AA says Dirrell should be disqualified...

What is the distinction? Ie. what is the scan 'negative' for?

I'm genuinely asking btw, and I think if I remember correctly, you have somekind of medical job? The statement from Shaw has been reported elsewhere as saying that there was no concussion, but it's not an area I have any knowledge in.

 

No. Boo has the medical job. Look at the following. If you take a blow to the head hard enough to cause a headache, you are concussed. A scan would show bleeding and stuff like that. OBVIOUS soft tissue damage.

[url]https://health.google.com/health/ref/Concussion[/url]

A concussion results from a significant blow to the head. Symptoms can range from mild to severe. They can include:

• Headache
• Altered level of consciousness (drowsy, hard to arouse, or similar changes)
• Loss of consciousness
• Memory loss (amnesia) of events surrounding the injury

Emergency signs:

• Changes in alertness and consciousness
• Convulsions
• Muscle weakness on one or both sides
• Persistent confusion
• Persistent unconsciousness (coma)
• Repeated vomiting
• Unequal pupils
• Unusual eye movements
• Walking problems

 

Yeah, yeah... you would think that would register before they want all crazy about this American bias.

 

Nobody should of been disqualified, it should of been ruled a NC. If anyone is to blame its Coles.

 

Cole had a bad night at office, but how was he to blame for Abraham throwing an illegal punch? He had no alternative but to disqualify Abraham. The rules are very clear.

 

"clear" thats a hard word to use, since theres been spamming topics about it all night with fights that show it is not "clear"

Anywho ofc he should to the tests, should not be a problem doing them at the hops or on the way there. his **** test has been taken.

and AA never said anything of the sort that the OP is saying.

(ofc the last two pharagraps are not ment for you, but the topic in general)

 

Lots of illegal punches are thrown in this sport but fighters dont get disqualified. Its the fine line between intentional or not and AA's punch was clearly not.

 

And NC because Abraham committed a foul.

 

The threads in question are disputing the fairness of the rule pertaining the nature of disqualification (incorrectly imo). There can be no dispute regarding the implementation of the rules last night.
If a downed opponent is unable to continue as the result of an illegal blow, the offending fighter is disqualified. Thems the rules. As I said before they are very clear.

 

No. Not only can you see that it was clearly intentional, even a day later he is making the statement that he believed he was allowed to throw it because the referee wasn't there to stop it. The fool's best excuse is he doesn't know the rules? Please. He stopped. Set. Threw. He knew exactly what he was doing and has admitted the punch was intentional.

 

Seriously???

If anything, they should go to the scorecards. You are just showing how biased and idiotic you are.


Can't expect much better from you, though. Carry on.:good

 

Well I disagree. I think Abraham clearly threw a punch when he knew Dirrell was on the canvas.
Does he deserve to be demonised? No.
Did he deserve to be disqualified? Yes.
Many illegal punches are thrown where disqualification does not follow. Correct. But generally when an opponent is incapicitated by an illegal blow disqualification follows.
And btw if Pac had been disqualified against Marquez, or Benn against Barkley, or Khan against Kristjansen, none of them could have had grounds for complaint.