I did leave out the various "knuwhumsayin" and "man" utterances he uses as punctuation. And I guess I write like I speak!
It doesn't matter if the WBC call it a technical draw. It's the commission who decide the official result, which will most likely end up being a NC.
:yep Very unlikely though. A NC is right, everyone can see that. Except Chad Dawson and Gary Shaw that is.
On Saturday, everyone was saying only an NC was right and somehow the referee ruled it a TKO. It was a combination of inept refereeing and a casually corrupt sport. Again it exposes what a scumbag Gary Shaw is and makes clear what a spoilt, entitled ***** Dawson is. Everything is possible in boxing, especially with Dawsons behaviour since the fight.
I hate all that "G" talk. Seen a few posts saying stuff like Morales is a "G" and that turns my stomach too:dead
I dont think the refereeing was inept. From what the ref saw from his point of view was no foul. And if a fighter somehow sustains a injury to himself that is not a result of a foul and refuses to continue, then the injured fighter forfiets and the other is awarded a TKO victory. On inspection the WBC have ruled it was a foul, leading to accidental injury which in their rule book ( and stress they have followed the letter of the law here) = TD decision. Now lets see what the commision says. I know you'd like to think that there was something dodgy is going on here, but So far, everybody has performed their duties correctly. No sign of corruption whatsoever.
With all courtesy, that is bollocks. From every single angle it was clear Dawson rose up and shoved Hopkins off. Are you telling me the man CLOSEST to the action missed that? It was awful refereeing. If hed been in control of the situation it would have flat-out been an NC.
No its not. the ref called no foul. I called no foul. other people called no foul. at the time it was the correct decision in light of the situation. From the refs perspective, he saw no foul, and it is the refs prerogative and duty to percieve the WBC rules and to implement them, at his discretion (read WBC rules) After review of the tapes it was overturned. This is Fair enough as with the benefit of tapes and multiple angles, the correct decision could be made, the ref didn't have these benefits and made a judgement call, and at the time he followed the rules correctly and made the right call, which at the time was TKO victory. perhaps he made the wrong call whether or not calling it a foul at the time. But like I mentioned before, with the benefit of tapes and hindsight this is an easy call to make and it is very easy to chastise an official with the benefit of various angles and the ability to see it over and over. But when your there in the thick of it you only get to see it once from one angle, and have to make a call on the spot, the ref made a call. he saw no foul, from his perspective he most probably saw no foul. So from what he saw he actually did everything Correctly. so with all due respect Stfu