Are 'British stoppages' really a bad thing?

A fight being stopped a moment too early is always better than a fight going on too long

If the outcome is beyond doubt in a very 1 sided fight then why let it carry on to its natural conclusion?

 

Yes, they're ****ing **** and annoying, but the real issue is the pointless mismatches. But I'm one of those that hates stoppages altogether. I don't think the referee should be able to stop fights unless they hit the canvas, the corner throws the towel in or they quit. It's boxing, they're so protected these days its ridiculous, and I know its because of the damage but it comes with the territory. Don't box then, nobody said it was safe, so stop making it safe.

 

Each instance is different I feel.

What is most concerning is the inconsistency between the time a referee steps in on an away fighter compared to a home one.

Thaxton vs Murray - Murray lands one or two decent punches, Thaxton wobbles back slightly and is waved off.

Webb vs Arron - Webb takes a pounding for quite a while and is allowed to continue.

 

Agree with this 100%

 

Obviously I would rather a fight end early rather than later for the Boxers sake but I do understand why people are against early stoppages for instances I do feel in Championship fights there should be little more leeway I mean the Bellew McKenzie stoppage was dreadful considering what was at stake.

 

Griffith-Paret is the only one off the top of my head that was determined by poor refereeing.

Owen-Pintor, Ramos-Moore, Carnera-Schaff, all freak occurrences.

 

That'd just be playing into the hands of the abolishionists.

 

The stoppages are becoming worse and worse. Yes it is better to stop the fight too early than too late, however the recent stoppages are a joke

 

Lets just say we had overseas Ref's for all of our Brit bouts would they be so quick to stop the action????.....I very much doubt it.....

I think one of the big reasons fights get stopped especially by British Ref's is because they know most of the lads from these shores and the lads from other places who fight in the UK a lot very well and they don't want to see any of them getting hurt any more than is necessary in the fight itself.

 

It all depends on the situation - if someone looks like they are taking a beating, out of their depth or badly hurt then thats cool with me.

Sometimes though the boxer isn't even hurt and has just taken a few punches, sometimes you have to give them the benefit of the doubt and let them continue a little while longer.

 

Yes that's what I actually mean. Unless its a brutal knockout, the count should always be made if a boxer gets up.

And in my opinion they should always be given the benefit. It's lambs to the slaughter and obviously it'd be abolished but its just what I'd like to see. I have no empathy or interest in a boxers life, health or money. It's sad when its an unhappy ending, but that's what happens when you punch another guy in the head for a living. Play the game.

 

Pathetic post...you need banning for that you blood thirsty ghoul

 

Yes, especially when that sack of ****, Howard Foster is involved - worst referee in the world.

But it all depends on the situation. Every fight is different so you can't really say whether they're good or bad, but if you're looking at the overall British stoppages that we've had, then I'd say yes, they're bad and full of bull.

**** B refs. :thumbsup