HBO criticisms..

I'm becoming increasing un-impressed with HBO as a whole, and now actually just really starting to go beyond questioning but just thinking the quality is lower then it should be at times. HBO seem to be increasingly picky about fights they'll accept and televise thus some fights come off some don't, it's too much influence from a network, on the sport itself. Take Calzaghe Jones, they wouldn't even do a PPV in another country, Wales Millennium stadium woulda been 70+ thousand people, a big event and done as well if not better. There's tonnes of worser examples many I've heard of, like Taylor, they'd only go along with one or two guys like Lacy over a couple of others more legitimate. Pavlik Hopkins is another they wanted, and they ruined their young star in the process, good work. They just seem to have to much clout on the sport and it's not always good. On the Calzaghe Jones fight they don't seem to be unbiased as a network should be much more, at all. Some notes and examples just from this weekends fight. Front page of HBO Boxing; No legs. No reflexes. No chance. That was the sad state old Roy Jones, Jr. found himself in last night at Madison Square Garden. The things that had for so many years made him unbeatable had deserted him, as they do all men with time, and all that was left was a technically flawed stationary target for Joe Calzaghe to stab and punch at for 12 rounds. Is that really a fair un biased fair piece on the front page of a tv networks front page for Boxing? Any network certainly in the UK would not write something like this, but merely the facts, what happened with at most a smal piece of opinion. But HBO seems rife with bias and too many opinions and motives. Notes from the fight itself; As Roy Jones is walking in, it lists his last KO win as Clinton Woods, 2002. Why of all things note this above and beyond everything else? This is talked of again in the very first round, why so much? Seems odd, there's a million and one more logical relevant things to talk about minutes before a big bout is about to commence, ok a negative stat is ok, but that one just seemed lame, and received unworthy emphasis. Pre right commentating Normally after some 10 minutes of national anthems and announcements the commentators come back on and talk positively of a big fight about to commence, to hype it a bit at least and stuff. Max Kellerman came on just before the opening round the first thing he talks of is Roy being past prime. The odds are against him. Firstly the odds weren't that much against, some what 5/2 approximately, nowhere near as much as many other fights where such a thing is not said. Can't you think of more things to say on this big fight about to start then this over and over? One positive thing or insight on it maybe, just one or two? R2 A close one, some scored for Joe some for Roy. Max Kellermen: "at this point of the fight Jones is making Calzaghe look like a washed up Trinidad." What the f uck is that? How ridiculous and clearly miles from the truth, why say something like this? He's wildly exaggerating how well Roy was doing, and inventing the idea were seeing Calzaghe look washed up, which he wasn't. Emmanuel Steward then comes on saying Jones attitude is right, both guys still have very good speed, Roy has more pop in his punches. R5 Emmanuel Steward: "Joe is doing what he wants at this stage of the fight. Roy has not been that successful in landing too many clean punches. Roy's contact percentage has to be very low, he's throwing punches but he cannot hit Calzaghe. Well I would have to give Roy so far this round. Jones is being physically beaten, as well as out punched." Jim Lampley: Big left hand from the welshman, Jones left eye is starting to swell." What major contradictions on the same round, same broadcast, from the same commentating box, same people even. Get it together. R6 As Calzaghe wanders over stalking Jones with his hands down, bouncing his head in front of Jones... Lampley: Jones must have made a pretty good point the last round as Calzaghe seems to be paying him more respect." Kellermen: Roy is occasionally landing the lead right hand and it doesn't seem like it's having an effect on Joe, and that may be having an effect on Roy. Steward: Definitely. WTF, more major contradictions. Your all agreeing with each other, but contradicting each other, and even yourselves. What a confused mess for the viewer. R12 As Joe and Roy touch gloves twice, the second also putting their arms on each others shoulders as a sign of respect.. Lampley: Calzaghe and Jones still have respect for each other. 2 minutes later: Lampley: Maybe Calzaghe shouldn't show boat quite so much, maybe he should show Roy a little more respect. Another contradiction. Right because Jones and tonnes of other fighters don't show boat? It's fine for them? You just said how the respect each other and just showed it then say that? Lampley: "Judge Terry O'Connor (Judge) of Wales, is from Wales. No he's not, he's from England. As it clearly showed even at the start of the fight on the very screen. Post fight Kellermen interviewing Calzaghe right after the announcement of him winning. No congratulations or positive comments. Very first question is about Roy knocking him down, and it happening with Hopkins too, only he looked more hurt this time. Then after Joe talking respectfully of his opponent and thanking everyone he just goes right into showing a replay of the knock down. "Joe here's the knockdown, you can watch it, and comment." WTF you want from him Max, blood? Oh no that's on Roy, where Joe landed a better cleaner shot which was as big a thing in the fight if not bigger over more rounds, as opposed to a brief knockdown. Didn't wana discuss that in the post fight interview at all no? Kellermen"It seemed like you were trying to out Roy Jones, Roy Jones. Watching him afar from across the Atlantic through his prime did you have those kind of thoughts that you wanted to fight someone like him." He's insinuating all kinds of things here. Weird comment. There really is a guy out there with a mandate to fight the LHW champ. He's undefeated, he's young, given Pavlik's loss to Hopkins the one guy left is Chad Dawson. Do you have anything to say about Chad Dawson. Stop racking on about how there's always another guy, then contradict yourself saying there's only one and exaggerating his case for a fight. Way out of context. Kellermen: Roy we've never ever seen you cut. When you were at your best no one ever won, no one ever came close to winning. And now whether it's because punches are landing, or cos the skin is not as elastic." WTF, desperate excuses, how about talk about the hard shots Roy and Joe landed, or something else, anything? "Considering were talking to almost a 40 year old." You don't tend to say that of other guys also not far from 40, like errr oh Calzaghe. Let alone post 40 like Hopkins whose older, weird that. Then finishing off the broadcast in furthermore negative light saying how Dawson is the legitimate contender, and Calzaghes position is different to Lennox Lewis's as Lennox can say he beat everyone his era. Lampley: "If he chooses to bypass Dawson, few if any critics are going to go at him for a decision like that." I.e, move on Max, let's try to be a little more positive and congratulating about this fight that just happened and broadcast, less about you and your bloody moaning and ulterior motives and bias. Really shoddy sorry. Just expect better from a big network. Thoughts?