Who did everyone hate on here before Amir Khan ?

Doesn't say much about your knowledge of boxing history mate....

 

Yeah he did, in combination with Parris.

The guy was a joke that night, just like the other joke that reffed Hatton/Lazcano. It's no coincidence he always seems to get the rub of the green with favourable reffing in England.

 

I couldnt give a monkeys, when im 60-70 il say i saw a great fighter in PBF destroy and pick apart the overhyped fighter by the fans, media and everyone in general.

Dont be bitter, it may not be Hagler Hearns or Ali Foreman but it was sweet

 

Neither ref changed the outcome of either fight. Both instances are just one of those little things that haters like to hold onto and bring up every now and again.....and each time the story is slightly more exaggerated than the last.

Against Zoo, Hatton executed the gameplan that he had to to win, and that was to get in close to nulify the right hand, bully Zoo and make him work 3 minutes of every round. It was a gameplan that a lot of people said would get him knocked out early as Zoo caught him coming in with a right cross and when this was proved wrong, the ref gets the blame.....

As for the Lascano fight, thats just one of myths thats been repeated so often then people who havn't even seen the fight are convinced its true (the JC-Hopkins decision is getting the same treatment).

Its very telling that for all the whinging on here about both fights, neither Zoo nor Lazcano (or their corners) made any complaints, either at the time or since then, about the reffing of the fights.

 

I'm not bitter, that loss is no disgrace and Hatton has had a pretty good career regardless.

I know you used to be a Hatton fan, then came on here and decided to run with the "cool kids" instead. At least I've made my own mind up on the subject rather than decide to dislike a boxer because you think it gives you some kind of "credibility"....

 

i know parris is a right wanker,imagine,letting kyosta hit hatton in the nuts umteen times,dropping him for 5 mins,then not classing it as a body shot,wot a wanker,then hatton hitting kyosta in the nuts and then kyosta retiring a few rounds later,if i was parris,i would of held zoo's hand up and ****ed hatton off,the cheating english manc twat.
makes me proud to be a english man

 

I don't know what the hell that last post is, so I'm going to discount it.

I personally loved the way Hatton would look to the ref while in a clinch as if to direct him. The only people that don't seem to question these refs are Hatton fans. The international community are always suspicious of these fights, it was pure bull****.

 

Are you joking, the cool kids or majority here shout for Hatton, id say im in at 10% minority, especially on the British forum

Having a laugh?

 

would ya go away and ****

 

It's no coincidence because you're imagining it! Any excuse, anything out of the ordinary to somehow twist into a "benefit" for Hatton isn't it ;-)

 

Brings to mind the popularity of another successful Mancunian export, Oasis, back in the "Definitely Maybe" days! As soon as they became mainstream, selling out arenas and millions of albums half of their original fans decided they were now "too cool" to be a fan. Same principle applies.

 

[QUOTE="TKO";3343691]It's no coincidence because you're imagining it! Any excuse, anything out of the ordinary to somehow twist into a "benefit" for Hatton isn't it ;-)[/QUOTE]
I'm imagining a blatant low blow and rabbit punching

Tell me I'm imaginging the CONSTANT holding with not a single point deduction or even warning? Please tell me I am, because it bores me rigid.

Did I imagine when he suddenly needed to tie Hatton's laces at the moment he was trying to grab hold of Lazcano after being hurt?

It's amazing how all of these decisions seem to benefit Hatton and go against his opponent. Quite an amazing turn of events. Law of averages would suggest an opponent might get something that favours him, if there wasn't blatant favouritism that is...

 

Yeah and Hatton got a point deducted for his low blow, whilst Tszyu was not punished for the same thing. It's just meeting fire with fire! Holding ain't against the rules in itself, as someone posted earlier any good trainer will tell his fighter when you're done punching tie him up! As for boring you rigid, if it does then don't watch. Simple as!

As for the laces, it is the referee's job to protect the safety of the fighters so far as a sport such as boxing allows. That means that if a fighter's laces have come undone, just as if their gumshield had come out or their hand wraps come loose, the referee should stop the contest and fix it when there is a break in the action (such as breaking a clinch). Imagine if Hatton had tripped over the lace and done his ankle ala Hopkins v Allen. The ref may have found himself getting sued for millions for failing to do his duties. I'm sure that matters more to him than a few ridiculous conspiracy theories dreamed up by some loons on the internet who have nothing better to do!

I seem to remember you're a Man United fan (could be wrong maybe just a Michael Carrick fan) and if so I'm surprised you can't see that most of this is exactly the same **** they get. Jealousy from haters who just don't like a winner, groundless accusations of the FA being in their pocket, every single decision in their favour being endlessly magnified and blown up by jealous rival fans and the media, whilst the ones which go against them are glossed over like they never happened. The parallel is exact and your post is the equivalent of Rafa's rant!

 

Whos' gonna' get second place Liverpool or Chelsea.Chelsea i'd say....

 

[QUOTE="TKO";3343823]Yeah and Hatton got a point deducted for his low blow, whilst Tszyu was not punished for the same thing. It's just meeting fire with fire! Holding ain't against the rules in itself, as someone posted earlier any good trainer will tell his fighter when you're done punching tie him up! As for boring you rigid, if it does then don't watch. Simple as!

As for the laces, it is the referee's job to protect the safety of the fighters so far as a sport such as boxing allows. That means that if a fighter's laces have come undone, just as if their gumshield had come out or their hand wraps come loose, the referee should stop the contest and fix it when there is a break in the action (such as breaking a clinch). Imagine if Hatton had tripped over the lace and done his ankle ala Hopkins v Allen. The ref may have found himself getting sued for millions for failing to do his duties. I'm sure that matters more to him than a few ridiculous conspiracy theories dreamed up by some loons on the internet who have nothing better to do!

I seem to remember you're a Man United fan (could be wrong maybe just a Michael Carrick fan) and if so I'm surprised you can't see that most of this is exactly the same **** they get. Jealousy from haters who just don't like a winner, groundless accusations of the FA being in their pocket, every single decision in their favour being endlessly magnified and blown up by jealous rival fans and the media, whilst the ones which go against them are glossed over like they never happened. The parallel is exact and your post is the equivalent of Rafa's rant![/QUOTE]
I wish the ref was thinking about the "safety of the fighters" when he allows all that rabbit punching in the clinches.

Excessive holding in itself is illegal. Another person that does not understand the rules of boxing. This is why refs, good refs anyway, punish constant and repeated holding in a fight. They do not arbitrarily remove points you know! Holding and hitting as Hatton seems to do is EXTREMELY illegal.

Your analogy is poor. The refs are poor in football and its a tough job. If it was a matter of somebody being successful I'd hate a lot of boxers, but I don't. Reffing a boxing match is much easier, its a shame the English refs can't be consistent with the rules, especially for their homeboy.