Comments Thread For: Whyte Wants Immediate Rematch Clause Removed From Joshua Contract

[joe strong]

Whyte be thinking he's the A-side here. Just take the money ffs. Reminds of when Latrell Sprewell rejected a 14 million dollar contract because "he had kids to feed", now he's broke

He agreed to the money. He doesn’t want an immediate rematch clause which apparently is in the contract. Joshua doesn’t even have a belt. Whyte wants it so the winner gets the Wilder fight in Saudi Arabia in December. There is no need for a rematch. If Joshua wins he goes to SA but if he loses he wants to prevent Whyte from getting that opportunity. It is a pretty bad look on Hearn & Joshua. They lack confidence & if that is the case why not take a weaker opponent than Whyte? The problem here is Hearn & AJ not Whyte…

[Boxviewer]

Same can be said for Wilder/Fury. 3 fights and Fury dominated em all 3 with 2 emphatic kos.

Exactly.

[STREET CLEANER]

Where would Whyte go if he beats AJ? The only dude out there is Wilder and that is not a lot of money to get decapitated.

[A_State501]

Same can be said for Wilder/Fury. 3 fights and Fury dominated em all 3 with 2 emphatic kos.

I think Canelo vs Bivol is the better example. Canelo was beaten pillar to post. He didn't even have Bivol hurt at any point in the fight. Yet Canelo and the men that live vicariously through him wanted to run it back.

[bullydean]

Where would Whyte go if he beats AJ? The only dude out there is Wilder and that is not a lot of money to get decapitated.

Saudi money is a lot and Whyte has already been battered so much one more KO isn't going to affect him that much.

[thack]

Same can be said for Wilder/Fury. 3 fights and Fury dominated em all 3 with 2 emphatic kos.

Sure , the list is endless but the conversation is about Whyte and Joshua.

[Nash out]

Whyte is right. "You gotta fight, for your right, to face Wilder." Beastie Boys out

[Apollo7]

Why has josh got rematch clause. If hes scared of losing, Josh needs to fight a weaker opponent than WHyte is? So no need for any rematch clauses.

It doesn't matter how weak the opponent is. They could be fighting Hugh Grant and they would want a rematch clause. It's an insurance policy and the sensible thing to do if you can.

[juggernaut666]

He agreed to the money. He doesn’t want an immediate rematch clause which apparently is in the contract. Joshua doesn’t even have a belt. Whyte wants it so the winner gets the Wilder fight in Saudi Arabia in December. There is no need for a rematch. If Joshua wins he goes to SA but if he loses he wants to prevent Whyte from getting that opportunity. It is a pretty bad look on Hearn & Joshua. They lack confidence & if that is the case why not take a weaker opponent than Whyte? The problem here is Hearn & AJ not Whyte…

Whyte had a rematch clause with Povetkin , he doesn’t or ever see a title shot had he not have it after getting knocked out the first time , he shouldn’t even be getting any opportunity like this regardless. What don’t make sense is he’s completely out of the picture without this fight in the first place .so he’s basically going to walk and not even be involved in any type of Wilder talks ,he’s basically done and will go fight others fir lesser money Lol

[Jwil20]

Whyte is going to miss his blessing. You asked for the fight and you got the fight. Of course Hearns going to make the contract favorable to his side though I don’t get the point to add a rematch clause for Joshua. My opinion this is a gift for Whyte as its a guaranteed big payday twice.

If Joshua losses, he probably wouldn’t take a rematch; for one losing to Whyte is bad enough but surely can’t risk it happening twice and secondly Joshua knows regardless of outcome he has a big payday with Wilder. I see Joshua still fighting Wilder win lose or draw.