'No evidence leading back to me' - Mayer on Ryan paint attack
WBO welterweight champion Mikaela Mayer faces Briton Sandy Ryan in a Las Vegas rematch on Saturday. In her BBC Sport column, American Mayer talks about the events leading up to victory in last September's first fight in New York when Ryan was hit by a can of red paint before leaving for the venue.On Friday, Ryan will address the controversy and rivalry between the pair.
I was in my room and we were starting to walk to the elevator, waiting for the go-ahead from the team to say we could go down because we were at the same hotel as Sandy Ryan. Sandy was out there first waiting for her car so we stood by the elevator and my nutritionist said to wait because she hasn't got in the car yet.My nutritionist was looking at her phone and was like, 'oh my god, someone just threw paint on Sandy'. We were all taken aback but I didn't understand that I was apparently the culprit.I got in the car but didn't really understand the extent of it until I got to the arena and online there was a photo of Sandy, who was stripped down with red paint on her. ESPN came in to see me and apparently I'm being blamed for the attack.Everyone who knows me, knows that would be out of character for me - it's not my style. I expected her to try to blame me. I was her rival all week but there were also other things going on. Sandy has already said flyers attacking her were put up around the hotel and city.You can't just point a finger when there is no evidence leading back to me. I was upstairs waiting to walk down for the fight of my life. I didn't know what time she was going to be down there or that she was going first. The only people who knew were her team - maybe she should look inside her own circle.
'I hope it doesn't happen going into this fight'
The incident took me by surprise but I was in fight mode and it didn't happen to me, so I wasn't flustered.If someone had thrown paint on me I would have slapped paint on the ass of my fight shorts and got on with it.I was concerned that she was going to pull out - her team were really getting her going about it.There was a clip of her coach Kay Koroma in the locker room screaming at her to pull out of the fight which I thought was super suspicious. That was weird to me and out of character for him. I really don't think it was the paint that threw her off her game but her team, who made it a bigger deal than it had to be.Obviously I don't want that to happen and I hope it doesn't happen going into this fight. It could have been called off and, after two years of busting my butt to get back in that position, that was the last thing I wanted.As for 'paint-gate' being used to promote the rematch, I was surprised the Top Rank team used the paint on the promotion posters - but this is entertainment. I didn't have any say in it. If I had done anything like that, my manager would have had my neck as he tries to keep me professional.I didn't know about it until the poster came out and I said, 'do they have red paint on Sandy?'I was just as taken aback as anyone else, but it's kind of funny.
'I have truth on my side'
It's important for women's boxing to have these rivalries and this is definitely up there as one of the top ones.I never counted out the rematch and just wanted to see what my other options were. Once I saw the views and how much the fans wanted it - and the excuses - I thought let's do it again and I'll do it even better.I didn't get my rematch with Alycia Baumgardner so I understand Sandy might have been frustrated, but I didn't have to give her this rematch. I could have just sat it out, waited for Lauren Price to unify and fought for undisputed or faced someone else. That's not the fighter I am though.I pride myself on the fact a lot of the fights I have been in are competitive and people aren't sure who will win. My feud with Alycia will stay number one for a lifetime, but Sandy can come second because of the coaching team situation and the paint situation.Sandy and her team have tried to gaslight me in a sense where I'm supposed to be making all of this up or I'm being dramatic, but it happened.You're going to see coach Koroma, my coach of eight or nine years since the Olympics, in her corner so they really can't say anything about it. They did what they did and they have to stand by that. I'm just protecting myself and I'm the one who had to go out and find a whole new team at this stage of my career which is not easy. I have truth on my side.Mikaela Mayer was speaking to BBC Sport's Bobbie Jackson.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Rangers, Hearts and Hibs watch Crystal Palace situation with interest as SFA has say on Euro exclusion
Uefa set to rule on multi-club ownership Sign up to our Football newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The situation with Crystal Palace potentially being denied from competing in Europe next season will not have gone unnoticed by supporters of Rangers, Hearts and Hibs. Oliver Glasner's team clinched a Europa League spot after they stunned Manchester City to win the FA Cup at Wembley last month – the first major trophy in the club's history. However, there is a complication. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Crystal Palace's Marc Guehi (centre left) and Joel Ward (centre right) lift the FA Cup after the Emirates FA Cup final at Wembley Stadium, London. Picture date: Saturday May 17, 2025. | PA Palace are facing an anxious wait to discover their fate after being required to meet with Uefa's club financial control body (CFCB) to show they do not fall foul of its multi-club ownership rules. John Textor holds a 43 per cent stake in Palace through his company Eagle Football, while he is also the owner of French club Lyon, who qualified for the Europa League with a sixth-placed Ligue 1 finish. No individual is allowed to have a significant say in the running of two clubs competing in the same Uefa competition and the CFCB will make a ruling on the case this month. Irish club Drogheda United have already been expelled from the Conference League due to multi-club ownership rules. They are currently owned by the Trivela Group - an organisation which also has a majority share in Danish side Silkeborg IF, who have also qualified for the Conference League, meaning Drogheda are unable to compete due to Uefa regulations, although club officials plan to appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad While Palace are confident they can settle their case - either by proving that Textor's influence at Selhurst Park is limited or by the American agreeing to sell his stake - the outcome could have implications for the Scottish clubs who have opened their doors to investors from other clubs. Rangers were recently taken over by an American consortium involving 49ers Enterprises - who own Leeds United - while Brighton owner Tony Bloom, who is also a minority shareholder in Union Saint-Gilloise, is set to acquire a 29 per cent stake in Hearts, with non-voting rights, in return for a near £10million investment. Hibs have also linked up with Bill Foley's Black Knights Group - who run Bournemouth and have involvement with French club Lorient and Auckland FC in New Zealand. All three deals required SFA approval and the chief executive of the governing body, Ian Maxwell, has welcomed the influx of multi-club investors into the Scottish game. Brighton owner Tony Bloom is set to purchase a 29 per cent stake in Hearts. (Photo by) | Getty Images "Multi-club ownership is here. It's part of football," he stated. "When you look across Europe, the number of clubs that are involved in some multi-club structure is growing by the day. We need to be part of that or why would you limit that investment? It was actually interesting when you start to think through the process. We had dual interest regulations which meant that if you're involved in a club, you can't get involved in a Scottish club unless we say yes. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad "But someone like a Tony Bloom, for example, that's getting involved in Hearts, has a track record at Brighton, understands football, has Union Saint-Gilloise, knows other clubs. We actually make it harder for him to come into Scottish football than we do for someone who's just sold a company for £10 million that's got no understanding of the Scottish game. When you actually get into it, that probably doesn't make a lot of sense." Maxwell also attempted to allay fears that Scottish clubs could find themselves in the same boat as Palace if say, for example, both Rangers and Leeds qualified to compete in the same European competition with the chairman of the newly-promoted English Premier League side, Paraag Marathe, also now the vice-chairman at Ibrox. "Our board, we're looking at it from two perspectives," Maxwell added. "Does it grow and develop the game? Will it generate financial investment into Scottish football? Does it give us an integrity issue? "The integrity issue falls away because that would only happen if it was two Scottish teams playing under our jurisdiction, which it's not. The jurisdictional matter becomes a UEFA point and we've been clear in all the dual interests, all the multi-club investment models that we've done, that if there was, similar to a Crystal Palace scenario at the moment, where there's a question mark about which one's going to play in Europe, it can't be the Scottish club that's the unintended consequence or has to step aside from European competition. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Leeds United chairman Paraag Marathe is also the vice-chairman of Rangers following the recent takeover by 49ers Enterprises. | PA "Now, I don't really understand why Crystal Palace and [Lyon], but they've not been able to sort that out because UEFA have shown in the past that they can find a way. "There's both of the Red Bull teams so they've found a way to make it work, whether it's just a timing issue or whether it's not. The good thing is, because the vast majority of clubs that have came into Scotland have got other multi-club ownership models, they're used to that. "You speak to the guys involved in the Hearts deal and they're very aware of what UEFA need and what UEFA want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don't get ourselves those problems. "So I think it's here, we can't ignore it. Why would you want to step away from it? Why would you want to block investment coming into the game if it's going to be good for our clubs? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Rangers takeover crew handed ringing SFA endorsement as American dream can be good for Scottish football
Andrew Cavenah and the 49ers investors were given the green light to take charge at Ibrox and it wasn't a tough decision Ian Maxwell has revealed the SFA gave the Rangers takeover the green light as he is convinced the American money men can be a positive force for Scottish football. Hampden chiefs have the power to step in if potential new owners look dodgy with tightened up fit and proper person rules and there have also been questions raised across the globe amid the rise of multi-club ownership. Gers have been backed by the San Francisco 49ers' investment fund – who also have control at Leeds United, while Hearts and Hibs have also received cash boosts from Tony Bloom and Billy Foley, who are involved with Brighton and Bournemouth. Maxwell insisted it was an easy decision to rubber stamp the developments though – as the newcomers to Scottish football all have solid track records and are no fly-by-nights. And the SFA chief executive is convinced Andrew Cavenagh and the 49ers team will be good for Rangers and the wider game. Maxwell, speaking before Rangers slammed his organisation over the John Brown notice complaint, said: 'It's not been particularly complicated. To be honest, we've definitely been more open. Multi-club ownership is here. It's part of football. 'When you look across Europe, the number of clubs that are involved in some multi-club structure is growing by the day. We need to be part of that or why would you limit that investment? 'Why would you want to block investment coming into the game if it's going to be good for our clubs? 'The trick is the club needs to then go and spend that money as wisely as possible. 'We don't get involved in that bit, but from a board perspective there's definitely a willingness to look at anything that generates more investment into Scotland. 'It was actually interesting when you start to think through the process and we had dual interest regulations which meant that if you're involved in a club, you can't get involved in a Scottish club unless we say yes. 'But someone like Tony Bloom for example, that's getting involved in Hearts, has a track record at Brighton, understands football, has Union St. Gilloise and those other clubs. 'We actually make it harder for him to come into Scottish football than we do for someone who's just sold a company for £10 million that's got no understanding of the Scottish game. 'When you actually get into it, that probably doesn't make a lot of sense. 'Our board, we're looking at it from two perspectives. 'Does it grow and develop the game? Will it generate financial investment into Scottish football? 'Does it give us an integrity issue? The integrity issue falls away because that would only happen if it was two Scottish teams playing under our jurisdiction, which it's not.' The European issue is one that's got UEFA's attention, with several clubs now under the same umbrellas, such as the Red Bull and City Football Group. English FA Cup winners Crystal Palace are facing protests over their spot in the Europa League with their owners also involved with Lyon, who have qualified for the same competition. Maxwell is confident it won't become a problem for Scottish sides – and they would never be forced to step aside. He said: "The jurisdictional matter becomes a UEFA point and we've been clear in all the dual interests, all the multi-club investment models that we've done, we've been very clear that if there was, similar to a Crystal Palace scenario at the moment, where there's a question mark about which one's going to play in Europe, it can be the Scottish club that's the unintended consequence or has to step aside from European competition. 'UEFA have shown in the past that they can find a way, they're both Red Bull teams so they've found a way to make it work, whether it's just a timing issue or whether it's not. 'The good thing is, because the vast majority of clubs that have came into Scotland have got other multi-club ownership models, they're used to that and you speak to the guys involved in Hearts and they're very aware of what UEFA need and what UEFA want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don't get ourselves those problems.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
MacIntyre riding high in 100th year since last Scots US Open winner
Presumably, everybody was scunnered by the arduous, futile guddles for the sports editor's wayward hoiks during The Herald's inaugural autumn outing and decided to put a limit on the hunt. But back to the US Open. In those formative years of the championship, there was plenty to write home about. Scottish golfers won 12 of the first 16 stagings. That was hardly surprising. In just about every US state, there was an intrepid Scot spreading the golfing gospel and laying foundations for the growth of the game on the other side of the pond. In that period, the Scots, in the words of the celebrated golf writer Herbert Warren Wind, had become, "as permanent in the American scene as Swedish masseurs and Chinese laundrymen.' The tartan army's period of bountiful plunder in the US Open would end in 1925 with Willie Macfarlane triumphing at the Worcester Country Club. That would be the last Scottish success in the USGA's showpiece. A century on, Oban's Robert MacIntyre had been making a good fist of it at Oakmont and was tucked in the upper echelons of the leaderboard heading into the closing day of a punishing week. Now, we're not sure if young Master MacIntyre is aware of Macfarlane's epic feat 100 years ago. In the annals of golf history, though, it remains a success of grand significance. Macfarlane, an Aberdonian by birth who travelled across the Atlantic to take up a club professionals' post at Oak Ridge in New York State, won his one and only major. He won it the hard way too, in a mammoth 36-hole play-off against the famed Bobby Jones in the searing heat of Massachusetts. And you thought poking it around Oakmont was a strenuous struggle? This was the US Open in which Jones, who would go on to win the grand slam in 1930, called a penalty on himself during the first round. Jones felt his club had moved the ball in the rough on the 11th hole, but officials were unable to confirm this and left it to the American to make a ruling. Jones called a one-shot penalty on himself. Lauded for his sportsmanship, Jones famously replied, 'you might as well praise me for not robbing a bank.' Tied after 72-holes, Macfarlane and Jones were still locked together after the 18-hole play-off. There was no sudden-death in those days. So, off they trotted for another 18-holes. Jones was four shots clear at the turn but Macfarlane rallied and won by a single stroke with a 73 to the 74 of Jones. The Scot picked up $500 for his exhausting 108-hole endeavours. This year's winner shoved a cheque for $4.3 million into his pocket. 'The finest of men and a great golfer,' said Jones as he lavished praise on the triumphant Macfarlane. The New York Times called the epic tussle, 'easily the greatest Open Championship of them all.' The golf correspondent with the Montreal Gazette, meanwhile, was positively giddy. 'Thus ended one of the greatest struggles between two of the game's giants that the world has ever seen,' he scribbled with a gasp. 'The gods of golf held their fingers crossed for Bobby Jones today but in the end, the most deserving golfer was rewarded. 'It was the perfect ending to a day of tremendous happenings that forced two thousand enthusiasts to dash hither and about, up and over the hills of Worcester Country Club in spite of a torrid sun that poured down on scorched heads.' There wasn't much sun on the final day at Oakmont on Sunday. The final round was deluged by the kind of downpour that would've had tournament officials consulting Noah for a meteorological update. The leading group had managed to get to the eighth before the dreaded hooter sounded as Mother Nature flung a star-spangled spanner into the USGA's works. MacIntyre was still in the top-10 when he reached the turn before the suspension. A couple of early bogeys had him glowering like the dark clouds that were brewing over Oakmont but a tremendous putt for an eagle on the fourth lifted his morale. Jon Rahm, the US Open champion in 2021, got himself home and dry before the hooter shrieked with an admirable 67 which hoisted him into the early clubhouse lead. Rory McIlroy posted a similar card 'It's crazy because it doesn't feel like I played that different to every other round,' said Rahm after finishing with a flourish. It's a funny auld game.
