Comments Thread For: Team Porter Upset: Kell Brook Was Holding Too Much

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Wow. Now he resorts to name calling. Another patented tactic for someone who knows he has no point. Thanks for not surprising me.

Well it's hard to reason with ******ity. You tried to suggest Porter wasn't bullrushing....lol

[Cinci Champ]

a fight between khan and brook will be more exciting through twitter and interviews.. these guys r just going to hug each other when they are close,,brook does it and khan does too plus he likes to pull down on his opponents heads,, ugly fight we will be watching, like i said the best part will be before the fight(in interviews and on twitter)

ya it could happen but lets be fair porter was giving brook no option but to hold and porter did his fair share of holding anyway

[peplz]

Porters problem, Porter doesn't punch his way inside at all or move his head like a good inside fighter he charges forward with his face literally facing the floor. Which is why there were cuts and it why there have been cuts in so many of his previous fights.

Brooks ties him up to prevent that, Porter was poor really poor. He needs to shorten his punches, they are so wide. If he shortened his hooks he could have done better work on the inside. It was in Porters interest to make it an 'ugly' fight or atleast you would have said so before the fight, since Brook is a slick fighter but Porter in clinches was also getting worked backwards. He doesn't know how to work with a free hand on the inside.

Porter doesn't know how to defend when he is outside either. Brook will not be the first to tie Porter up when he comes inside now people know he doesn't know how to fight in the clinches and work his way inside effectively at mid range.

He did not come in with his head down. Just simply not true. He came in bobbing and weaving pretty much every time. You can't do that when you're looking down. Not every referee is going to allow that much holding. So if holding is going to be the chosen tactic to beat him it may not always be allowed.

[peplz]

Well it's hard to reason with ******ity. You tried to suggest Porter wasn't bullrushing....lol

The guy with the school yard insults really thinks he has any credibility to call anyone ******. Now that's the pot calling the kettle black. The guy that tries to make a point by posting an emoji really thinks he is in the position to know the difference between his own little hissy fit and "****** mode". Put a tampon in it please...

[PunchyPotorff]

Someone needs to take Porter and his team to task in a big way. Their entire focus is ignorant. Bull rushing in, flailing away, rabbit punching, head-butting... that isn't boxing. Maybe the goofball needs to join MMA or some arena football team. Brook boxed smart, stuck with his plan, and clearly won. Get past the whining b.s. and start from scratch with Boxing 101. Otherwise shut up and go away.

[White_Knight]

Brook won an ugly boring fight where he was allowed to employ some questionable tactics. And he probably could have won the fight fair and square without all of the excessive holding but we will probably never know either.

I don't believe Brook would have been able to win that fight without clinching. The referee was a poor one. He was the same old man who didn't give Provodnikov credit for knocking down Bradley in round 1 of their fight.

[Mike Haynes]

See? I hate when fighters/ trainers do this.....I didn't hear a PEEP outta them DURING the fight.

On the flip side, why KB didn't throw any uppercuts is beyond me. He could've ended Porter with a few of those.

[Mike Haynes]

The fact that they're commentators isn't the issue. The fact that Brook was holding is the issue. If he wasn't doing it they wouldn't have had anything to comment about. So the truth is good from a commentators mouth because that's his job but it's bullcrap from Kenny Porter because his son just lost a fight where he feels that he was treated unfairly. That's the definition of a double standard. And Kell Brook having stitches doesn't prove that Porter was bull rushing with his head. Porter got cut by a clash of heads himself. Does that prove that Kell Brook was bull rushing? No. And Brook's cut happened when there heads collided in the clinch not as a result of Porter bull rushing. So you need to find a different example. The rabbit punches were accidental and all occurred as a result of the clinch. They had absolutely no effect on the outcome of the fight and Brook's clinching was a part of his gameplan and had a definite effect on the outcome of the fight. So in this instance the excessive clinching was most definitely the greater evil in comparison to Porter trying to get his arms free and throwing some shots that strayed to the back of Brook's head.

I agree....the rabbit punches weren't accidental per se, but it was the only punch available while being held by Brook (who ALSO did some rabbit punching in those clinches)....Brook HIMSELF had no plan B, but was lucky the ref didn't deduct points.

[LacedUp]

I agree....the rabbit punches weren't accidental per se, but it was the only punch available while being held by Brook (who ALSO did some rabbit punching in those clinches)....Brook HIMSELF had no plan B, but was lucky the ref didn't deduct points.

Brook didn't need a plan b as his plan a was working perfectly fine.

Anyone of us who have followed Brook for his entire career can tell he hardly even got out of 2nd or 3rd gear.

[LacedUp]

The guy with the school yard insults really thinks he has any credibility to call anyone ******. Now that's the pot calling the kettle black. The guy that tries to make a point by posting an emoji really thinks he is in the position to know the difference between his own little hissy fit and "****** mode". Put a tampon in it please...

I'm saying you went in full ****** mode, which you did.

Next I'm going to say you don't know shyt about boxing and you're clearly just butthurt that Brook beat Porter.