I rewatched Hatton vs Urango last night......

And you DON'T think Hatton does that? :think

 

11. No shoes or boots with springs allowed.

whats wrong with that?

 

Springs! :good

That would be kinda awesome.

 

You've sort of pissed on your own argument really...because he has neither been deducted or DQ'd for the above offence then it has to be assumed that refs do not consider that he wrestles or hugs, you might think it but the vastly experienced paid professionals who have officiated at his fights do not...whose opinion do I value most? :huh

 

A tournament of spring-heeled heavys bashing ten bells out of each other:rasta Boiing*

 

No I don't. That rule is there because the Marquess of Queensbury rules superceded the London Prize Rules where putting opponents in holds and throwing or wrestling them to the ground was allowed.

Thats the level and type of holding and wrestling the rule is refering to, not clinching and/ or working inside that has gone on in boxing for the last 100 years but that only seems to be a problem for some people because Hatton does it.

Luckily the referees don't download the rules and then read them totally unaware of the intended meaning or context they were writtren in.:good

 

:thumbsup

 

Did you happen to miss the other part of that, you know where it says hugging, or has the meaning of that word changed? It says hugging. Hugging means hugging, and Hatton hugs.

Haha, you guys love the refs judgement. When Cortez was in there quick sharp breaking up that hugging bull**** you were crying your eyes out, what amazing double standards! :yep

They are told to work out of these so called "clinches" by the refs (and I'd put Hatton's on the side of mauling and holding than clinching). They aren't just saying it for the fun of it. Therefore one would assume he would be punished for doing it consistently against the refs word. Surprising this never happened in England? Not a bit.

 

I'll tell you what TFFP. You go over to the Classic Section and get clarification for that rule ("hugging" means bear hugging to weaken an opponent BTW, not clinching) and the context in which it was made and then you can come back here and apologize.

As an aside, assuming at least some refs know the rules and how they should be enforced little better than TFFP, anyone care to guess how many points Hatton has been deducted for illegal holding during a 47 fight career conducted in both the UK and America?

 

Not enough that is for sure. I constantly hear "break out" or "stop holding", yet amazingly not once is he warned. I have to wonder why this is, if the ref feels the need to keep telling him the same thing why he isn't punished. Although this wasn't a surprise in England.

Hatton/Mayweather was a joyous night on many levels. It was incredibly sweet to hear Hatton and his fans blaming the ref after so many years where we've wondered quite what the hell Hatton is allowed to get away with. Wonderful :rofl

 

Its not just Hatton in the UK though is it? Fighters generally (and Hatton in the USA) are rarely warned for clinching because referrees understand how to apply the rules and what constitutes wrestling and hugging.

I'm not going over this **** yet again. The thread is about a possible disqualification of Hatton in the Urango fight, anyone who thinks he should be DQ'd in that fight either doesn't understand the rules or is just hating on Hatton. I did have you down for the latter but you do seem genuinely ignorant of the rules as well.

 

I know for damn sure hugging is illegal. The refs seem very hesistant on being "contraversial" and chucking guys out for it, that I will give you. Up until Cortez anyway. I don't see much difference to what Barney did on a domestic level compared to a lot of Hatton's latter work against Urango. Can you tell me?

Very very minimal difference, except Hatton is Hatton, you've gotta brave to upset the money boys.

 

Hugging, in the context of those rules, does not mean clinching

And spare me your little conspiracy theories....Hattons never been docked a point for illegal holding (on either side of the Altlantic) and how many times do you see other boxers deducted points for clinching? That tells you how most refs interpret that rule.....but I'm sure you know best!!

 

Chucking guys out? He's barely ever been warned, let alone docked a point for it.

Kinda suggests you are wrong.

 

That doesn't mean he shouldn't have been. Matthew Barney hardly got away with a thing in his fights and he was a consistent holder/hugger/"clincher" whatever you wish to dress it up as. Suggests a lot of how refs choose to referee this rule depends on the reputation of the fighter!