont be fixed with or without a subscription channel existing. If a subscription channel didnt exist there would be nobody to pick up the slack from the boxing no longer covered. Its just less boxing on tv and less choice for the boxing fan. Even if a boxing fan chooses not to pay or doesnt think its worth it at the very least its providing an option.

[TRUSSMAN66]

Haven't seen anybody blame the ills of Boxing on a boxing channel.........

[catchweight]

Good for you.

[Guest]

Who's to say that if you were a little beefster growing up today you wouldnt be watching boxnation like you did with sports channels in the past? Im just saying its an extra option available to all. It is in competition with conventional channels but thats not a bad thing, and it doesnt mean that other channels will support boxing less.

Dave - that just means the channel is marketed poorly, or the fights it was showing were not good enough to interest you. It would definitely be preferable for everything to be shown on sky (or even better on terrestrial), but thats not going to happen. At least you saw an advert for boxing at all with boxnation existing. You have the choice.

But your point seems to be that it will thrive if IS marketed correctly and surely this demonstrates (to a degree) that it isn't because even as a boxing fan, I don't feel compelled to sign up.

Sky tried a similar thing with Premiership Plus if you cast you minds back and it died on it's backside because you couldn't guarentee that the big matches would actually be any good. Course there's no guarantees in life but people aren't going to shell out for a boxing snorefest but they'd be more inclined to tolerate it if it didn't cost anything.

Groves/Froch may be a fight of the Year contender and all the PPV moans may very well be forgotten but without a guarantee of a cracking fight (Eddie's bluster doesn't count) a lot of people will be put off watching it or find alternative means of doing so.

[TRUSSMAN66]

Good for you.

Bad for your argument though..

[catchweight]

Good for you.

Bad for your argument though..

It wasnt an argument. It was a statement of opinion.

[TRUSSMAN66]

It was an invalid statement

[Rowley]

The marketing is a side issue for me. If someone was to create golfnation I don’t care how well it was marketed I would not subscribe as I am only a marginal fan (watch a Major or the Ryder Cup). As such were all the golf to be stuck away on such a channel I would never become a hardcore fan, would never attend a tournament, never buy a magazine or book and certainly never take up the sport. As such a potential fan of the sport has been lost.

[TRUSSMAN66]

BBC has the Open........and The Masters feel like you do about terrestrial viewers watching the game......As they INSIST BBC has some live play......

Golf is a non starter......

[catchweight]

It was an invalid statement

It wasnt really though but I tell you what, Im discussing subscriptions channels here. Next time I have a major case of the runs and cant keep my arsecheeks clenched any longer I will look you up and we can discuss boxing on your terms. Deal?

[TRUSSMAN66]

Pathetic..

[Rowley]

Feel free to substitute the word golf for another sport. The point I was making is getting into a sport does not happen overnight. I don’t remember the first fight I ever watched but I did not watch it and think, that is amazing I am now 100% committed to that sport. I am going to subscribe to both boxing magazines, spend thousands on books on the subject and remortgage my house to go to watch the sport in Vegas. However over my 20 odd year love affair with the sport those are all things I have done. A channel such as boxnation serves only to kill that process ever developing and happening.

[TRUSSMAN66]

I agree with you.......100% and at least we can discuss the subject like adults....

[catchweight]

The marketing is a side issue for me. If someone was to create golfnation I don’t care how well it was marketed I would not subscribe as I am only a marginal fan (watch a Major or the Ryder Cup). As such were all the golf to be stuck away on such a channel I would never become a hardcore fan, would never attend a tournament, never buy a magazine or book and certainly never take up the sport. As such a potential fan of the sport has been lost.

I wouldnt be surprised if there was a golf channel marketed to just dedicated golf fans. I dont disagree that in an ideal world boxing would be shown extensively on sky sports but it isnt and it wont be due to the competition. I cant see you why think having a subsidiary subscription channel that makes more boxing available to dedicated fans is a bad thing. There isnt the interest from any tv channels to show extensive boxing coverage and a subscritpion channel picks up that slack and makes it available. I can only see your argument working if a subscription channel was taking boxing away from Sky Sports or regular television but that is not what is happening. Its making boxing available to fans that no other network is willing to show.

[jimdig]

Is the sky model really one to be commended? Doesn't its success as account for setanta, espn, bt? Are more subscription sports channels a good thing box nation a bad thing?
I really don't have a firm opinion, but I do like box nations product and pricing. I would not like to be paying hbo's ppv prices, whereas I'd be happy to pay for hbo as a station (were it available this side of the pond).

[KC]

I seem to remember - on the old 606 - signing an online petition for a dedicated boxing channel [or have I really drunk that much cider in the interim that I actually dreamt that one?].
Did anyone else that signed that petition honestly think that said channel would be free to air/terrestrial/part of the sky platform with no extra cost - seriously?
I did sign up to Box Nation, I don't like having to pay the extra but hey I don't like paying taxes either. I do think it has prompted Sky to show more of the US fights so that must be a good thing I believe.

[Sponsored content]