dfOAFC Posted September 7, 2008 Author Share Posted September 7, 2008 Even still. I'm pretty sure there would have been people celebrating Nas getting beat by Barrera never!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfOAFC Posted September 7, 2008 Author Share Posted September 7, 2008 In my eyes Khan is pretty much a gentleman in and out of the ring and behind the wheel of a car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 I loved Naz, I was at the Barrera fight and sat next to a Mexican who knew his boxing. I had a great night that night as I saw a British sportsman come up short against one of the all time greats and had the pleasure of sharing it with a Barrera fan. If you haven't seen them watch all 3 of the Barrera-Morales fights, Barrera was robbed in the first (an absolute classic) given the win in the 2nd when he shouldn't (dull fight tho) and finally settled it in the 3rd. No disgrace in losing to Barrera. Naz went off the rails as he couldn't cope with defeat, eventually you will lose a fight, how you come bask from that is what defines a true champion. Barrera did it, Lewis did it, Ali did it, Tyson did it. I like Khan, he has a lot fo what is needed to make it, quick hands, quick feet, at times a killer instinct and can pull shots and angles out that aren't expected, much like Naz. However, he can't take the good shots and to be fair not many can. The kid who beat Khan last night looks the business and I look forward to watching his career as I like the sport of boxing. I hope Khan, picks himself up, gets back in the gym and learns his trade. As for the hype, if the game is to stand in a ring and debilitate the other bloke before he debilitates you then in my book you can hype yourself as much as you want. If you don't believe you are the best and use all your promotional might to get this across then you are in the wrong game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfOAFC Posted September 7, 2008 Author Share Posted September 7, 2008 Take Tennis for example and Murray. Just because he's British doesnt mean everyone likes him. He's the tennis equivalent to Khan. Cocky, Overhyped, Over-rated and believes what the media say to inflate his ego when he's done nothing. It's the reason I cant stand him either. speaking of which, just laid the posh Jock **** at 1.68 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfOAFC Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 speaking of which, just laid the posh Jock **** at 1.68 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Naz had the potential to be a genuine great but decided to stop using his talent and just rely on hitting the other bloke harder than he could hit him - you obviously need a decent jaw to do that but it's no way to establish yourself as a legend. I seem to recall he also had a little scrape in his motors as well. I really don't see how anyone can compare the two as people and prefer Hamed, he was an arse of the first order. At least Khan does all the work with schools, presenting awards to servicemen and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) Naz had the potential to be a genuine great but decided to stop using his talent and just rely on hitting the other bloke harder than he could hit him - you obviously need a decent jaw to do that but it's no way to establish yourself as a legend. Thing is, it served him well for some time too. He made about 10 defences of his titles and is thought of by many to be a British boxing great. Some have gone as far to say the best British boxer of all time. Hamed had the talent and lacked the desire to really go again after the Barrera defeat. Khan has the desire but you can't put muscles in your chin. He keeps saying he's faster and stronger than he was in his last fight. He was fast and strong anyway. He needs to work on his defence. Guarantee his next fight he'll be talking about being faster and stronger though. Edited September 8, 2008 by RoytonBlueLad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Naz was a proven champion... Won the title and defened it a number of times so I think its unfair to attack Naz or compare him to Khan.... Khan on the other hand looked like he was flawed from a number of fights back... and was totally out classed the other night... He will come back, the hype will build, he will get his pay cheque some more times from the idiot british public before he is KO again... He simply isnt a world champion... Journey man for my money... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Naz had the potential to be a genuine great but decided to stop using his talent and just rely on hitting the other bloke harder than he could hit him - Aye, this is what cost him the Barrera fight, he kept looking for the bingo punch rather than boxing. If Naz had just done the basics then stepped up a gear and did what only he could he would have gone down as an all time classic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky_Latic Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 anyone remember the fight khan had against the scottish lad. Cant think of his name off the top of my head, but Khan got knocked down and was counted to 8. Barely got up and then dropped back down to a knee. Should of been counted out (most refs would have) but the ref didnt bother. Khan went on to win the fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horlicks Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 anyone remember the fight khan had against the scottish lad. Cant think of his name off the top of my head, but Khan got knocked down and was counted to 8. Barely got up and then dropped back down to a knee. Should of been counted out (most refs would have) but the ref didnt bother. Khan went on to win the fight. It was Willie Limond who knocked him down and he was never know as a big puncher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeylandLatic Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 He's cocky as hell, simple as. Thought he could drive his BMW with no licence or insurance at 155mph on the M62, didn't go to court relying on his fancy hangers on. Then bowls someone over in the centre of Bolton. Hasn't proved his worth in the ring and yet strutted in as if he was WORLD champion. At least Hamed could do the business in the ring even if he was cocky out of it. God luck to Khan but he's no Hatton, Lewis, Calzaghe, Woodall, Sugar Ray etc. Just thinks hes better than he has proved. The boxing equivalent of Tim Henman? Just going onto another point I don't understand why people are always having a go at Tim Henman and saying how bad he is/was. Afterall he was only FOURTH best in the wrold, that's terrible isn't it? Henman would have won plenty but unfortunately he was very unlucky with having Pete Sampras and then Roger federer to contend with for grandslams. Henman was a great tennis player but he lacked charisma and circumstances often prevented him proving his ability with grandslam titles. I don't you could ever compare Kahn to Henman in terms of ability in their respective sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Just going onto another point I don't understand why people are always having a go at Tim Henman and saying how bad he is/was. Afterall he was only FOURTH best in the wrold, that's terrible isn't it? Henman would have won plenty but unfortunately he was very unlucky with having Pete Sampras and then Roger federer to contend with for grandslams. Henman was a great tennis player but he lacked charisma and circumstances often prevented him proving his ability with grandslam titles. I don't you could ever compare Kahn to Henman in terms of ability in their respective sports. Henman was a very good top ten tennis player, what let him down was when the chips were down, his nerve would go or he would double fault etc... the amount of shots he hit into the net at vital times let him down too. Henman should have won Wimbledon in '01 1 set down in the Semi, scraped it back to 1-1, destroyed him in 6-0 in the third before rain halted proceedings. Big Goran proceeded to beat him 3-2 the day after, Henman again losing his nerve, when the momentum was seemingly with him. As for Khan, overated. Turned pro too early and too much hype surrounding him. The cheek of the guy saying he wanted to fightg Hatton, Ricky would destroy him with one arm tied behind his back. Naz was a cock but the real deal. Khan's a little upstart with a very good PR machine behind him, he has some ability but will never get anything near world class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.