Fury stoppage premature?

Double post instead of an edit.

 

It's all right people saying let it carry on, they aren't at the receiving end of a 250lbs right arm smash are they?

That said I do wish it would have gone on longer but that's the masochistic side making an appearance, would the ref have called if off it was for a world title? I don't think so. Should the ref have called it off? Probably.

 

It was a premature stoppage. You have to question the referee's role in general.

IMO the referee is there to ensure the rules are adhered to, nothing more. The rules say a fighter must defend himself at all times, so when a fighter is no longer in a position to defend himself a stoppage is absolutely legitimate.

However Pajkic, even after having gone down twice was still fighting back, still defending himself and despite looking wobbly had only 20 seconds left to make the end of the round and get his head clear. He could have gone to the ropes and covered up easily for that length of time.

You could say 'yeah, but he would have gone down again'. Well actually, No. You can't say that for sure. There are loads of fights I can think of where one fighter has recovered much better than you think he might have done a few seconds previously.

You might say 'well it was obvious he was going to lose anyway after the two knockdowns, why let it continue?'. Well you have to let it continue because it's a sporting contest, with rules and the rules say underwhat circumstances the fight should be stopped.

The Eubank fight was frustrating, but not as bull**** as the Fury one. The lad he was fighting was clearly outclassed, clearly getting hurt when hit and offering absolutely nothing back. I'd have preferred the referee to tell the lad he had to show something or be stopped between rounds. But no one's perfect.

 

Horse**** so didn't read anymore...the refs primary responsibility is to ensure the well being of both fighters

 

Of course that is not even up for debate.

I remember seeing a post a few months ago in which almost everyone was backing fury to beat Price. I was the only one to back Price, now we see the **** coming home to roost.

 

I think you're getting him mixed up with the doctor. The rules are designed to protect fighters, the ref is there to apply the rules. It's interesting that 3 judges are required to award a victory in points, but only one judge is required to essentially award victory by tko.

 

I've never seen a doctor jump in and stop a fight when the fighters are still in motion...thats the refs job

 

The referees decision to stop both the Fury and Eubanks fights were clearly wrong, Pajkic although hurt had still plenty fight in him and deserved a chance to fight on. Why Alexander decided to stop the Eubank fight is beyond me, Eubanks opponent never looked hurt but in truth it was a boring fight that told us nothing that we didn't already know the lad, that jr has some talent that might be developed into something marketable.
All in all I believe British referees are destroying the sport in their country with these premature stoppages, and turning people of watching the sport. Let a fight reach it's natural conclusion, and then the ref can do his job by intervening but only when the defeated boxer has no chance of winning.

 

I watched the Prescott fight last night and people on here were even saying that stoppage was too early. There really are some blood thirsty buggers on here!! ;-)

 

I thought that was a good stoppage.

 

Yes, exactly. The ref's job is to apply the rules. The doctor makes sure the fighter gets the best medical attention immediately.

British referees are no longer applying the rules, they're making **** up as they go along. Using far too much discretion.

Remember when commentators used to have that lame joke about a foreigneer needing a KO just to get a draw in Italy. Well it's even worse here now. They need a KO just to get to the scorecards at all.

 

Yep,I thought it was nigh on perfect. Plenty were criticizing it in the RbR thread though.

 

Whatever your feelings on the stoppage, and UK officiating in general, we are WAY OFF what Italy was like in the 70s and 80s. There is a problem but exagerating it even more isn't going to help things.

 

With the Eubank fight, the opponent was very negative and not really doing anything. As it wasn't a significant fight in the first place, and the opponent hadn't come to fight, I don't really have a problem with the stoppage.

The Fury fight is a different matter.

Agree.

And I doubt the BBBofC are going to do anything about it.

I think British fans should demand that American refs should be used instead for any significant fights, because our own refs are an incompetent embarrassment.

 

God luck with that idea!