He wasn't robbed of a knockout because Fury should've been given an eight count the first time he was kept up by the ropes. The referee, in fact, nearly got Fury brutally knocked out Ray Mercer Tommy Morrison style.
It wouldn't have been a standing eight count because it was the ropes that kept him up - it would've been treated as a normal eight count.
Fury should have been given a count immediately after crashing into the ropes because the rules state that if a fighter is held up by the ropes you call it a knockdown and give the fighter a count. But the ref was paid off (like the judges were) by the rich men in suits so that the cash cow Fury could fight Joshua down the line for even more money and all the belts. What I have a problem with is if the ref refused to award Usyk the knockdown and ignore the rules then why did the ref step in to give Fury the count when it became obvious that Usyk was 1 second away from landing the crunching, brain rattling, finishing blow. Why did the referee stop Usyk from landing the finishing blow to turn off Fury's lights?
I don't think it was particularly controversial.It wouldn't have been too controversial a stoppage either if the referee decided that. It was in the grey area. Tbh, in a fairly close title fight I'd rather the ref did what he did, give the fighter a count, and let the fight continue.
This is a stupid “what if” scenario too many people are clinging on to…. You could also say “if the ref didn’t administer a standing 8 and Tyson still stayed on his feet it wouldn’t have been a knockdown round” And it would be an equally valid statement… “what if the ropes weren’t there he would have fallen” “what if God smote him down right there it would have been a KO!” miserable folk always looking for controversy… the internet sucks. Usyk won a hard fought bought, and it was a good fight.
Incorrect. The rules state that if a fighter is help up by the ropes then it should scored a knockdown. Your opinion is irrelevant. The rules are what is relevant.
How do you determine that he was “held up by the ropes” and didn’t lean back and bounce off of them knowing they were there? Did he seem unconscious? Was he literally layed against the ropes being “held up by them” for any extended period of time? How do you define “held up” by the ropes? Because there wasn’t a point where he was immobile against the ropes… even if he bounced off of them…. Y’all are reaching. Again, people just want something to talk about… can’t just enjoy a good fight and a great win.
Not stupid. Usyk used up a lot of gas working him around the ring to trap him in the corner and unload. When he finally trapped him and was about to unload, the ref then remembers the ropes rule (which apparently wasn't even under the licensing board's rules) and grabs usyk mid punch.
It's fairly obvious. Whether the referee is corrupt, or not, it ultimately served to Fury's detriment. Had he been given a count the first time the ropes kept him up (not the second or third), he would've been able to recover more easily instead of taking a barrage of flush punches. If we go along with your view that the referee was paid off to help Fury, he ultimately did not do so. He would've tried to avoid giving Fury a count, but then realised later on that giving him a count was the most beneficial thing to do. Ultimately, it didn't help Fury.
I disagree. Fury wouldn't have recovered in time after a standing 8 count. He was gone. You take longer than an 8 count to recover when your legs are completely gone.
I did! But I looked at it similar to how I looked at Tim Bradley against Provodnikov when his eyes were rolling in the back of his head and he kept punching…. With admiration for his toughness and resolve.. A lesser fighter would have been done.. And the man finished the fight well and possibly even won another round after that!
His legs were gone and he crashed into the ropes multiple times. That is according to any reasonable man, the definition of a knockdown. I can only reason with a reasonable man. So I leave it to you.
Your definition of a knockdown doesn’t even involve anyone being “down”! I’m honestly not trying to troll, as troll-y as that sounds.
