For those that think Parker was "robbed" - what do you make of New Zealand's media disagreeing?

Parker wasn't robbed. Joshua won the fight.

My gripe is the scorecards show Parker had no chance of winning on points unless he was dominant. I felt Parker won 3-5 rounds, and overall there was not a huge amount in the fight, but Joshua won it fairly clearly. For 119 & 118 to be given, you have to be giving AJ everything.

The referee also help detract from Parkers chances by breaking them apart whenever he was inside. At times the weren't even tangled and he was still separating! An absolutely inept performance.

The odds were against Parker, even in a totally fair fight, but.... in typical Hearn fashion - the cards and referee do that little bit to improve the chances of his fighter. The Sky commentry was also hard to listen to.

The thing is.... I like Joshua, he comes across professional (if a little fake), and he is a good boxer. Just.... the whole commentary hype, and the fact he benefits from Hearn judges/referees is starting to turn me against the guy.

 

I watched the fight live and have re-watched it since. I was supporting Joe.. but I can't find anything to complain about the scorecards personally. The only clear round I gave to Joe was the sixth. The rest are pretty much all AJ. Parker was busy with a fast jab.. but he hardly ever actually caught AJ with it. They were almost entirely landed on the gloves of Joshua.

Look at the after fight photos, there is not a single mark on Joshua, compare that to Joe. That is pretty convincing evidence of how the fight went in itself.