The BBC are nuthuggers - official

[Dick Buffman]

The folly is that people expect the BBC to be objective cuz' they talk with a funny "sophisticated" accent when in reality the BBC is one of the biggest propaganda machines masquerading around as a respectable news outfit.

They don't call it the British Brainwashing Corp. for nothing.

[Dave Rado]

The folly is that people expect the BBC to be objective cuz' they talk with a funny "sophisticated" accent .

No they expect it because that's what the BBC have for the most part delivered, for more than 70 years, and because it's written into the BBC's constitution and is how they justify their existence.

[P-Killer]

I'm not saying this is a good fight but it will sell well to the UK.

Casual sprots people will think OK Harrison had a gold medal, I remember him.

[Dave Rado]

Update:

I've just received a reply from Mike Costello, as follows:

Hello Dave ... thanks for your comments

Your contention that Haye doesn't want to fight the Klitschko brothers is a viewpoint. I was stating a fact - there is ill-feeling between the two camps because of the nature of previous negotiations. The dispute is about much more than a 50-50 share of the purse.

As obvious as it might seem to you "and anyone who really follows boxing" that Haye doesn't want to fight them, Haye himself says otherwise.

The "lazy fight schedule" you describe is by no means extraordinary. The Klitschko brothers will each fight only twice this year, as will Manny Pacquiao.

I did not compare Haye-Harrison to Lewis-Bruno in 1993. I said it would be the biggest heavyweight contest in the UK since then. I stand by that assertion.

As for reporting a "premature" story, I did not say the fight was "done and dusted". I pointed out, correctly, that Harrison's camp said terms had been agreed. For this fight, Harrison is being promoted by Matchroom, a company noted for a level of integrity often missing in boxing.

You seem ready to accept Haye's word in this instance ("Haye denies this"), yet you refuse to believe his reasons for not fighting the Klitschkos.

Thanks again for your time


Mike

I've replied to his email as follows:

Hi Mike

Many thanks for taking the time to reply, I appreciate it.

I was not dis*****g the fact that there is ill feeling between Haye and the Klitschkos, but was only dis*****g your assertion (or viewpoint) that their ill feeling is the primary reason that the fight is not taking place, for which I have seen no evidence. That assertion or viewpoint is not fact.

Again, you make an assertion (or give a viewpoint) in your email that the dispute is about much more than a 50/50 share of the purse, without providing any evidence for that statement. Most people in the boxing world outside the UK are highly sceptical that it is really about anything more than Haye not wanting to fight them yet.

You said I was ready to accept Haye's claim that the contract is not done and dusted, but you are misrepresenting what I said. I am equally sceptical about Haye's and Harrison's statements on the subject. I simply criticised your report, which appeared to me to accept Harrison's statement completely at face value and did not mention the fact that Haye has disputed it. The introduction to your report began with the statement:

"An all-British world heavyweight title fight between champion David Haye and challenger Audley Harrison in November is a good deal closer this morning."

Not, as I would have expected: "According to Audley Harrison, an all-British world heavyweight title fight between champion David Haye and challenger Audley Harrison in November is a good deal closer this morning."

That wording clearly gave the impression that there was no journalistic scepticism at all about Harrison's statement, and it did not mention that Haye disputes Harrison's claim. Then you started your report: "Harrison's camp say terms have been agreed and it's now up to Haye to sign the contract.", and again I would have expected a BBC report to have mentioned that this version of events is disputed by Haye, but it wasn't mentioned.

Dave

I must give him kudos for bothering to reply to me in such detail, even though I disagree with most of what he said.

[P-Killer]

Update:

I've just received a reply from Mike Costello, as follows:




I've replied to his email as follows:




I must give him kudos for bothering to reply to me in such detail, even though I disagree with most of what he said.

He actually sent a good response. He had it covered

[P-Killer]

The folly is that people expect the BBC to be objective cuz' they talk with a funny "sophisticated" accent when in reality the BBC is one of the biggest propaganda machines masquerading around as a respectable news outfit.

They don't call it the British Brainwashing Corp. for nothing.

Not all of the BBC is bias.

Heck most TV palces are now though, if it means they get money, then they do it.

[La Cucaracha]

No they expect it because that's what the BBC have for the most part delivered, for more than 70 years, and because it's written into the BBC's constitution and is how they justify their existence.

Dave, I appreciate your candor and honest appraisal on this subject.

Many times I have disagreed with you on this site (under a different name obviously) but the letter you sent to Mr. Costello is exactly the kind of approach that all UK boxing fans should take if they truly want to see the sport of boxing prosper, both inside and outside of your borders.

Whether Harrison-Haye makes money or not, and whether or not it sells to the casual fans distracts from the important point; which is that fighters like Haye who routinely fleece the fans with bogus fights are tearing the sport apart. And for a major news publication like the BBC to support his choices makes the situation all the more distressing.

I believe the most disturbing part of the article is the comparison to Lewis-Bruno.

For what it's worth I believe Frank Bruno is superior to David Haye.. and Audley Harrison... well you get the point.

Many people consider Lewis amongst the top 10-15 Heavyweights of all time, and for what it is worth Frank Bruno was giving him hell on Earth and was actually winning one scorecard 59-55 while being even on the others when he got careless and got himself knocked out. (Let's also remember Lewis was holding and hitting Bruno in a blatantly illegal manner in the finishing sequence).

Bruno was for all intents and purposes, the equal to Lewis that night.

Both men are far superior to Haye in my book, and it's disgraceful to compare a Haye-Harrison matchup to the classic fight that Lewis and Bruno put on.

If I were an Englishman myself, and one who appreciated the history of the great English fighters, I would consider this article a giant slap in the face.

[S.G.]

Honestly don't really see a problem with the aricle. As the guy said, it's mostly factual; the only real part you could take issue with is "the ongoing ill feeling between Haye and the Klitschko brothers, Wladamir and Vitali, has opened the door for 38 year old Harrison" which is, I suppose, too neutral and doesn't fairly distribute the blame (which most of us know Haye deserves the lion's share of.) Wouldn't deem it worthy of a letter of complaint, especially compared to some of the other stuff out there.

[Southpaw Stinger]

****** ****s. I ain't watching out of principal.

Fuck Harrison and fuck Haye too.

[La Cucaracha]

Honestly don't really see a problem with the aricle. As the guy said, it's mostly factual; the only real part you could take issue with is "the ongoing ill feeling between Haye and the Klitschko brothers, Wladamir and Vitali, has opened the door for 38 year old Harrison" which is, I suppose, too neutral and doesn't fairly distribute the blame (which most of us know Haye deserves the lion's share of.) Wouldn't deem it worthy of a letter of complaint, especially compared to some of the other stuff out there.

Comparing it to Lewis-Bruno is a disgrace and an insult to both Lewis and Bruno.

Also, an insult to us fight fans who have enough respect for the history of the sport to know better.