Why haven't I seen anyone argue that Arreola should have won by DQ?

Because everyone is just so happy to see a viable heavyweight challenger that they don't care.

 

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=474221

 

Because only pussies would complain about it.

 

The only reason Molina got DQ'd from that rule was to protect PW from suffering a loss if Molina made it the distance.

Reiss got a lot of stick for that and rightly so. Don't think he makes the same 'mistake' twice.

 

Because everybody whined when Kirkland won by DQ (rightfully so). They would be hypocrites here.

And at the moment of the corner "interference" it was Molina and Arreola taking a 10 count. At least Kirkland can hang his hat on having dropped Molina, whereas Arreola would have literally been 2/3 of the way through a KD count if his was stopped.

 

I didn't see a single poster here argue that DQing Molina was the right thing to do.

 

Because nobody wants to see that ****, its a ******ed rule. Especially when the knockdown took place right at the end of the round and Stiverne's people were coming up to the corner already anyway. It was a weird circumstance. The ref used logic and reason and let the fight continue. :thumbsup

Molina getting DQ'd vs. Kirkland was ******ed! Kirkland had him hurt and probably could have finished him off anyway... there was no sense in that.

 

Because it´s a BS rule and unfair to the fighter in the ring.
And people would be screaming here how Arreola would have gotten knocked out in the following rounds.

 

The HBO crew brought up California having exceptions and ruling out accidents

Molina fight was in Texas where the commission might be more punitive

 

This content is protected