Another Negative Assessment Of Horn's Tactics

This fellow meticulously analyzed the tactics the Horn employed against Pac.

This content is protected

BTW
The ref told Horn that he was there to protect him. He sure as hell wasn't there to protect Pac-that's for sure.

 

Mayweather would have started fouling back and Horn would have toned it down. Or the ref would have started warning Mayweather and maybe disqualified him for retaliating.

 

In what specific ways is criticism of fouls drivel?

 

This isn't Vale Todo, a contest in Brazilian Jujitsu where anything and everything, eye gauging, biting, kicking in the groin, head-butting, elbowing, arm locks, headlocks, hitting on the breaks or after the bell and choke holds are OK.

 

If they think that cheating is OK, then they should not be surprised when the rest of the boxing world considers their winners cheaters and their cheating-assisted wins bogus.

 

Why is concern over foul tactics which can potentially lead to serious injury drivel? The reality of the danger involved in boxing isn't being denied. Of course there is physical danger. However, rules are there to minimize those dangers by preventing the anything-goes situation that can lead to them.

BTW

Rules have a purpose. For example, hitting behind the head or rabbit punching is made illegal because it might lead to crippling by severely injuring the cervical part of the spinal cord.

Thumbing the eye increases the risk of permanent injury leading to blindness.

Hitting below the belt exposes the urinary bladder and gonads to injury.

Head butting is illegal because it the head isn't a fist and the head isn't gloved and it can easily fracture a facial bone such as the cheek bone or an eye socket.

So what you seem to be demanding is something other than boxing.