Comments Thread For: Mayweather Not Legally Capable To Move From May 5 Date
Collapse
-
-
Lol your missing the point. He is contractually obligated to the MGM Grand. Its funny how yall say Floyd should move the date but Pac doesnt have to fight on May 5th. And if Floyd doesnt move date he never intended to fight Pac and is ducking, but if Pac dont fight may 5th he gets a pass. You guys are clownsComment
-
A guy tweets pics of himself with his belt playing on his phone, and ppl start ****ting their pants like the last 2 years of nonsense never happened. Mayweather gives everyone crumbs for a couple years, then one day decides to give a ham sandwich and everyone freaks out.Comment
-
-
Martinez fought almost his entire career at 147. He is a 154 pounder who went up to middleweight to fight Williams and Pavlik but is not a true middleweight. He said he'd come down to 152. Mayweather fought De La Hoya at 154. What's the problem? This would be a good fight but it is way too high risk for Floyd so will never happen.
So it was okay for Martinez to go up in weight to middleweight to challenge the world champion (Pavlik) but it is too much to ask floyd to come up to fight Martinez at a weight below the jr. middleweight limit? Wow, that is lame.Comment
-
Mayweather's "contractual obligations" obviously could not absolute. Fighters get injured and have other things preventing them from "fufilling" fights. As for MGM, Mayweather, if he actually HAS it booked, and not just provisionally, he would forfeit his deposit, that is, if he made any. The amount would mean nothing to him in the event of a Pacquiao fight. The judge allowed the June 1st date to bring money to Las Vegas, so would easily allow a new date.Karen Winckler, the attorney for WBC welterweight champion Floyd Mayweather Jr., and the boxer's adviser, Leonard Ellerbe, advised BoxingScene.com that Mayweather is "not legally" capable of rescheduling his planned return on May 5th at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas. Mayweather has "contract agreements" in place with several companies, which obligate Mayweather to fight on the planned May date.
[Click Here To Read More]
All a lot of bullarkey.Comment
-
May 5th was good for Pac and JMM matter of fact Arum wanted it ,,,, do you know what that means ,,, Pac is DUCKING Floyd like his life depends on it !!Mayweather is not obligated by the criminal court to fight May 5, and even if he were, his lawyer could get that changed in a day.
He likely has contractual obligations (to MGM) to fight that day, but he should have thought about that before he booked that venue without an opponent or a contract.
It is as simple as that.Comment
-
Yeah....Not really.Look, I like Mayweather and it's a fact that Bobbo can be a d*ck. However, it's kind of silly for the angry mob that is boxingscene to be all indignant like Mayweather is now some super righteous wrongfully persecuted individual.
The guy blatantly ducked the fight in question for 2 years and the only reason he can only fight on May 5th is b/c he was convicted of committing a crime. He is at LEAST 50% responsible for this fight being pushed back this long, and he only began actively pursuing the fight when he saw a difficult style matchup that exposed Pac's vulnerability to an extent.
The man is acting clearly as an opportunist. No one forced Mayweather to get thrown in jail. With that said. Bob, do what you have to do to make this fight so we can stop talking about it.
But lets not act like Mayweather is some saint in all this. He isn't, and the boxing public is once again hyper reactionary to schoolyard tweets and manipulation tactics. If the fight doesn't get done, it's also b/c of the many days Mayweather was on vacation or not tweeting to make the fight happen. There are multiple guilty parties in this debacle.Comment
-
Comment
-
Mayweather is not obligated by the criminal court to fight May 5, and even if he were, his lawyer could get that changed in a day.
He likely has contractual obligations (to MGM) to fight that day, but he should have thought about that before he booked that venue without an opponent or a contract.
It is as simple as that.
So what you are saying is you don't know either way, just riding the legal fence?Comment
Comment