Nigel Benn comeback fight

[Red_Army]

Sure, understand that and I have no issue with governing bodies implementing the toughest of regulations, whatever the sport. However, in this case a governing body has approved the fight based on its criteria and having done so it’s Benn’s choice.

Do I think he is being sensible? No, seems an unnecessary risk to me. But it must be his choice.

And no matter what governing bodies do to mitigate risk, they cannot eliminate it. Seem to recall only a few weeks back a driver got killed. Racing continued later on, the next day I believe. The nature of sport.

So my position is simple. Governing bodies do all they can to mitigate risk and set criteria as they see fit. People who meet that criteria should be free to choose.

But do you actually think they do all they can to mitigate risk? Why have the Biba licenced it and not the BBBC?

That I don’t know. Different bodies have different ideas and I don’t find that surprising. Never really understood the need for four boxing authorities means four different world champions at the same time. Probably down to money somewhere along the line. I dare say each of the four boxing bodies have different rules. Not to mention different countries having different rules. It’s just the way it is.

But that’s a different matter. The fight has been authorised by a legitimate body. Therefore Benn can decide for himself.

This has nothing to do with the four divisions. This is the national sanctioning body. Why do you think he went with the lesser known Biba rather than the BBBC?

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

But do you actually think they do all they can to mitigate risk? Why have the Biba licenced it and not the BBBC?

That I don’t know. Different bodies have different ideas and I don’t find that surprising. Never really understood the need for four boxing authorities means four different world champions at the same time. Probably down to money somewhere along the line. I dare say each of the four boxing bodies have different rules. Not to mention different countries having different rules. It’s just the way it is.

But that’s a different matter. The fight has been authorised by a legitimate body. Therefore Benn can decide for himself.

This has nothing to do with the four divisions. This is the national sanctioning body. Why do you think he went with the lesser known Biba rather than the BBBC?

The mention of the four divisions was more by way of an example of different bodies working maybe in different ways. bIBA and BBBC are different bodies who maybe work different ways. Each perhaps looking at the same situation slightly differently.

That these two may look at the same situation and come to different conclusions is not surprising. On indeed have different requirements when the fight takes place. I dare say Been could have fought in other countries, some may allow it, others may not.

I think we are talking about two different things. The fight has been approved by a recognised body in Britain. Benn meets their requirements and is free to fight. I am not aware of the the BBBC approval being requested and refused. Who knows, if they have been bypassed it could simply have put their nose out of joint, hence their response. Sour grapes.

[Red_Army]

"The British Boxing Board of Control (BBBoc) is against the fight, which will be sanctioned by the rival British and Irish Boxing Authority (Biba)." (BBC).

Do you understand why Benn has gone to Biba for approval (and why Biba have accepted it), and why he has not gone to the BBBC?

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

"The British Boxing Board of Control (BBBoc) is against the fight, which will be sanctioned by the rival British and Irish Boxing Authority (Biba)." (BBC).

Do you understand why Benn has gone to Biba for approval (and why Biba have accepted it), and why he has not gone to the BBBC?

I really wish you would stop saying do you understand. It’s quite arrogant, no, it’s bloody arrogant and seems to me that you believe you are the only person who really understands.

Best we stop now, maybe try some manners, I am replying quite politely.

For the record I do fully understand, I think the issue is you don’t.

[Red_Army]

"The British Boxing Board of Control (BBBoc) is against the fight, which will be sanctioned by the rival British and Irish Boxing Authority (Biba)." (BBC).

Do you understand why Benn has gone to Biba for approval (and why Biba have accepted it), and why he has not gone to the BBBC?

I really wish you would stop saying do you understand. It’s quite arrogant, no, it’s bloody arrogant and seems to me that you believe you are the only person who really understands.

Best we stop now, maybe try some manners, I am replying quite politely.

For the record I do fully understand, I think the issue is you don’t.

You clearly don't, otherwise you would agree with the BBBC in that Benn shouldnt fight.

[claptonCasual]

His son Conor is playing his dad in the new Footsoldier movie.

https://www.britflicks.com/blog/post/73 ... SOLDIER-4/

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

"The British Boxing Board of Control (BBBoc) is against the fight, which will be sanctioned by the rival British and Irish Boxing Authority (Biba)." (BBC).

Do you understand why Benn has gone to Biba for approval (and why Biba have accepted it), and why he has not gone to the BBBC?

I really wish you would stop saying do you understand. It’s quite arrogant, no, it’s bloody arrogant and seems to me that you believe you are the only person who really understands.

Best we stop now, maybe try some manners, I am replying quite politely.

For the record I do fully understand, I think the issue is you don’t.

You clearly don't, otherwise you would agree with the BBBC in that Benn shouldnt fight.

I said a few posts back we were talking about two different things.

Benn chose the BiBa for his own reasons, of course, he had a better chance of getting approval, obvious. Been done before by boxers even switching the country of the fight I believe to get approval. Nothing new. Nothing wrong. Free country and people can choose as they see fit. Nothing to do with the BBBC.

The BBBC for their part have said they wouldn’t sanction the fight. We all know that. Been reported. But that don’t matter because nobody is asking for their approval. They are not relevant in this matter. Banging on about the BBBC is pointless because what they do or say makes no difference. Their opinions carry no weight in the matter. They are irrelevant.

If Benn meets the standards and has got approval from a recognised body, end of story. That is the point. He has met the standards of a recognised body. BBBC may not like losing control to a rival, tough. But he has got approval.

His fight is legitimate, appoved, sanctioned, OK. Therefore it’s his choice whether to fight or not, and accept the risks. The BBBC are irrelevant. I wonder if that is why they chose to comment.

the BBBC is irrelevant in this matter, They have been bypassed. Their opinions carry no weight. Benn is free to choose.

[Red_Army]

I really wish you would stop saying do you understand. It’s quite arrogant, no, it’s bloody arrogant and seems to me that you believe you are the only person who really understands.

Best we stop now, maybe try some manners, I am replying quite politely.

For the record I do fully understand, I think the issue is you don’t.

You clearly don't, otherwise you would agree with the BBBC in that Benn shouldnt fight.

I said a few posts back we were talking about two different things.

Benn chose the BiBa for his own reasons, of course, he had a better chance of getting approval, obvious. Been done before by boxers even switching the country of the fight I believe to get approval. Nothing new. Nothing wrong. Free country and people can choose as they see fit. Nothing to do with the BBBC.

The BBBC for their part have said they wouldn’t sanction the fight. We all know that. Been reported. But that don’t matter because nobody is asking for their approval. They are not relevant in this matter. Banging on about the BBBC is pointless because what they do or say makes no difference. Their opinions carry no weight in the matter. They are irrelevant.

If Benn meets the standards and has got approval from a recognised body, end of story. That is the point. He has met the standards of a recognised body. BBBC may not like losing control to a rival, tough. But he has got approval.

His fight is legitimate, appoved, sanctioned, OK. Therefore it’s his choice whether to fight or not, and accept the risks. The BBBC are irrelevant. I wonder if that is why they chose to comment.

the BBBC is irrelevant in this matter, They have been bypassed. Their opinions carry no weight. Benn is free to choose.

What a load of nonsense. In pure factual terms, yes he has been licensed. But the reason he has been is that he has gone to a body with less stringent tests.

Of course the BBBC carry weight, they are the known body. Them saying they wouldn't sanction it will and should influence people in whether they watch or buy tickets.

So yes, Benn has a license. That doesn't make it right though.

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

You clearly don't, otherwise you would agree with the BBBC in that Benn shouldnt fight.

I said a few posts back we were talking about two different things.

Benn chose the BiBa for his own reasons, of course, he had a better chance of getting approval, obvious. Been done before by boxers even switching the country of the fight I believe to get approval. Nothing new. Nothing wrong. Free country and people can choose as they see fit. Nothing to do with the BBBC.

The BBBC for their part have said they wouldn’t sanction the fight. We all know that. Been reported. But that don’t matter because nobody is asking for their approval. They are not relevant in this matter. Banging on about the BBBC is pointless because what they do or say makes no difference. Their opinions carry no weight in the matter. They are irrelevant.

If Benn meets the standards and has got approval from a recognised body, end of story. That is the point. He has met the standards of a recognised body. BBBC may not like losing control to a rival, tough. But he has got approval.

His fight is legitimate, appoved, sanctioned, OK. Therefore it’s his choice whether to fight or not, and accept the risks. The BBBC are irrelevant. I wonder if that is why they chose to comment.

the BBBC is irrelevant in this matter, They have been bypassed. Their opinions carry no weight. Benn is free to choose.

What a load of nonsense. In pure factual terms, yes he has been licensed. But the reason he has been is that he has gone to a body with less stringent tests.

Of course the BBBC carry weight, they are the known body. Them saying they wouldn't sanction it will and should influence people in whether they watch or buy tickets.

So yes, Benn has a license. That doesn't make it right though.

No but it makes him legimate and free to fight if he chooses and the BBBC have no say in the matter. Their views are irrelevant and that is a fact. I’m dealing with facts, pure and simple.

It’s not for me to pontificate about whether it’s right, wrong, stupid etc for a 55 year old to box. mcColl still is at 54 and looking for a title shot. Plenty of other older fighters come out of retirement for “one last round”, to quote the Rocky film. Do I think it’s smart, no probably not. But I respect the fact that he has the right to choose.

I’m not and never have been someone who tries to run other people’s lives. This is a simple matter. He has been approved by a recognised body. Up,to him. He more than most know the risks. His choice. Nothing to do with the BBBC. Who knows, they could well be proved right but I hope not.

[Red_Army]

I said a few posts back we were talking about two different things.

Benn chose the BiBa for his own reasons, of course, he had a better chance of getting approval, obvious. Been done before by boxers even switching the country of the fight I believe to get approval. Nothing new. Nothing wrong. Free country and people can choose as they see fit. Nothing to do with the BBBC.

The BBBC for their part have said they wouldn’t sanction the fight. We all know that. Been reported. But that don’t matter because nobody is asking for their approval. They are not relevant in this matter. Banging on about the BBBC is pointless because what they do or say makes no difference. Their opinions carry no weight in the matter. They are irrelevant.

If Benn meets the standards and has got approval from a recognised body, end of story. That is the point. He has met the standards of a recognised body. BBBC may not like losing control to a rival, tough. But he has got approval.

His fight is legitimate, appoved, sanctioned, OK. Therefore it’s his choice whether to fight or not, and accept the risks. The BBBC are irrelevant. I wonder if that is why they chose to comment.

the BBBC is irrelevant in this matter, They have been bypassed. Their opinions carry no weight. Benn is free to choose.

What a load of nonsense. In pure factual terms, yes he has been licensed. But the reason he has been is that he has gone to a body with less stringent tests.

Of course the BBBC carry weight, they are the known body. Them saying they wouldn't sanction it will and should influence people in whether they watch or buy tickets.

So yes, Benn has a license. That doesn't make it right though.

No but it makes him legimate and free to fight if he chooses and the BBBC have no say in the matter. Their views are irrelevant and that is a fact. I’m dealing with facts, pure and simple.

It’s not for me to pontificate about whether it’s right, wrong, stupid etc for a 55 year old to box. mcColl still is at 54 and looking for a title shot. Plenty of other older fighters come out of retirement for “one last round”, to quote the Rocky film. Do I think it’s smart, no probably not. But I respect the fact that he has the right to choose.

I’m not and never have been someone who tries to run other people’s lives. This is a simple matter. He has been approved by a recognised body. Up,to him. He more than most know the risks. His choice. Nothing to do with the BBBC. Who knows, they could well be proved right but I hope not.

I hope I never need some useful advice from you then.

[BIGRON]

I hope it's a better fight than the 2 welterweights are having on channel five at the moment ☹

[StockholmO]

He risks brain damage. Bad idea.

[Thor]

The fight has been called off due to Benn sustaining a shoulder injury. Maybe fate has decided he should let sleeping dogs lie.

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

The fight has been called off due to Benn sustaining a shoulder injury. Maybe fate has decided he should let sleeping dogs lie.

Younger boxers get injuries too. Maybe he’s just trying too hard, or unlucky. Or maybe he will conclude his body just ain’t up to it. Not the sort to quit. Be interesting to see if he changes his mind.

[BiggsyMalone]

“Shoulder injury”

Cheapest ticket was £50. I bet they sold less than 100 tickets with less than a month to go.

[spen666]

He risks brain damage. Bad idea.

Every boxer does

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

He risks brain damage. Bad idea.

Every boxer does

As do footballers.

[Red_Army]

He risks brain damage. Bad idea.

Every boxer does

As do footballers.

The difference is though that receiving blows to the head is fundamental and unavoidable in the sport of boxing, where as in football it is a secondary part of the game.

You could take heading out of football without losing the point of the sport. You can't do that with receiving blows to the head in boxing.

[Thor]

With heading the ball back in the shall we say "old days" the ball weighed a ton and had laces, made of real leather and when wet was even heavier still. I'm sure a few of the older gentlemen on here can verify this fact.

When I was a kid the mitre multiplex was a heavy ball - compared to today's ball.

Today's balls are like balloons, you can literally do what you want with them as they are so light.

So whilst I get what they are saying the ball tech or material make up has moved on considerably. So is it that heading the balls of today carrys far less risk than when I was a kid or when say my or his dad were kids?

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

With heading the ball back in the shall we say "old days" the ball weighed a ton and had laces, made of real leather and when wet was even heavier still. I'm sure a few of the older gentlemen on here can verify this fact.

When I was a kid the mitre multiplex was a heavy ball - compared to today's ball.

Today's balls are like balloons, you can literally do what you want with them as they are so light.

So whilst I get what they are saying the ball tech or material make up has moved on considerably. So is it that heading the balls of today carrys far less risk than when I was a kid or when say my or his dad were kids?

And a good thing too. Heading will always be a primary part of the game, though once upon a time it was not the done thing. And I'm old enough to remember the dubbin coated, heavy, rain soaked laced footballs. Bloody hard enough to kick any distance and if heading, mind the laces.

Ball technology is much improved, though when heading the speed of the ball is likely to be faster. It would take someone with better maths and physics skills to measure the weight vs speed difference between the two, or whatever the correct terminology is. Eg a light bullet travelling and velocity will crack the skull whereas a heavy football moving slower wont.