in response to the questioning of David Haye's back injury

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mines a pasty
    Banned
    • Mar 2009
    • 824
    • 72
    • 0
    • 956

    #1

    in response to the questioning of David Haye's back injury

    Of course his bank wasn’t injured. He did exactly the correct thing.

    He’s come out of the situation with a shot at the WBA title, free from endless ‘re-match’ clauses with the Klichko’s and if/when he does fight the brothers, and assuming he has a share of the world title pie, he can negotiate terms with the bros on a much more even basis. As it should be.

    He’s also now signed up to Sky box office – far better than Setanta, both in coverage, stability and financially.

    Was he back injured? No. Or at least I very much doubt it.

    Who’s the winner out of the situation?

    David Haye is the winner.


    Listening to some people on here I truly wonder if some of you are children, or at least in your early teens. Calling him a sissy, a joke etc. Grow up for pity’s sake.

    Boxing is a business, just as it is a sport, and David Haye is a very, very clever man.
  • Bobby Shaw
    Banned
    Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
    • Sep 2007
    • 4308
    • 236
    • 29
    • 39,810

    #2
    Too many ******s on NSB.So you guys wanted David to fight Wladmir and a week later see Setanta going bust.He wouldnt have recieved a penny for that fight and add all the rematch clauses,that fight was worthless all risk and no reward

    Comment

    Working...
    TOP