It's just a shady move. 1. Signs contract and assures that no horsehair gloves can be used 2. Quickly gives the gloves to the commission to approve so that even if May brings it up, it becomes a non issue. Note: The commission probably at this point does not know that these two teams agreed on NO HORSEHAIR GLOVES. If they did, they would not have approved it for this specific fight. 3. Inspection day comes and May finds that the gloves that were initially prohibited is fair game. Just distasteful. It's clear as day that Pac broke the terms signed in the contract. If I was May, I'd argue it again.
Contracts are binding in every court regardless of country , but until you see the contract you cannot have an opinion on who is breaking it. Also I work with contracts all day long (not to this level however) and there are always areas of interpretation.
Don't be surprised if mayweather enters the ring wearing a crash helmet & body armour. Best ever my a.rse!
Well, I think we should give this situation the benefit of the doubt and believe what ESPN posted. If May really allowed the usage, they wouldn't have made a sound and just acquiesced to it. I just don't think it's an honourable thing to do. As an average fight fan, I wouldn't care. But as someone who is in business, I just find it a little shady.
Is there a source citing this besides ESPN's vague reference to "those close to the situation"? I'm just genuinely curious. Because it would seem odd if this really was in the contract, which leads me to believe that ESPN's source(s) may have been mistaken or misinformed.
There is NOT, but I think we should give it the benefit of the doubt. Why would they make up random facts for no reason? Just to create controversy? Mayweather and Ellerbe in the past have stated their opinion on BANNING HORSEHAIR GLOVES. Just doesn't make any sense that they would allow it in the biggest fight of their careers. [yt]RzgN310On6k[/yt]
I agree, but ESPN never reported it as a fact. It reported it as the claims of an unnamed source, or unnamed sources. I just find it very difficult to believe that they'd be able to simply ignore a contract stipulation with commission approval.