What are your suggestions? I don’t think allowing a fight to go on when a fighter is completely out on his feet and making a rule that a referee can’t stop it because it’s late in the last round is an improvement: it’s a recipe for death or irreparable brain damage. I don’t think there are any rules that are not already in place that are better than letting the guy who is actually in the ring and seeing what is going on from a closer and better vantage point than any other make the call on stopping or not stopping a fight. Is it infallible? Of course not. But ANY rule which says a ref cannot stop a fight when a fighter is defenseless is basically saying ‘If he dies, he dies.’ You be you, Ivan Drago.
That is not what I'm suggesting. Obviously you want to avoid Ivan Drago scenarios. What Im saying is that there are hundreds, thousands of referees. Each of them are unique human beings with their own opinions and tolerance levels. Each have their own judgement and observational skills. So by your logic, you are saying every fight could potentially have literally thousands of different outcomes depending on the discretion and unique opinions of a ref. The numbers rise even higher a couple more thousand if a ref is incompetent or biased. That doesn't sit well with me that there is no universal standard when a fighter who busted his ass for 3 months might have his legacy and pay day ruined because everyone has their own opinion on what to do. It's a sport. Imagine if every time threw a 3 point shot, the refs got to determine if it should be 2 or 3 points and there was no universal rule on the exact range of said shot.
Boxing has plenty of set parameters, just like other sports. And the refs do make that determination — they throw up their hands to let us know it’s a 3-point attempt and they can rule if a guy’s foot was touching the line. And in football they can call holding on one play and not the next even though there’s probably holding on basically every play. And basketball refs can call hand-checks or not call them. Don’t get me started on balls and strikes. There’s not a sport I’m aware of where there’s no human judgment (and thus possibility of human error or one referee officiating/enforcing differently than another) involved. And in those sports the referee doesn’t — at least not approaching the degree a boxing referee does — have someone’s life literally resting on their judgment. Sorry your guy got stopped but he was out on his feet. He was rendered unable to continue. That’s the way it goes. But if you really have ideas on HOW to change things and exactly, precisely WHAT change you’d make, I’d like to hear them. But not just ‘things should change because guys shouldn’t lose fights.’
It's really hard to invest in a conversation when you keep making condescending comments like "sorry your guy lost" or putting words in someone's mouth claiming they believe things should change just because "i don't want my guy to lose" because I literally never said anything remotely close to that. I think they ruined Taylor's career and in nowhere near the only one who believes this. Obviously there is going to be human judgement in every sport. The basketball example flew over your head. Yes some calls are disputed over 3 pointers but they have vert explicit rules as far what a 3 pointer ISN'T and they aren't stopping a game every 30 seconds arguing over WHAT a 3 point shot is. Boxing is the only sport where we argue for literally decades about wether or not an event ended legitimately and the right call was made. Dempsey vs tunney was more than 100 ****ing years ago. Lennox vs Vitali is another and people bicker for 75 pages everytime the thread is made. Andre Ward vs Kovalev was another **** storm. You keep acting surprised like you've been living under a rock when i use these examples are dismiss them like you don't get what im saying. As for solutions, it's pretty simple. Instead of "unwritten rules" like ask a guy what his name is, make him take 2 steps forward, look in his eyes and check fot signs of life, make them WRITTEN rules so we don't have people arguing and flaming 5 years later if it was a good call by the ref. Every fighter should be allowed to go out on his shield unless they are being beaten senselessly and offering no defense. Don't end a fight right after a knock down unless a guy gets counted out from 1-10...i thought that was why the count was invented in the first place? These are just a few examples while still allowing for human judgement on a case for case basis.
I simply do not agree with you. People still debate whether the ball hit the ground on the “Immaculate Reception,” one of the most famous plays in NFL history that took place in the 1970s. You are angry because Taylor lost. You just said it ruined his career. He won a championship after and fought for another. Chavez ruined him physically to some degree but that had nothing to do with the stoppage. Your main points seem to be (a) Taylor’s career was ‘ruined’ and (b) in other fights you think Chavez got a break (I think the only one you mentioned what Whitaker, and I also disagreed with the scoring, but I don’t think it was an outright robbery). You want to have a guy get knocked down, get up, get an 8-count, have him go through complete concussion protocol while the other guy plays with his cell phone in the corner for several minutes? I’ve got a better idea — if we need to do all that stop the fight because the guy who put him in that shape has won ... the fighter has been rendered helpless/unable to continue if it takes all of that. Which is the object of the sport, for one to either outpoint the opponent OR render him helpless. I don’t agree with putting fighters’ lives on the line because you (or anyone) is more worried about their record. Do you not know that sometimes when they wave a fight off without the 10-count that we’re talking about precious seconds that can mean the difference between life and death, of life-ruining brain damage and maybe being able to walk and function again? But you want to count first ... to satisfy your desire for a certain result? No, just because a guy stumbled to his feet doesn’t mean he can or should continue. In this case, for the upteenth time, Meldrick was unresponsive to a referee who was standing right in front of him counting out loud and with his hands ... while Taylor was in lala-land staring uncomprehendingly into the distance. It’s clear his mind wasn’t there. Which means he’s finished. Which means the guy who put him in that condition wins.
Tony Perez in Superfight 2. To be fair he screwed up against Ali by cutting the round short when he had hurt Joe a little before that. It was a slim chance maybe to score a knockdown. Then he did nothing while Ali held excessively. It took a special kind of suck to ruin an AliFrazier bout. Perez should have bought a ticket. The next one is Richard Steele for letting Ray Leonard violate every rule in the rulebook 17 times without a single point taken. Leonard made a farce out of it. At one point Sugar steps back winds up a bolo and drills Hagler right I the family jewels. Steele? They must have gotten to Steele. I cant Leonard praise. It was that bad. He hitting him on the break maybe 10 times. It's all good I hate that fight
Haven't read the whole thread but for a truly incompetent judge, you can't look any further than the infamous Adalaide Byrd. Not just for the Canelo GGG fight but there have been other stinkers from her too. By all accounts a very nice person but a truly terrible judge.
According to Brit Ricky Hatton, Joe Cortez was a bias SOB who wouldn’t let Hatton fight his fight on the inside against Mayweather and wanted Mayweather to win because he was upset that Hatton’s soccer hooligan fans had booed the US national anthem before the fight.
Knowing Gene he'd say "So what Ive still got one good eye lets fight" Tough guy Gene & one of boxings genuine good guys too
Interesting that the ref in that fight was Joey Curtis, who could become infamous six months later for his handling of the first Michael Dokes - Mike Weaver fight. Having watched the Tillis-Shavers fight last night, I don't think Curtis' performance was as bad as you saw it. Shavers did hit Tillis after the bell on at least a couple of occasions. The second time I caught it (Cosell said it was at the bell, but to me it sounded after (unless the sound was out of sync)), Curtis didn't say anything to Shavers.
Joe Cortez in his latter years was he bought ??? who knows but he should never have been officiating There are so many blatantly crooked ones it would take all night to name them but if they come from Vegas? Know what I mean
Well, it probably is a bit distorted in my memory since I haven't seen it in two years, but surely it was clear that the ref was bias towards Tillis?
