AT1 is fighting on FNF

I don't use the word "robbery" often, but that was highway robbery. One of the most incompetent actions I've seen perpetrated by boxing officials. Shameful!

 

I agree.Outright robbery.

 

I agree that it was highway robbery. But it has more to do with the rules than with the referee, specifically. They should allow officials to review the instant replay between rounds, to make judgments on these kinds of things. The ref can't catch everything as it happens in real time, and they're often not in position to make the right call anyway. He was just being honest at the end, as he repeatedly told them that the replay clearly showed that it was caused by a clash of heads, but he didn't call it that way when it happened.

 

:rofl :rofl :rofl

You claim every person that JT got a decision over (in a CLOSE fight) was a robbery.

 

The referee didn't rule it a punch or a butt. He simply didn't see it either way. He didn't see a butt, so he assumed it was a punch, but that doesn't mean he saw a punch open a cut. Therefore, he really had no ruling. Interesting though that earlier, ESPN2 said that the ref called it a butt. Later though, it seemed that he said he did not see a butt.

I found it odd that the commission told the ref that they'd leave it up to him, but then after he said that it should go to the scorecards, they then told him "No."

The question is whether they want to get it right or not. If you want to be correct, and rule the fight properly, they will either change this to a no contest, or really, go to the cards as they should have done, and award it to Thompson (if he was ahead).

Another question not answered here is why they needed to stop it at all. Thompson could see, and clearly wanted to continue. There was absolutely no medical need to stop that fight. To be totally honest, if we really want to be honest, there is almost never a medical necessity to stop a fight on a cut. Cuts are cosmetic - they can look ugly, require stitches, cause unsightly blood, but they don't usually actually medically require a stoppage. In the old school bouts that I research, they NEVER stopped a fight on a cut. Was totally unheard of. In fact, "first blood" was simply another betting point, a normal occurence in the course of a fight. However, politics, and the need to pacify those who think there is brutality going on if they see blood, caused things to change, and they ruined the purity of the sport.

 

Friend, I never said "robbery." I said they were bogus decisions. And they were.:yep

 

Guys, I got a big question.

BJ Flores was supposed to fight in a "swing bout" (aka only shown if there is time) tonight against Corey Phelps...but it's now taken off boxrec?

Anyone know what that is about? did the mention Flores at all?

 

It's really only the pbf fanboys who hate on at1. He's just another guys who happens to be a professional boxer giving is opinion on floyd and the fanboys can't take it so they hate on him. at1 never disrespects anyone from what I have seen and wish him best of luck on his career.

 

exactly only the floydtoys dislike the guy cause he dared to criticize Fraud.

 

Anthony Thomspon really got screwed in there last night. The result should have gone to the cards because the cut was obviously caused from a headbutt. Thompson also deserved the decision against Foreman, he really has had some awful luck in the ring lately. I wouldn't be surprised if this gets overturned soon but if not than the final decision will be a horrible one.

The top guys at 154 seem stale but there are a lot of young and exciting guys coming through. Thompson would make for good fights with most of them. But if he keeps getting screwed out of wins that he deserves than he's going to miss out on some good fights and paydays. I hope his luck turns.

 

:yep

 

It'd should always be assumed it is a butt, unless the Ref saw the punch land that opened a cut.

The problem with the ref was that he said it looked like it might be from a butt from the replay.. key word "looked"... he was definitive at all. He kept going back to saying he didn't see the butt as it occured, so he left it open it could have been a punch.

He had the chance to say, I was wrong, it was a butt.. go to the cards. He didn't ****ing do that.

Ref was ****.

 

You knew I would like that.:good

 

Ok I don't get this. Ref admits that it's a headbutt, so why not rule it that way and go to the scorecards? What fuken BS!!