Joe Cortez : I allowed Marquez to continue...

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Soriano, Feb 24, 2009.


Page 2 of 9
  1. Soriano

    Soriano Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,949
    0
    Sep 8, 2008
    Use your grey matter, dude. In defending himself, he committed a slip. Think harder. Perhaps you would know what is really in the mind of Cortez. I know that Pac won had the error of one the judges been rectified. But this revelation that he allowed Marquez to continue because he is not his enemy speaks volumes where his bias is. He should have said he is neutral, and he is no friend/enemy of anyone. Got that? :deal
     
    Soriano, Feb 24, 2009
    Soriano, Feb 24, 2009
    #16
  2. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    36,318
    11,363
    Jan 6, 2007

    With the end of the three knockdown rule, it's at the ref's discretion as to whether or not to let the fight continue after the third knockdown.

    All Cortez was saying (and he was defending himself against JMM's accusation that HE WAS AN ENEMY OF MEXICAN FIGHTERS) was that IF he really WAS an enemy of Mexican fighters, he would have had a perfect opportunity to exercise his enmity and stop the fight.

    Instead, he exercised his lawful discretion and judged JMM fit to continue.

    And how JMM performed for the balance of the fight justified that judgment call.


    By stating (and proving) that he was not an enemy of Mexican fighters in response to an accusation from a Mexican fighter that he WAS, Cortez was not showing any bias one way or the other.

    No More than it would have been pro Philipino bias for him to state:

    "I am not an enemy of Philipino fighters."



    These points are self evident and should be obvious to any reasonable person.
     
    cuchulain, Feb 24, 2009
    cuchulain, Feb 24, 2009
    #17
  3. freddy-wak

    freddy-wak M O D E R A T O R Full Member

    36,443
    29
    Oct 28, 2004
    i dont think he has an agenda against mexicans, i just think he's way passed it now...he's always looking to make a name for himself and has ruined some pretty good fights.....

    retire joe

    plus, he probably felt bad that he didnt take a point away from manny for that third knockdown that was clearly a foul...
     
    freddy-wak, Feb 24, 2009
    freddy-wak, Feb 24, 2009
    #18
  4. nhojrem

    nhojrem Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,436
    0
    Jan 4, 2009
    plus the judging error..
    what is wrong with boxing....:fire:fire:fire:fire
     
    nhojrem, Feb 24, 2009
    nhojrem, Feb 24, 2009
    #19
  5. Kush

    Kush Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    27,095
    980
    Dec 16, 2007

    Cortez shouldve taken a point away from pac or at least a dq
     
    Kush, Feb 24, 2009
    Kush, Feb 24, 2009
    #20
  6. bmf95b

    bmf95b Boxing Fan Full Member

    5,268
    11
    Jan 9, 2007
    3 knockdown rule NOT IN EFECT.
     
    bmf95b, Feb 24, 2009
    bmf95b, Feb 24, 2009
    #21
  7. 4Rounder

    4Rounder Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,275
    21
    May 14, 2006
    1) 3 KD rule not in effect.

    2) Pacquiao hit Marquez while down, no point deducted.

    3) Marquez was not in shaky legs after 3 flash KD's

    4) Cortez has become awful in big fights becoming inconsistent and makes too many mistakes. The dude gets in the fighter's way.
     
    4Rounder, Feb 24, 2009
    4Rounder, Feb 24, 2009
    #22
  8. futonrevolution

    futonrevolution Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,304
    0
    Nov 22, 2008
    How exactly do you "investigate" Cortez to see if he's a "friend to Mexican boxers," huh?

    Give him a taste test between Nigra Modelo and San Miguel Pale?
    Check his Facebook for Mexicans?
    Have a drinking buddy wear a wire and ask leading questions?

    How about just having big-name fighters stop using Cortez because he's borderline-incompetent? IMHO, that makes a lot more sense.
     
    futonrevolution, Feb 25, 2009
    futonrevolution, Feb 25, 2009
    #23
  9. Soriano

    Soriano Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,949
    0
    Sep 8, 2008
    But thefact that he admitted he had the option to stop but did not. Why did Cortez bring it now and what is the point of him bringing it up? Just because Marquez does not want him to officiate? Whoa! In process, the fish is caught thru his mouth.

    Cortez should be banned from officiating.
     
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    #24
  10. bernie4366

    bernie4366 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,681
    22
    Aug 29, 2006
    referees always have the option to stop you *******... he didn't stop it for the crazy, INSANE reason that JMM WASN'T HURT!!!

    CAN YOU BELIEVE IT??? HOW BIASED AND UNFAIR!!! OOOOOHHHHH BOOOOO HOOOO!!!
     
    bernie4366, Feb 25, 2009
    bernie4366, Feb 25, 2009
    #25
  11. Soriano

    Soriano Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,949
    0
    Sep 8, 2008
    By his oral admission on this article. This is the evidence that writer can attest and testify to. He said if Mexicans (that includes Marquez) are my enemies, I could have stopped that fight (JMM-PAC) and would not allow to continue. He did not clarify that he is a neutral referee and do not see anyone as friends or foes, so he did what he did as neutral referee. As a matter of fact, he said I don't dislike Mexicans, that's why I allowed Marquez to continue.
     
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    #26
  12. Soriano

    Soriano Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,949
    0
    Sep 8, 2008
    He said he could have stopped it. My point is, slow-brained moron, he, in his own words, allowed Marquez to continue, despite the fact that he had the option to stop it. He admitted that this actuation of his showed that he considered Marquez or Mexican boxers, friends, not enemies, in the same manner way he treats his Mexican relatives. Doesn't that show his bias to a race who incidentally he admitted he is affinity to? He did not say I would do the same thing whether he is my friend or enemy. Thus, restating his neutrality and objectiveness as a referee.
     
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    #27
  13. theunderdog

    theunderdog Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,814
    1
    Jul 4, 2006
    correct decision for the wrong reasons. it doesnt matter if cortez was high, drunk, or stupid. jmm should have continued as he was still more than enough tp challenge pac that day.

    if cortez stopped that, he would have robbed all the boxing fans of one of the greatest rivalries of our time. i do not like cortez at all. but the was correct to let it go in this one.
     
    theunderdog, Feb 25, 2009
    theunderdog, Feb 25, 2009
    #28
  14. futonrevolution

    futonrevolution Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,304
    0
    Nov 22, 2008
    If Mexicans are his friends, he could have stopped the fight, too. Referees have made worse calls than that before and will do so in the future. Shocking but true.

    Has anybody ever said that Mexicans are their enemies? Well... other than Lou Dobbs or Daniel Boone?

    Anyway, I think it would have been a disservice to both JMM and Pac (and us) to have stopped that fight. Whether you love them, hate them, or don't care, it's shaping up to be a decent trilogy.
     
    futonrevolution, Feb 25, 2009
    futonrevolution, Feb 25, 2009
    #29
  15. Soriano

    Soriano Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,949
    0
    Sep 8, 2008
    Correct or not, he should not have use this instance to ingratiate himself to the Mexican boxers so that he can keep his job to officiate their matches. It showed that he is not an objective referee when he revealed this. I have no problem w/ JMM continuing the fight. But the fact that Cortez said "I allowed him to continue....". That's something else. He is using it to make a case that he does not like Mexican boxers. He should have said, I am a neutral referee, and I should not express my like or dislike to a particular boxer or race. That's my point.
     
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    Soriano, Feb 25, 2009
    #30
Page 2 of 9