BBBoC to have a close look at O'Connor card for Smith v Simpson

If anything folk would have been swayed towards a Smith decision then given the comments on TV! Also a 10-8 first round and the 12th round to Smith!

So going by your ideology and the fact the majority of folk still thought Simpson won... That highlights how badly it was scored even more!

 

It was a close fight which could have gone either way.

118-112 seems very wide for that fight but as Ian points out its only a difference of opinion in 2/3 rounds.

O'Connor's 'previous' though makes it look worse.

Sad to say but may be time to turn it in on his part

 

I agree some of the rounds were close. However, I think no matter how many times anyone scrutinised or went through that fight with a fine toothcomb that they would come out with a score anything like his.
From watching it live, to watching it with Sky's Smith-favoured commentary, to watching it in silence. I don't see how anyone could get that score, especially someone who has the actual job of scoring it!

 

:deal

When I watched Calzaghe-Hopkins on my own I thought Joe won pretty clearly, by something like 4 rounds and I couldn't believe that it was a split decision.

It is a plain simple fact, people work off each other and there is no doubt that they get effected by what others say and will generally follow what others say.

 

I thought his scoring was a bit wide of the mark,but what if he thought a lot of the rounds were close but Smith was nicking them?

 

Bit harsh, but probably right for the most part.

 

I've answered that in my post you quoted. Do you agree then that it's a possibility that John only won 2 rounds depending on how you look at it? Nonsense. Noone, not even Smith I don't think seen it like th. And as already said, for someone who's JOB it is to score a fight fairly, it's a disgrace.

If it wasn't then why would there be such a backlash against the scoring from everyone on this board? Do the people on this board not know how boxing works or is scored? Did they need enlightened by the great piece of information that he may have scored all these 'close' rounds to Smith... No everyone seen it for what it was... An unprofessional controversial shambles.

 

Is there a chance the card will be made public?

 

it wouldn't hurt for judges to be made accountable for their decisions, in the case of ian john lewis the other week an example should have been made, a suspension of around 3 months.

In the case of O'Connor it has happened time and time again, its embarrasing and maybe it is an idea to release the scorecards after fights and see which rounds were given to which fighter. Could only be beneficial to the sport.

 

That would be interesting. Just to see what rounds he gave to Smith, would give us a lot of clues as to what he was thinking IMO.

For example and IIRC, there was a judge who gave De la Hoya the last round against Trinidad when Oscar hardly did anything and was a CLEAR Tito round...you can assume by that that he had Trinidad so far ahead and decided not to make it obvious so made his cards a little closer.

 

There is no conceivable way that you could only judge Simpson to be winning only 2 rounds. I think there were around 4 rounds from 5-9 where they were very clearly Simpson rounds.

Using the "If he gave all the close rounds to Smith" argument doesn't really work as he clearly failed to score clear rounds to Simpson as well.

 

The fact even rounds are hardly ever be scored doesn't help matters. Is that an official directive?

 

Defintley need's to go man .No more judging like that .F----g terrible scoring .