Should John Henry Lewis have been paid to fight a fight he could not possibly have been anywhere near competitive in, on account of not just the talent gap but the fact also that the chap was legally blind? Should Henry Armstrong have been paid for holding Barney Ross up and passing the last 8 or so rounds of their "fight" off as a legitimate contest. A fortiori, should Ross have been paid for taking a fight he knew he had no real chance of winning? Should Andrew Golota have been fined/banned/insulted for refusing to fight on after incurring serious injuries invisible to the paying public, but which were later established by an independent medical tribunal? Should Peter McNeeley have been denied his purse for fighting in a patently suicidal fashion? Should he be denied his purse for promising the paying public a "cocoon of horror" and then blithely walking into the artillery without so much as an attempt to make a legitimate contest of it? Should Vitali Klitschko have been denied his purse for knowingly carrying a potentially fight-ending injury into his bout with Chris Byrd, that injury subsequently forcing him to quit?? Should Paul Briggs, who belongs to that most abused member of the boxing fraternity, namely the boxers themselves, be derided and stripped not just of his financial reward, but of his legitimate past glories, for taking a fight he not only knew he had zero chance of winning, but in which, with due regard being had for his psychological, neurological and physical state, could have resulted in his death or lasting injury? And if there is to attach to Briggs such a lasting financial and reputational stigma, what then of our boy Danny Green, who took the fight with good notice of the dire straits his "opponent" was in?
Everyone else- the promoters and TV companies, have made their money, despite having at the very least, constructive knowledge of the state of Briggs health. They lead the public into this. And then Briggs did what all boxers are obliged to do anyways: he defended himself at all times. Yet it is Briggs, a most tertiary party to this farce, who is rounded upon most viciously. Go fucking figure.
Everyone involved who had prior knowledge is culpable. If Briggs was really as bad as they are saying then he and everyone else who had that knowledge deserves to be stripped of any money they were paid for this and on top should pay a hefty fine. Don't bring up Briggs career and tragic past. It has no relevance to the travesty that was played out here. He either dove or was so damaged that he could barely stand. Either way, he had no business taking this fight. I didn't watch or pay for this fight because I thought it was a farce. The fact that it ended up being one of the most embarrassing things I've ever seen in boxing makes me angry. Not because I got ripped off (I didn't) but because it shit all over a sport I love that already struggles for acceptance and legitimacy in Australia. Now it's a laughing stock. I don't care about the how or why. Green, Briggs and everyone else involved are scum. Pissing on the sport that made their living. That to me is inexcusable.
Their knowledge was pre-the fact and not after the fact. They had knowledge, constructive or actual, right from jump street. Considering the role they played in the execution of this fraud, and the fact that they had more to gain, and did in fact so gain more, then they should be fined and forced, in addition, to forefeit all profits. Their fine must exceed their profits, otherwise it's a joke. Briggs past and present are directly related to his future. With his health in decline, and with his future bleak, how much culpability do you attack to a man who saw a chance to make some bread and took it. Drowning men grab flotsam, always have done, always will do. Again, what culpability do you attach to John Henry Lewis for taking a fight he knew he could not win, due to his being blind? History has treated John Henry Lewis well. So too it should Briggs. I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, who should be the most prominent, immediate subject of your wrath? Paul Briggs? Hardly. Briggs was bringing legitimacy to Australian boxing when he refused to fold in two absolute wars with Adamek. Briggs would have to throw 20 fights before he got round to bringing boxing into disrepute, I can promise you. Green is more to blame than Briggs. And Briggs is not really to blame at all. They threw Briggs a lifeline and he grabbed it. Green and the others stood to gain far more.
I am not here to portion out blame. All are culpable, all should be punished. That Briggs may have had a less distasteful reason for doing so means nothing and only serves to obfuscate the issue. All were willing parties to this. No one is exempt. I actually quite liked Paul Briggs the fighter and I liked the way he conducted himself as a trainer for his brother. He was calm in the corner and always offered something tangible unlike say Jeff Fenech who would result more often than not to screaming in a whiny tone. It does not give me pleasure to view Briggs in this light but that is his fault. Anything he gets from the Aussie boxing fans and the boxing world in general for this is deserved. I won't cry crocodile tears for Briggs. If they had some kind of charity night or otherwise to raise money for a warrior down on his luck then there's an excellent chance I would have contributed willingly to the Briggs retirement fund. The people that paid to watch that fight weren't given that choice. They paid to see athletes perform and got their faces pissed in. All involved with prior knowledge are culpable and all should be punished. The integrity (what's left of it) of the sport demands nothing less.
A wonderful post, & the final sentence speaks to the heart of what I was getting at. Using Irish's line of logic in regards to Briggs' health being in-decline & taking an opportunity to make some bread, you could apply it to a cash-strapped bank robber.
False. False False False. You could not be more wrong. The bank robber is in the business of robbing banks. Whether he robs them out of desperation, or robs them out of fun, whether he robs them out of necessity or by way of sport, that is what he does: rob banks. At no point in time can he be said to be a credit to bank robbing, or an upstanding citizen, for robbing banks sets no good example and is contrary to the common good. Now, what is it Briggs did? He either threw a fight or came into a fight in terrible shape. This is one instance of culpability, if it is even that, set off as it is against a career which featured one, if not two, of the best fights the 175lb division has seen in recent years. Briggs has a history of utter and tee-total committment, above and beyond anything Danny Green has ever mustered, that's for sure, and most certainly above and beyond the illegal and criminal activities of a bank robber. Briggs is a tertiary partner in an incident which has visited fleeting and local disgrace on a sport which he has already embellished on a global platform. What Briggs did, was totally out of character and cannot be considered to be the latest in a long line of misdeeds by the man. It must be set-off against his history of refusing to fold in tough fights, more than can be said for Danny "Dog" Green- who quit like a cunt when the going got tough in Germany vs Beyer and plain flat-out failed when he fought Mundine. And you still have not answered my questions about John Henry Lewis. Is he too a dog, a blind man with no chance of fighting crumbling with no resistance? Paul Briggs isn't hurting boxing. What's killing boxing is that a guy like Paul Briggs can fight themselves into a state of neurological decline in toe-to-toe wars with Adamek, and then find his name sullied all because he was a tertiary partner in a scam organized by much more powerful people. Hell of a lot of love being shown to fighters round here.......
I don't know the truth of the circumstances involving Lewis --- who isn't the topic, nonetheless. If he did what Briggs did, sure, he shouldn't have been paid. Again --- Do you normally support people who don't do their job getting paid for it?
Briggs did his job. He signed the contract that saw Danny Green and a bunch of TV Execs and commentators get very well paid. Briggs did his job. He got a bunch of people into an arena and got tickets sold. Briggs did his job, he went 24 hellish rounds with Adamek, thus making him a big enough name with a bad enough brain which in turn made him a good opponent for Danny Green. Oh, Briggs more than did his job.
Interesting discussion guys. http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/ot...paul-briggs-camp/story-fn4pw13c-1225896483784 http://www.smh.com.au/sport/boxing/from-hope-to-hospital-how-a-farce-unfolded-20100723-10p2e.html
All told, i'd me more inclined to Irish's angle, particularly after reading that article above. Seems like cash desperation and a temptation to get some of the glory back drew him in but he probably realised at some point he was nowhere near right. I would put more of the blame on Green and the promoters who probably had a fair idea what the real story was. On the basis of the two Adamek fights, I too would have been happy to hand over the PPV value as a thanks, they were great fights
:jaw:Salaco is agreeing with me. The highlighted part is the essence of what I am talking about........Briggs had a lot of credit in my account, and does not attract as much culpability as he otherwise might, with due regard being had for 1. His previous performances. 2.The constructive knowledge the other parties had of this "situation". I think it is pitiful that people are rounding on Briggs....while more culpable people, who made more money, get away with it.
Sorry guys but I don't agree at all. Again this wasn't a charity night. This wasn't a donation for Briggs' retirement. This was a professional fight. Be misty eyed over Paul if you like but he robbed the boxing public of their money just as surely as Danny Green did. Great fights in the past or not that fact does not change.
Right-wing ideals Genie,.. to witness it's superior and cunning powers brings a smile to all who think within that zone, it was a 'clean hit' so to speak. :Thumbs:
Nope. You are wrong. Danny Green ripped them off far more than Briggs did. After all, it is one thing to expect a desperate man to steal. It is something else for a less desperate figure to go along with it, especially where he stands to gain more despite being as well versed in the scam as anybody else. Furthermore, when you consider that Green never even won a meaningful fight in his life, and plain outright bombed in his two biggest fights {Mundine and Beyer}...well...figure it out.
We'll have to agree to disagree then. My opinion is you are implying a disparity that doesn't exist. All parties went into that fight with the intention of duping Aussie boxing fans out of their money. All should wear the blame equally. By your rationale, we should just wheel out every past fighter who ever showed courage and give him an instant payday for nothing. That sham of a fight may end up being the catalyst that gets boxing dropped from pay tv over here. So because Briggs wanted one last unearned payday, up and coming boxers may get no tv exposure and the sport of boxing can effectively cease in Australia. That's a high price to pay for one washed up fighter. Briggs is just as much at fault as Green, the promoters and anyone else that knew about his condition going into that fight. You appear so wrapped up in hatred for Green that you've forgotten that it's about the sport of boxing first and foremost.
Ah but don't underestimate the stupidity of the common Australian Genie, this is why the Mundine era has been successfully stretched out for so long, I have no doubts it will continue until every leech regiume is nice and fat and laughing at the 'electorates' so to speak, (for it is the season)....and, won't the media help them out, oh yes, will they fucking ever.
The disparity is obvious. Green didn't need the money AS desperately as Briggs. The TV people....didn't need the money AT ALL. In terms of desperate pressing need, Briggs was top of the list. In terms of having made the fight, it is Briggs who had prove himself on the highest level and garnered the most international attention. Only one person had their arm twisted here and it was not Green or his buddies. That's not my rationale. Briggs didn't get an "instant payday" for nothing. He got this "instant payday" {no doubt Green got paid more} because his international recognition made it a viable occasion for TV..Most Australian boxing should not be on Pay TV in the first instance anyways for one simple reason: It's shite. Take that up with the TV Executives. They televised this shite knowing it was going to be shite. Don't try and tell me that poor, brain-damaged Paul Briggs is the big player in this fiasco. Please. No, Briggs is not as much at fault as Green. Green knew the score, is a healty fighter with far fewer miles on the clock, and with less pressing financial concerns. I don't hate Green, I just know him to be a dog and a canine of robust repute, and he more than played his part in this mess.
The disparity is obvious. Green didn't need the money AS desperately as Briggs. The TV people....didn't need the money AT ALL. In terms of desperate pressing need, Briggs was top of the list. In terms of having made the fight, it is Briggs who had prove himself on the highest level and garnered the most international attention. Only one person had their arm twisted here and it was not Green or his buddies. That's not my rationale. Briggs didn't get an "instant payday" for nothing. He got this "instant payday" {no doubt Green got paid more} because his international recognition made it a viable occasion for TV..Most Australian boxing should not be on Pay TV in the first instance anyways for one simple reason: It's shite. Take that up with the TV Executives. They televised this shite knowing it was going to be shite. Don't try and tell me that poor, brain-damaged Paul Briggs is the big player in this fiasco. Please. No, Briggs is not as much at fault as Green. Green knew the score, is a healty fighter with far fewer miles on the clock, and with less pressing financial concerns. I don't hate Green, I just know him to be a dog and a canine of robust repute, and he more than played his part in this mess.
Whilst I now believe you are trolling I will answer this. I have said that all involved are culpable. You somehow took that to mean I blame Briggs exclusively. All are at fault, all should be punished. Green is not exempt from that.
Yes but to what extent is Green to blame? More or less than Briggs, or equally so? I ain't trolling.....I don't troll.
what i dont understand is this. why not make it a bit more realistic? if you're gonna take a dive, try not to get KOed by a jab that barely lands.
How about letting the public know Green didn't beat you legit, to rescue your pride? He wanted us to know it was a fake...& people are still finding ways to try & draw it up as a real contest. Amazing.
