Amir Khan: "I'm not risking my life. I'm not fighting Brook"

[Uklad]

yeah, sure he said that mate !

Lol.

[LacedUp]

yeah, sure he said that mate !

Lol.

He also said: "Brook just wants an easy payday against me"

Same guy who said he could end Brook's career.

[IronDanHamza]

Misleading title.

[Weltschmerz]

There's a full stop in between. Perfectly acceptable in journalism.

Misquoting is acceptable too?

He seemed similarly unconvinced that he would take on his British rival Kell Brook. “I’ve fought the best fighters in the world and still am fighting the best fighters in the world, I’m still the number one position for the best world titles in the world as well. But the thing with Kell Brook, I just think there’s no point because he’s not fighting the A-list fighters and also because I'm a little biatch.

[Combat Talk Radio]

You guys are reacting wrong. He DID say what was in the title.

The problem is, the way the title is worded makes a false implication because of how it's written - aka click bait. Then the OP proceeded to edit the quote and add his own salt (in red).

What the title implies:
"I feel Brook is a risk to my health, that's why I'm not fighting him"

What the article says:
"I won't risk my health (going back up to MW). Oh, and also, I don't feel like fighting Brook because he's not worth it."

DESPITE suffering a devastating knockout against then WBC middleweight champion Saul “Canelo” Alvarez, Amir Khan maintained he would box the Mexican again, but only down in his division – welterweight.

“I don’t think I’ll be going up to that weight again,” Khan told the Saima Ajram show. “I’m going to be real and I’m going to tell you there’s no point because I’m risking my life and my health

...

He seemed similarly unconvinced that he would take on his British rival Kell Brook. “I’ve fought the best fighters in the world and still am fighting the best fighters in the world, I’m still the number one position for the best world titles in the world as well. But the thing with Kell Brook, I just think there’s no point because he’s not fighting the A-list fighters and also because I'm a little biatch. I’m taking tough punishment fighting the best fighters in the world and Kell Brook’s fighting the easy guys. He wants to fight me, he wants to make big money, he wants to make easy money fighting me. So I’m not going to give him the opportunity. I just want him to prove himself and if he proves himself and fights even half of the fighters I’ve fought then I’ll take the fight,” Amir insisted. “Why should I give him that opportunity when he doesn’t deserve it?”

http://www.boxingnewsonline.net/amir-khan-would-fight-canelo-alvarez-again-but-not-at-middleweight/

He's not wrong though about Brook not taking risky fights. It's like David Haye for welters.

[IronDanHamza]

You guys are reacting wrong. He DID say what was in the title.

The problem is, the way the title is worded makes a false implication because of how it's written - aka click bait. Then the OP proceeded to edit the quote and add his own salt (in red).

What the title implies:
"I feel Brook is a risk to my health, that's why I'm not fighting him"

What the article says:
"I won't risk my health (going back up to MW). Oh, and also, I don't feel like fighting Brook because he's not worth it."



He's not wrong though about Brook not taking risky fights. It's like David Haye for welters.

Exactly, it's misleading.

The title implies that Khan doesn't want to fight Brook because it's a risk to his health when that's not what he said at all.

[LacedUp]

Exactly, it's misleading.

The title implies that Khan doesn't want to fight Brook because it's a risk to his health when that's not what he said at all.

Hey it's not my fault if people can't seperate two sentences from each other. Those were the two main points of the article, and are split by a full stop. It's 100% acceptable in journalism.

[LacedUp]

You guys are reacting wrong. He DID say what was in the title.

The problem is, the way the title is worded makes a false implication because of how it's written - aka click bait. Then the OP proceeded to edit the quote and add his own salt (in red).

What the title implies:
"I feel Brook is a risk to my health, that's why I'm not fighting him"

What the article says:
"I won't risk my health (going back up to MW). Oh, and also, I don't feel like fighting Brook because he's not worth it."



He's not wrong though about Brook not taking risky fights. It's like David Haye for welters.

Khan is a little girl, that's what we know.

[LacedUp]

Misquoting is acceptable too?

No but it is funny.

[IronDanHamza]

Hey it's not my fault if people can't seperate two sentences from each other. Those were the two main points of the article, and are split by a full stop. It's 100% acceptable in journalism.

Why even bother playing dumb? What you're doing is very transparent.