In a wild, seesaw battle the two warriors - Nigel Benn and Iran "the Blade" Barkley waged war in a furious 1990 bout. After not penalizing Benn for hitting Barkley while he was on the canvas referee Carlos Padilla decides to halt the bout in the waning seconds of round one. Barkley, who landed many clean blows of his own even driving Benn across the ring at one point, is never granted a rematch. He deserved it though. The stoppage looked dodgy to me having just viewed it again on youtube. I think Barkley might have turned the tables and gotten Benn out of there if he had been allowed to continue.
Barkley was delivering straight, clean punches whereas Benn was winging wild haymakers throughout the short fight. I still believe Barkley to be the better fighter. He ducked most of the wild punches but did get clipped and hurt obviously. Barkley also started slow against Duran and Hearns. I feel he would have gotten Benn out of there ala Hearns I had he made it past that first round. Padilla did a horrible job in that one and he was usually a good referee.
Certainly was...the ref could do nothing about it, you almost see he didnt want to stop it but had to. Cant take anything away from Benn but that fight should have went on, and I think it would have continued to be enjoyable.
It probably shouldn't have stopped there, but what can you do? Three knockdown rule in effect and Barkley's balance was ****. Don't think Barkley would have won, for whatever reason he didn't seem to have his power or technique from what we saw, but it should have gone on.
As others said, there was a 3 KD rule in effect and Padilla didn't wanna stop it as he motioned to the WBO official whether or not he should stop it
That is why it was stopped-the three knockdown rule. although I think had there not been a 3 knockdown rule Barkley probably could have won. Barkley has taken more punishment from Toney and Hearns than he did from Benn, but Benn knocked him down and Barkley was a little cold. I think Barkley could have come out for round 2 and knocked out Benn with a left hook. But with the 3 knockdown rule which both sides knew about Barkley was stopped in one round by Benn. Nevertheless, Benn was landing his hard punches very easily on Barkley.
Bull**** Barkley would have won, he was getting murdered and would continue to get murdered, he was on shakey legs.
That first punch Benn landed was unbelievable, Barkley wasn't right because of that. Benn did want Barkley again at 168 or 175 but it never happened. He thought he'd always beat Barkley because he could be hit. (He also said he'd beat Hearns because he'd only have to hit him)
I remember thinking the ref lost control. Benn was better but Barkley deserved another shot just to clear any doubt.
Thanks for responding to those who did. I forgot about the three knock down rule. Hard to believe this fight was almost 20 years ago!
This whole fight seemed to be a mess. Barkley was shakey and probably would have lost even if it had gone on.
true. and also benn was no hearns . it is simple : benn > sims > barkley reaons : benn > sims - h2h and the barkley fight. sims > barkley - h2h , the duran and hearns fights. back to the topic : the fight should have been stopped. definitely.