Comments Thread For: Hearn: We Hope Team Fury Can Solve This Problem, But We Have To Look Out For Anthony Joshua

[Toffee]

Young Edward, it’s not a “problem”....there is no problem. There is a legally binding judgment regarding a legally binding contract. I don’t get what this man doesn’t understand about the situation. Move on hairplugs, go seek world domination elsewhere

You're wrong. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.

A retired judge can't order a man to put on gloves and fight another man.

FFS, where's your brain?

[davefromvancouv]

You're wrong. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.

A retired judge can't order a man to put on gloves and fight another man.

FFS, where's your brain?

He can if the man signed a contract with a rematch clause, then tried to avoid honoring it.

[786]

Eddie got his wish. He knew the fight wasn't going to happen but he fooled everybody into believing he was doing all the running around when all he did was contact the organisers of the AJ vs Ruiz 2 fight.

It doesn't take much for Eddie to fool these mis-matchroom morons.

I think most, if not all blame should be on Fury and his team. Having said that, the thing I'm blaming Eddie for is his naivety for ignoring the whole arbitration thing and seemingly going ahead for the fight as if it held no significance just because Arum said it'll be ok. Here's the thing, was Eddie really that naive to think that a fighter who has not honored a contractual obligation to another fighter and is now in court with the other guy can sign to fight AJ in the midst of this legal battle? His fans, yes they are naive because this isn't what they do day in, day out and they believe every word Eddie says but a guy with Eddie's experience, his pops, advisers etc etc, no one thought this might jeopardize the fight from happening? Really?! Not one person at matchroom thought, 'hold on a sec'? I find that very hard to believe.

The whole thing just stinks of manipulation and dishonesty but ultimately, Fury and his team are to blame for this.

[Oldskoolg]

He can if the man signed a contract with a rematch clause, then tried to avoid honoring it.

I’m not even going to argue with that emotional kid.

[Toffee]

He can if the man signed a contract with a rematch clause, then tried to avoid honoring it.

No, you're wrong too.

A judge can't force two men to fight. A contract can't force two men to fight.

They can rule a contract is valid. They can rule that a contract has been breached. They can award damages for breach of contract.

It's very, very simple and not up for debate.

[factsarenice]

Arbitration was always about gaining leverage for MONEY, not redemption but MONEY because it's always about MONEY.

Hearn said, “Let’s see. Let’s see if Team Fury can pull something out of the bag for their fighter… Translation = Bob and Team Fury will need to pull MONEY out of THEIR pockets to pay Wilder's step aside MONEY ...not me.

Eddie Hearn may initially avoid contributing to Wilder's step-aside MONEY but Hayman is a MONEY-MAN and he knows there are 100's of millions floating around and he and team Wilder want part of it. Al will almost certainly ask for a wall of step-aside MONEY and possibility some type of a guaranty or option for the winner because THAT's where the real MONEY is. The problem with the option is that it screws up 100's of millions more in a AJ/Fury trilogy.

The rabbit hole doesn't stop there...it can escalate because Fury will have final say and he's a gambler. Fury, firmly believes that he can beat Wilder and he may call Hayman's bluff and refuse to give Wilder step aside MONEY. Fury like Hayman is smart, he understands leverage and he knows that beating Wilder a 3rd time will not only end the Wilder gravy train but also severely diminish the value of Al Hayman's entire heavyweight stable. If Fury call's Hayman's bluff, Al Hayman will be forced to decide if he is truly willing to risk it all on the premise that Wilder can beat Fury and to that I say No.

In the end, it's about position, leverage and MONEY, it's always about the MONEY. Everything else is chit chat!

[Toffee]

I’m not even going to argue with that emotional kid.

There's no argument. I'm not even offering opinion. I'm telling you that you're incorrect.

[Motorcity Cobra]

Wilder & Fury have a stadium reserved & the WBO has ordered AJ to fight Usyk. There's nothing to resolve. Get on with the fights

[Bronx2245]

Arbitration was always about gaining leverage for MONEY, not redemption but MONEY because it's always about MONEY.

Hearn said, “Let’s see. Let’s see if Team Fury can pull something out of the bag for their fighter… Translation = Bob and Team Fury will need to pull MONEY out of THEIR pockets to pay Wilder's step aside MONEY ...not me.

Eddie Hearn may initially avoid contributing to Wilder's step-aside MONEY but Hayman is a MONEY-MAN and he knows there are 100's of millions floating around and he and team Wilder want part of it. Al will almost certainly ask for a wall of step-aside MONEY and possibility some type of a guaranty or option for the winner because THAT's where the real MONEY is. The problem with the option is that it screws up 100's of millions more in a AJ/Fury trilogy.

The rabbit hole doesn't stop there...it can escalate because Fury will have final say and he's a gambler. Fury, firmly believes that he can beat Wilder and he may call Hayman's bluff and refuse to give Wilder step aside MONEY. Fury like Hayman is smart, he understands leverage and he knows that beating Wilder a 3rd time will not only end the Wilder gravy train but also severely diminish the value of Al Hayman's entire heavyweight stable. If Fury call's Hayman's bluff, Al Hayman will be forced to decide if he is truly willing to risk it all on the premise that Wilder can beat Fury and to that I say No.

In the end, it's about position, leverage and MONEY, it's always about the MONEY. Everything else is chit chat!

Deontay Wilder Won't Take Step-Aside Deal To Allow Fury-Joshua, Says Scott
May 18, 2021

Retired heavyweight contender Malik Scott, who currently trains former world champion Deontay Wilder, says the once-beaten boxer will not accept a step-aside agreement to allow Tyson Fury to face Anthony Joshua in a full division unification on August 14 in Saudi Arabia...

Scott took to social media to make it known that his boxer will not step away from the third Fury fight.

“Wilder declined and had no interest in step-aside money. Y’all dealing with a whole different type motherf---- over here. He want the blood, not that step-aside money. Retribution is upon us," Scott stated.

https://www.boxingscene.com/deontay-wilder-take-step-aside-deal-allow-fury-joshua-says-scott--157732

Do you find it odd, how fast Arum booked the stadium in Las Vegas?

[mawoodhouse]

No, you're wrong too.

A judge can't force two men to fight. A contract can't force two men to fight.

They can rule a contract is valid. They can rule that a contract has been breached. They can award damages for breach of contract.

It's very, very simple and not up for debate.

You are right, a judge cannot order 2 men to fight. However, part of that contract would have been whoever won the 2nd fight MUST defend the WBC belt against the loser in the 3rd fight. So the WBC belt is attached to that contract, meaning if Fury won’t fight Wilder, then he would have to give up the WBC belt....which the WBC likely agreed to, but let’s hope they didn’t. We don’t want to see Fury give up the WBC belt cause we want to see him fight Joshua for all 4 belts....otherwise, besides being an all British fight, there would be no real reason for Joshua to fight Fury right now without the WBC belt on the line.....cause he wants that belt.