Comments Thread For: Anthony Joshua vs. Francis Ngannou - Done Deal, On Date TBD In Riyadh

[Boro]

AJ has beaten 3 reigning and defending champions: Martin, Parker and Ruiz.

As for the ref stopping Parker from fighting on the inside against AJ - fighting on the inside is not Parker's thing!

Imo, AJ is actually more dangerous close up than Parker. Yes, the ref was way to fussy, which made for a poor fight, with unnecessary breaks and restarts. But you could just as easily say that stopping them fighting on the inside benefited Parker, not AJ.

Who did they defend against like, Martin hadn't defended once, neither did Ruiz, Joshua was their respective first defence "reigning" implies a "reign" a reign implies you've proven your authority, you've certainly not done that by not defending your title(s).

And certainly not in the case of Martin who won his of Glazkov blowing his knee and retiring and of course Ruiz didn't prove his either did he!? it was proven to be a fluke...

You could argue it benefitted Parker but you could just as easily argue it benefitted Joshua more, it's not as if Ruiz didn't put him down with inside fighting.

And Parker has some decent ability inside and he's been dropping and putting people away with uppercuts and with his short arms it's pretty much a given it's from the inside.

[JakeTheBoxer]

I will be laughing all around if Ngannou somehow hurts AJ and makes him quit. It would be sweet justice..

AJ is nothing but a cherry picking fraud at this point.

[Richard]

Obvious he was gonna duck Emperor Zhang. Joshua better not embarrass boxing like that ****** fat fvkc fury did

Joshua should of fought Zhang. Not interestested in what is mainly a money grabbing fight. Wilder v Zhang has me more interested though.

[Richard]

I will be laughing all around if Ngannou somehow hurts AJ and makes him quit. It would be sweet justice..

AJ is nothing but a cherry picking fraud at this point.

I give AJ some credit though for fighting Uysk and the Fury fight would of happened had it not been more for Wilder pushing the third fight.

[kafkod]

Who did they defend against like, Martin hadn't defended once, neither did Ruiz, Joshua was their respective first defence "reigning" implies a "reign" a reign implies you've proven your authority, you've certainly not done that by not defending your title(s).

And certainly not in the case of Martin who won his of Glazkov blowing his knee and retiring and of course Ruiz didn't prove his either did he!? it was proven to be a fluke...

You could argue it benefitted Parker but you could just as easily argue it benefitted Joshua more, it's not as if Ruiz didn't put him down with inside fighting.

And Parker has some decent ability inside and he's been dropping and putting people away with uppercuts and with his short arms it's pretty much a given it's from the inside.

So, according to you, "reigning and defending champion" doesn't mean "reigning and defending champion", it means whatever your agenda at the time needs it to mean. Why does that not surprise me? Lol.

Parker, btw, really has never beaten a reigning and defending champion. He won a vacant title by beating Andy Ruiz in exactly the same way AJ beat Fat Andy ... boxing on the outside and never letting Andy get anywhere near him.

[Boro]

So, according to you, "reigning and defending champion" doesn't mean "reigning and defending champion", it means whatever your agenda at the time needs it to mean. Why does that not surprise me? Lol.

Parker, btw, really has never beaten a reigning and defending champion. He won a vacant title by beating Andy Ruiz in exactly the same way AJ beat Fat Andy ... boxing on the outside and never letting Andy get anywhere near him.

Where did i mention it meaning anything other than "reigning".

You do know that a reign requires proving you authority over you domain right, you imbecile? you haven't done that if you haven't defended you belt you simplistic fúck.

No ones cares if he hadn't defeated a reigning champion, he BECAME a reigning champion by defending multiple times, therefore Joshua by extension beat a reigning champion.

You do realise you simplistic approach to this is actually downing Joshua's resume right...

[kafkod]

Where did i mention it meaning anything other than "reigning".

You do know that a reign requires proving you authority over you domain right, you imbecile? you haven't done that if you haven't defended you belt you simplistic fúck.

No ones cares if he hadn't defeated a reigning champion, he BECAME a reigning champion by defending multiple times, therefore Joshua by extension beat a reigning champion.

You do realise you simplistic approach to this is actually downing Joshua's resume right...

And ... here come the childish insults when the crass ******ity of your comments is exposed. Why does that not surprise me either? Lol.

But hey .. two can play that game. So tell us, fuckwit ..

What is the difference, in your head, between a world champion and a reigning world champion?

What is the difference between a champion defending his belt and a defending champion?

Please answer these questions as best you can, then in future I'll know where I stand when I'm talking to brain dead window lickers like you.

[Boro]

And ... here come the childish insults when the crass ******ity of your comments is exposed. Why does that not surprise me either? Lol.

But hey .. two can play that game. So tell us, fuckwit ..

What is the difference, in your head, between a world champion and a reigning world champion?

What is the difference between a champion defending his belt and a defending champion?

Please answer these questions as best you can, then in future I'll know where I stand when I'm talking to brain dead window lickers like you.

No one was insulting you sweetheart, if you deem pointing out how an imbecile acting like an imbecile is insulting, you need to reevaluate your life son and grow a thicker skin.

Stop trying to win an argument on semantics, you know as well as I do that we're not arguing semantics here.

Any pudding can pick up a belt via email, be elevated or win vacant titles.

What makes a true champion is defending the belt, hence why you decided to argue on the peripheries.

You know your fickle semantics argument holds no water in reality, despite its validity in the dictionary.

Context matters and to deny that proves your extremely disingenuous and lack the ability to think critically or beyond your biases.

Not only that it makes me laugh that you the audacity to imply anyone is a window licker, when you're either intentionally ignoring context to try and win an argument.

Or am I to believe you're that rétarded in which case how audacious of you.

[kafkod]

No one was insulting you sweetheart, if you deem pointing out how an imbecile acting like an imbecile is insulting, you need to reevaluate your life son and grow a thicker skin.

Stop trying to win an argument on semantics, you know as well as I do that we're not arguing semantics here.

Any pudding can pick up a belt via email, be elevated or win vacant titles.

What makes a true champion is defending the belt, hence why you decided to argue on the peripheries.

You know your fickle semantics argument holds no water in reality, despite its validity in the dictionary.

Context matters and to deny that proves your extremely disingenuous and lack the ability to think critically or beyond your biases.

Not only that it makes me laugh that you the audacity to imply anyone is a window licker, when you're either intentionally ignoring context to try and win an argument.

Or am I to believe you're that rétarded in which case how audacious of you.

Stop bullshitting and answer my questions. What do you believe is the difference between a world champion and a reigning world champion?

What is the difference between a world champion defending his title and a defending champion?

And look up the definition of the word "semantics" before you try using it to cover up your ******ity.

[kafkod]

Where did i mention it meaning anything other than "reigning".

You do know that a reign requires proving you authority over you domain right, you imbecile? you haven't done that if you haven't defended you belt you simplistic fúck.

No ones cares if he hadn't defeated a reigning champion, he BECAME a reigning champion by defending multiple times, therefore Joshua by extension beat a reigning champion.

You do realise you simplistic approach to this is actually downing Joshua's resume right...

"Where did I mention anything other than reigning"

You said that Martin and Ruiz weren't reigning champions when they defended their titles against against AJ. So you clearly must think they were something other than reigning champions. If they weren't reigning champions and they weren't defending champions, what the fuck do you think they were?

"he became a reigning champion by defending multiple times"

Wtf are you talking about? A fighter becomes a reigning champion by winning a championship title and his reign lasts until he loses the title. There is no other definition of what a reigning champion is.