Efe Ajagba vs. Stephan Shaw & Guido Vianello vs. Jonathan Micah Rice RBR.

No, the fight goes to the scorecards and the punch is a scoring punch. A scoring punch is a reward. You do realize that many cuts are opened by grazing shots that barely make any contact too right? Why should a punch that barely touches your opponent be the reason you win a fight?

 

This.

 

The fight shouldn't have been stopped. Fact. If a cut ends a fight it should be a clear disability for the fighter so he can't defend himself or can't see properly. Vianello was even winning minutes with that cut. He wasn't in danger at all. Yeah, the cut looked nasty but there was no real reason to stop the fight. Rice wasn't really taking over or knocking Vianello around the ring because of the cut. And that should be the factor that comes into play if we talk about cuts leading to TKOs. If a doc stops a fight and not the ref or the corner it should go to the scorecards. Easy maths. Rules are a joke. It's an actual joke that a fat bald lazy mother****er like Rice gets a W on his record for doing absolutely nothing apart from opening a cut luckily. There is a difference between landing a nasty hail mary lucky punch and knocking somebody stiff or opening a cut.

 

Rice fought like chit.. but unfortunately that is the correct decision.
They can run it again one more time.

 

How long til the main event.

 

That wouldn't make sense because you could be punishing the guy that cut the other. What if he was losing on the cards but would have won eventually, even on the cards, if he didn't cause a cut.

 

Vianello.....shades of the ghost of fellow Italian Francisco Diamani, winning a fight and losing because of a freak injury!?!?!

 

this crap is taking way to long to start

 

I may burst into flames for saying this but @CST80 is right. Yes, the cut was caused by a punch and the doctor thought it was bad enough to stop the fight. Under normal circumstances the man with the cut loses. The reason it's different in this case is we were told there was no replay for this fight therefore Benji Esteves' original ruling of the cut being caused by a butt should have remained the official ruling no matter how incorrect it was. Vianello most certainly would have won this fight by decision.

No matter how egregious the error, it's not the way sports works that you change the rules in the middle of the event.

The only possible excuse is that the ESPN announcers gave us incorrect information relating to the usage of replay.

 

If you want to make an argument that the fighter could continue, that's one thing. It's absolutely ******ed though to even suggest that a fighter who lands a punch that causes enough damage to stop a fight could possibly be punished for landing that huge damaging punch.

 

Its ESPN, it could be in 5 minutes, it could be 90 minutes

 

Gotta laugh about espn aswell, always projecting righteousness yet those ****s are as corrupt as they come and will break the rules and act unethically just to get the result they want.

 

Why should the thinness of your opponents skin be a reason you lose? This is so ****ing weird to me.