For those that think Parker was "robbed" - what do you make of New Zealand's media disagreeing?

This is from "The New Zealand Herald":

"FORGET THE BRAVADO, PARKER'S CHALLENGE FELL FLAT.

It's all well and good telling the world that the gigantic boxer you are about to face has a glass jaw. But the bravado doesn't look so flash when your man doesn't get close to doing the business on the supposedly fragile chin. Joseph Parker barely put a chip in the crystal as Anthony Joshua went on the precisely controlled front foot against him in a Cardiff heavyweight unifier which turned stupefier....As a contest it pipped David Tua's failed 2000 bid against Lennox Lewis for potential if unfulfilled drama. While Parker was outclassed, poor Tua was virtually inactive. But as the Cardiff fight wore on, the result was almost as inevitable."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12024159



Radio New Zealand:

"AJ won the early rounds easily, and then could afford to sit back and let Joe have to search for the win. Very good fight from the now WBA, WBO, IBF and IBO world champion. There will be a lot of talk about how it was a bit of a boring fight, however it was done entirely on AJ's terms. He came in with a gameplan, and executed. That's why he walks out with the gold."

https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/sport/353838/recap-parker-vs-joshua


The Southland Times:

"HEADLINE: MAYBE I WAS TOO CAUTIOUS

Joseph Parker admitted he could have done more in a desperate final round as he lost his world boxing title to Anthony Joshua. A brave Parker took Joshua the distance for the first tme in the big Brit's career but lost a unanimous points decision by a wide margin – 118-110, 118-110, 119-109. The writing was on the wall for Parker over the championship rounds but he couldn't penetrate the armour of the classy Joshua. He needed a knockout in the 12th and final round but it played out much like most of the fight, with Parker struggling to get on the front foot enough to pressurise Joshua into presenting an opening."

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/comba...arker-maybe-i-was-too-cautious-laments-parker


TV New Zealand News:

"HEADLINE: Anthony Joshua comfortably beats Joseph Parker in unanimous decision win."

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/spo...in-challenges-deontay-wilder-next-title-fight



Can anyone from the "Joshua robbed camp", what do you make of New Zealand's press seeing it so clearly for Joshua?

Also, can you find/have you seen any New Zealand media that explicitly see Parker the winner?

 

Is that right? So i Parker had clearly won, the NZ press would go ahead and print that he's not good enough.

That's absolutely hellish.

 

Fight felt pretty wide for Joshua to me. It was absorbing rather than excellent.

 

Man, that's ****ed up. I'm actually going to take your word for it because someone else intimated it earlier.

 

You know, this actually makes sense to me for another reason. Some of the articles on The Sweet Science get scooped up by New Zealand online news - and they're always the ones a bit negative about Parker. I wrote one about Parker-Ruiz saying yeah, very good, but Parker's ready for the move on now, and that got picked up, and recently another guy wrote one - not as bad as it sounds - about Parker being too slow to overcome the distance, and that got picked up.