Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: Hearn Shoots Down, Rejects Tyson Fury's 'Lineal Title' Claim

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Toffee View Post
    Yes it does, for exactly the reasons you've given.

    Fury v Joshua (1 v 2) gives us a lineal champ and takes any debate regarding Fury's "retirement" out of the equation.

    Just as you believe Klitschko v Povetkin did, which took any doubt about Klitschko winning it against Chagaev out of the equation.
    Two totally different things. In the Klitschko case, a new lineage needed to be started by #1 and #2 after Lewis retired. Chagaev was rated #3 after Vitali. Povetkin was #2 when Vitali retired. Minor detail...

    Originally posted by uppercut510 View Post
    whats going on with this guy hearn????
    Originally posted by uppercut510 View Post
    fury is the lineal champ why is this even a debate?
    In the Fury case, Joshua fans desperately want Joshua to "seen" as the best, so they refuse to acknowledge that Fury is the lineal champion until Joshua fights him.

    But it's not working. Fury is back and is still referred to as the LINEAL CHAMPION, the head of the division. No matter how many media sources they change, like the RING and, just recently, Wikipedia.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by SeGoodland View Post
      Look, I agree with what you are saying, you can't relinquish the lineal title. Yes, Tyson Fury is the "Lineal Champion". FACT.

      BUT the Lineage slogan/motto/whatever is 'the man that beat the man'. Tyson Fury won the Lineage from the man who didn't beat the man. Klitschko was given the Lineal title. So its not a real title when it can be given out and not earned.
      Klitschko was not "given" the lineal title. He won the Ring & lineal titles when he beat Chagaev, who was considered the no.1 contender.

      Lennox Lewis retired legitimately, leaving the title vacant.

      Originally posted by Robbie Barrett View Post
      YDKSAB. There's no rule saying they can't be stripped. Fury did technically retire and was also banned for PEDs. All the sites that track lineal don't have Fury as lineal champ.
      Who has ever been stripped of the lineal title other than Muhammad Ali, who was forced to retire for 4 years?

      I mean, Fury retired & unretired the same day, you really count that as a retirement? Then he said he was retiring again, but started plotting a return to the ring. just a few months later. Mind you all of this took place on Twitter.

      That's not a real retirement man, come on.

      So yes, he relinquished all his alphabet belts and momentarily "retired" over Twitter, but never really stopped being considered an active fighter and was always staging comeback fights even when he was like 300lbs.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by The D3vil View Post
        Klitschko was not "given" the lineal title. He won the Ring & lineal titles when he beat Chagaev, who was considered the no.1 contender.

        Lennox Lewis retired legitimately, leaving the title vacant.
        Yes, I know...patronising. So, the Lineal title's 'motto' is 'The Man that beat the Man'. Klitschko did NOT do this when he 'won' the Lineal title.

        Fine, ok...he was 'Awarded' the 'titles', which is the same thing.

        award
        [əˈwɔːd]

        VERB
        give or order the giving of (something) as an official payment, compensation, or prize to (someone).


        Note that it clearly says 'give' and 'giving' in the definition

        The Ring and Lineal titles are not from governing bodies that sanction bouts, they are a supplemental belt and/or title that is given to the winner in order to promote the fighters status, on top of the sanctioning bodies titles. Do you disagree?

        He was given the Ring and Lineal titles.
        Last edited by SeGoodland; 12-19-2018, 05:58 AM.

        Comment


        • We should make Tyson a belt to go with his title.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Nusky View Post
            Another mayweather/pacquiao situtation and everyone is falling for it AGAIN. This is a textbook long con and we're the marks.

            I'll still be in attendance when this fight happens 3 or 4yrs from now getting fleeced for my hard earned dollars like everyone else.
            The difference is that guys like Floyd were great fighters that stayed excellent.

            I wouldn't be at all surprised if Wilder and AJ are not at the top of the HW game in 3 or 4 years, depending on how the division unfolds and who comes though. I don't think either are that good where i'd be confident they will still be on top in 4 years time.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by SeGoodland View Post
              I don't even know where to start with this but lets go with...

              Tyson Fury won the 'Lineal Title' from a man who didn't beat the man who held it before.

              Joshua didn't get the titles out of a cereal box. He beat the current holders to unify. It's Fury's loss and fault that he wasn't the man in the ring when Joshua won.

              There may have been a fantasy based argument that Martin or Parker were babysitting Fury's titles considering how they won them but they lost them.

              I don't own my old house just because I've moved to a bigger and better one. That house now belongs to someone else because I decided to move on. Fury did the same with his titles when he had them.

              Terrible analogy. It'd only make sense if someone stripped your house from you and give it to someone else.

              Let's be fair, the IBF stripped Fury before all that stuff even happened because he couldn't face a mandatory due to a rematch clause with Wlad.

              The IBF are Hearn's boys, that's why all his champs used to get IBF title shots. They couldn't wait to strip Fury of that belt, knowing some bum could pick it up and sell it to AJ. It was all done by design.

              You can say what you want about the other belts, but Fury was getting unfairly stripped of the IBF within about a week or two of beating Wlad. Actually, they had no right to strip him because the rematch clause technically hadn't been triggered when they said they would.

              The IBF and Hearn stole Fury's belt with a plan to get it in AJ's hands.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by SeGoodland View Post
                Yes, I know...patronising. So, the Lineal title's 'motto' is 'The Man that beat the Man'. Klitschko did NOT do this when he 'won' the Lineal title.

                Fine, ok...he was 'Awarded' the 'titles', which is the same thing.

                award
                [əˈwɔːd]

                VERB
                give or order the giving of (something) as an official payment, compensation, or prize to (someone).


                Note that it clearly says 'give' and 'giving' in the definition

                The Ring and Lineal titles are not from governing bodies that sanction bouts, they are a supplemental belt and/or title that is given to the winner in order to promote the fighters status, on top of the sanctioning bodies titles. Do you disagree?

                He was given the Ring and Lineal titles.
                The "man" Lennox Lewis legitimately retired, so the title is then bestowed to the winner of the 1 & 2 contenders for the title, which Klit & Chagaev were considered.

                Klit won and therefore was the man. He earned it.

                Comment


                • Comment


                  • Originally posted by Laligalaliga View Post
                    Lolx.... This laughable.
                    Explain please

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP