Comments Thread For: Porter: Rematch With Kell Brook Would Be Different

[SkillspayBills]

There must be some anti-rematch clause rule. I just don't understand why champions don't put rematch clauses in all their matches.

[-PBP-]

He needs to get back in line. This is welterweight. If you take aN L there's 8 other fighters ready to step in.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

There must be some anti-rematch clause rule. I just don't understand why champions don't put rematch clauses in all their matches.

There is. Kell Brook was the mandatory challenger hence there can be no rematch clause.

[junior gong]

It would be different, easier for Kell.

[PunchyPotorff]

"Porter: Rematch With Kell Brook Would Be Different"

Yeah, it would be different. It would be fought on a different date, and you would be beat down even worse.

Maybe in the meantime, you and Sam Soliman should get together to compare notes. Two of the most pathetic fighting styles I have seen in 50 years of watching the sport.

[peplz]

It would be different, easier for Kell.

You still want to beat black people death and put people who you disagree with in front of a firing squad?

[DARKSEID]

There is no dimension where Shawn Porter deserves a rematch with kell brook.

Brook made him look like a 12 year old amateur.

[Grimmer]

Never happening.

If Hearn sends Kell over to the U.S. to defend his title it'll be for megabucks against someone like Marquez, Pacquaio or Mayweather.

Otherwise he's going to defend in the UK again Khan. Failing that The IBF mando looks a walkover.

It makes zero sense for Brook to give Porter a rematch. It's far too risky and Brook can make better money elsewhere.

[Grimmer]

There must be some anti-rematch clause rule. I just don't understand why champions don't put rematch clauses in all their matches.

You're not serious?

[SplitSecond]

porter had his best succes playing counter-puncher