Why Does The Irish Media Hate Conor Mcgregor?

kilns

and so what will you think of Conor when he loses on Saturday night?

ooter

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Conor Mcgrgor never did nothing much for me to be honest. I think the main reason there is a dislike for him is because the sport comes across as very rough.
If you asked me who were the people that I knew that followed it. There rough lads. Who were rude and disrespectful in school and still are as adults. It's not to do with being from a poor area or your background.
I also think parents don't want to promote it to there kids because they don't want there kids to get involved in what appears to be such a violent sport.
I have no idea what he's like as a person he might be lovely or horrible. I'd like to meet him.

If you took the first 2 words out of that quote you could easily be talking about a rugby player.

kilns

Dantian wrote: »

kilns wrote: »

So when McGregor loses on Saturday to Mayweather you will call him a loser too?
Or when he lost to Nate Diaz was he a loser too?

NOT AT ALL! Not even sure how you got that from what I said.  

He will lose, because thems the breaks - but it was a bloody smart move to have the fight at all!!

He could have made a career 'undefeated' having boring fights against guys he KNEW he could beat but having these BIG 'grudge matches' or taking on boxers like Mayweather when he himself isnt a professional boxer is effing balsy and a great business move for him.  

professional atheletes win and lose all the time because thats the nature of their job, like stockbrokers making money and losing money but McGregor has transitioned from sportsman to business man and thats how you go from being rich to wealthy.

But the point was made that the ODonovans and Murphy were losers because they only got silver medals, when competing against all what the world could produce.

Conor effectively came second in his fight with Diaz and will come second in his fight with Mayweather so by definition he will be a loser too, albeit a rich one

Dirty Dingus McGee

ooter wrote: »

Probably an achievement to those individuals but at the end of the day they lost, people may choose to celebrate that but I wouldn't.

There are 3 olympic medals handed out every 4 years.Less than 1 per year, getting an Olympic Medal in any sport is a great achvement.

Dantian

kilns wrote: »

But the point was made that the ODonovans and Murphy were losers because they only got silver medals, when competing against all what the world could produce.

Conor effectively came second in his fight with Diaz and will come second in his fight with Mayweather so by definition he will be a loser too, albeit a rich one

Depends on how you define loser. he could win easy fights against nobodies and be rich, or he can take on fights like Mayweather etc, win or lose and then become wealthy.

There is a vast difference.

E.g George Forman got rich playing football - he became wealthy putting his name on those grills.

Tell me how

Dantian wrote:

E.g George Forman got rich playing football - he became wealthy putting his name on those grills.

George Foreman was a boxer.

ooter

kilns wrote: »

But the point was made that the ODonovans and Murphy were losers because they only got silver medals, when competing against all what the world could produce.

Conor effectively came second in his fight with Diaz and will come second in his fight with Mayweather so by definition he will be a loser too, albeit a rich one

He was still world champion after losing the Diaz fight and will still be world champion win or lose tomorrow night, last time I checked those silver medalists you mentioned were never world champions.

cletus

Dantian wrote: »

Depends on how you define loser. he could win easy fights against nobodies and be rich, or he can take on fights like Mayweather etc, win or lose and then become wealthy.

There is a vast difference.

E.g George Forman got rich playing football - he became wealthy putting his name on those grills.

George Foreman got rich playing football...George Foreman the professional boxer.

I am officially done with this thread

Dantian

cletus wrote: »

George Foreman got rich playing football...George Foreman the professional boxer.

I am officially done with this thread

lol whoops! need another coffee I think!

stephenl15

road_high wrote: »

I'm not sure which is worse tbh- McGregor himself who's just playing an act to make money or the mindless idiots that "follow" him and think is some kind of talent.
I don't think ever the phrase "money can't buy you class" were more apt for an individual. They should put his name beside the word crass in the dictionary.

That's an embarrassing comment honestly

Theboinkmaster

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Yes when McGregor first turned up to late late - what was that 4 years ago - he was totally and utterly charming

As I said - I looked in to see what the hype was all all about.

People going on about accent is balls - he has just changed. you can have a working class accent and be classy or not.

This sums it up perfectly for me. I appreciate his hard work and skill, what he has achieved in such a short space of time and fair play to him for making so much money.

But the guy comes across as an angry knacker to me, with zero class. At the start I loved him (like that late late show clip) but now after seeing him throw cans/bottles across a room a year or two ago at Nate Diaz I lost all respect for him.

Angry little knacker with no class about him.

Birdie Num Num

Dantian wrote: »

Depends on how you define loser. he could win easy fights against nobodies and be rich, or he can take on fights like Mayweather etc, win or lose and then become wealthy.

There is a vast difference.

E.g George Forman got rich playing football - he became wealthy putting his name on those grills.

Mayweather - A retired boxer in his 40s who hasn't fought a competitive fight in 2 years. A good career behind him obviously but a bit of perspective please.

flaneur

It's nothing to do with his achievements and he could be a lovely guy in person, but it's to do with the way the event's being promoted with aggressive 'psyching' of his opponent and some of the words used were pretty controversial and garnered all sorts of negative press at home and abroad.

His promotors are painting a picture of a hard-man who grew up in some kind of urban war zone / ghetto called 'Crumlin' where he was lucky to escape with his life.

It's all about building this 'fighting Irish' mythology around him and it's all about marketing in the US to drive up PPV numbers. The image that's being portrayed irritates a lot of people in Ireland as it's largely just marketing and playing on stereotypes.

If you compare that to the rowers in West Cork or any of those olympians, they're just normal sports people and they're getting positive publicity because they're media-friendly and nice. Of course they'll get a very different kind of coverage.

The way this fight's being promoted is more like WWE level of hype.

weldoninhio

Dantian wrote: »

Depends on how you define loser. he could win easy fights against nobodies and be rich, or he can take on fights like Mayweather etc, win or lose and then become wealthy.

There is a vast difference.

E.g George Forman got rich playing football - he became wealthy putting his name on those grills.

What about when he lost to Joe Duffy or Artemji Sitenkov?? Was he a loser then?? They aren't huge names!!

Birdie Num Num

ooter wrote: »

He was still world champion after losing the Diaz fight and will still be world champion win or lose tomorrow night, last time I checked those silver medalists you mentioned were never world champions.

You're wrong there. Presumably you would be of the opinion that McGregor is fighting a loser tomorrow night too considering Mayweather only managed a bronze in the Olympics. Considering he has retired now too it should be a handy fight for McGregor if he is what he is has been elevated to.

WinnyThePoo

I'm a fan of McGregor. Not only his skill level but his image and talking has made him the biggest money draw in ufc.

He's the full package.

I'm not sure slagging athletes from other sports like the o'donovon brothers or Murphy and calling them losers is on.
They have also worked their asses off to get to the level they have had success in.

I'm sure McGregor would be a fan of other Irish athletes having success on the world stage.

kilns

ooter wrote: »

kilns wrote: »

But the point was made that the ODonovans and Murphy were losers because they only got silver medals, when competing against all what the world could produce.

Conor effectively came second in his fight with Diaz and will come second in his fight with Mayweather so by definition he will be a loser too, albeit a rich one

He was still world champion after losing the Diaz fight and will still be world champion win or lose tomorrow night, last time I checked those silver medalists you mentioned were never world champions.

So was Sonia OSullivan a loser for not winning gold at say the '96 Olympics?

Sofiztikated

Watch this, then come back and tell me how much of a no class, uncouth, knacker he is.

ooter

Birdie Num Num wrote: »

You're wrong there.

Are you saying McGregor wasn't world champion before/after he lost to Diaz?

Tell me how

Sofiztikated wrote:

Watch this, then come back and tell me how much of a no class, uncouth, knacker he is.

That's a fair point. But the crass image he portrays (at times) is what ticks a lot off.
He does it to get paid? Ok, I just don't like that version of him.

Birdie Num Num

ooter wrote: »

Are you saying McGregor wasn't world champion before/after he lost to Diaz?

Be selective why don't you. I am saying that you are wrong in what you said in your post and you know where you are wrong.

Dirty Dingus McGee

McGregor could be a very nice guy in general (like any other person) the problem is that he poromotes his fights in such a classless and charmless manner (in my opinion) that it's hard to find him to be likeable and it's hard to ignore some of the things he's said.The Klitskho Joshua fight had none of that nonsense and it didn't make any less of a big event so you don't really need all the ****e McGregor goes on with to sell a fight.

I'm sure I'll be bombarded with a whole load of arguments to the contrary however it'll make zero difference because likeability is a gut feeling it isn't something you can argue for or against either he is likeable to you or he isn't and personally I just don't like him.

bur

He's a hateful personality. Yes it's an act but most of his fanboys, the impressionable ones, don't realise this, which also makes him a terrible role model.
We have enough youth that think it's hilarious to run around slapping the heads off people for no reason, cause it's a laugh. They don't need any extra encouragement.

Wheeliebin30

bur wrote: »

He's a hateful personality. Yes it's an act but most of his fanboys, the impressionable ones, don't realise this, which also makes him a terrible role model.
We have enough youth that think it's hilarious to run around slapping the heads off people for no reason, cause it's a laugh. They don't need any extra encouragement.

ffs someone think of the children.

Ban video games and violent movies quick!

And rap music!

martingriff

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

I'm a fan of McGregor. Not only his skill level but his image and talking has made him the biggest money draw in ufc.

He's the full package.

I'm not sure slagging athletes from other sports like the o'donovon brothers or Murphy and calling them losers is on.
They have also worked their asses off to get to the level they have had success in.

I'm sure McGregor would be a fan of other Irish athletes having success on the world stage.

While I do not like McGregor I have to agree he is great for the UFC and this mentality by some of his supporters there is something wrong with you if you don't follow him body and soul and then to diss other sports stars is another level. I All ways thought Dublin fans support of Connoly was over the top but this surpasses it

threein99

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Watch this, then come back and tell me how much of a no class, uncouth, knacker he is.

Watch the press tour to any of his fights and show me where the class is ?

ooter

Birdie Num Num wrote: »

Be selective why don't you. I am saying that you are wrong in what you said in your post and you know where you are wrong.

Just checked there and I see 1 of the brothers won an individual gold medal at the worlds last year, didn't know that.
Fair play to him, something to be proud of.

Theboinkmaster

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Watch this, then come back and tell me how much of a no class, uncouth, knacker he is.

Watched it - still think he's a no class uncouth knacker.

Didn't act that way in the video but publicly does 90% of the time.

Sofiztikated

Tell me how wrote: »

That's a fair point. But the crass image he portrays (at times) is what ticks a lot off.
He does it to get paid? Ok, I just don't like that version of him.

Which is absolutely fine.

My argument is thus: Why does it take an American (admittedly Emmy award winning) sportscaster to crack that persona? Why does the Irish Media hate Conor, as per the thread title? Why could an Irish mainstream journalist not do this, and push and celebrate the actual Conor, and show that it's not the suits or bling watches that make him successful, but rather his work ethic and his desire to be successful that makes him successful.

But that might take some work, and the lazy, easy option suits them.

road_high

stephenl15 wrote: »

That's an embarrassing comment honestly

Tell us all why it's "embarrassing" so? It's the truth. And you know it.