Kell Brook revelled in being “flavour of the month again” but will weigh up whether to continue boxing after settling his rivalry with Amir Khan in emphatic fashion at Manchester’s AO Arena.
Brook channelled years of frustration at previously being overlooked by his nemesis for a fight into one of the finest displays of his career in the battle of the two ex-world champions, both 35, in a 149lb catchweight bout.
A sixth-round stoppage defeat left a battered and bruised Khan contemplating retirement and Brook admitted he could hang up his gloves as well, with options seemingly limited despite a 40th win from 43 professional contests.
He is unlikely to get the chance to avenge losses to Errol Spence Jr and Terence Crawford – who hold three of the four welterweight world titles – although Conor Benn and Chris Eubank Jr have expressed interest in fighting Brook.
“I think they should fight each other first,” Brook said. “I’ve just beaten Amir Khan, I’m the flavour of the month again. They have to get in line, I’m the man again. I’m just going to enjoy this win.
“The fighter’s always the last to say they’ve had enough. I feel fit, fresh, my body’s working perfectly. I don’t want to be one of those fighters that carry on too long but I felt amazing in there.
“This grudge match is the icing on the cake for me, I can live at peace with myself and my career. You could see on my face that I was absolutely over the moon with the win. I’ll be remembered for this fight now forever.
“Do I want to carry on? I feel like a 23-year-old, but I’ll sit down with my immediate family, see if we want to carry on. It was dead easy to train for this because it was an easy fight for me to get up for.”
Brook made his professional debut in September 2004 – the month after Khan won Olympic silver in Athens – and realised his world title dream 10 years later by outpointing the highly rated Shawn Porter in California.
It is widely recognised as one of the best overseas performances by a British fighter and Brook still ranks this as his career highlight, even after securing the bragging rights against Khan.
“(Porter) was coming through as the next Mike Tyson and taking the world title off him in America, I didn’t sleep for three days because I thought if I went to sleep I might wake up and it not be real,” Brook said.
“That was unbelievable. Probably Porter is still number one.”
Brook spent Christmas away from his family, missing his children’s birthdays as well, after training for this fight in Fuerteventura in the Canary Islands, where he disclosed he was dealt a setback after catching Covid.
“We’ve all been through it all for weeks and months away from our family to make sure that we’re in the best condition we can be, and that moment (of victory) it’s all worth it when I’m up there,” Brook added.
Khan, a former unified world light-welterweight champion who has fought some of the best fighters of his era at the most famous global venues, acknowledged family commitments could inform his decision about whether to continue.
He suffered the sixth loss of a decorated 40-fight career and was repeatedly troubled by Brook’s timing and power. While he stayed upright throughout, he was trapped on the ropes when referee Victor Loughlin waved off the bout.
“I’ve had a great career. Winning fights, losing fights, being knocked down, got back up,” Khan said.
“I’ve done more than I ever expected. Maybe I peaked too early in my career. I was 17 in the Olympics, I won a world title at 22. I’m 35 now, I’ve been in the game a very long time, I’m an old man now.
“I want to spend time with my kids, my family. I want to be there for my family, for my kids. I want to take them to school and be that father.”
One specific bone of contention between the fighters down the years has centred on what happened when they sparred early in their careers, with both Khan and Brook insisting they came out on top.
But a smiling Khan, who sat near Brook at the post-fight press conference as the pair buried the hatchet following their fight, confessed: “I can’t remember me and Kell sparring but it made a good storyline, no?”
Brook added: “It was that long ago… listen, it is irrelevant now.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here