Why??? What do you want exactly? If a man is not winning a fight, then surely it is up to the referee to end it no matter who it is, and shouldnt the corner be doing more to preserve their fighter??? And to be fair to referees, they are stuck in between a rock and a hard place, they are damned if they do and damned if they dont.
Too much lager me thinks!!!! Sorry, i can make sense when i have too.... And if you are about to call me a noob and tell me to stfu also, can i just say before you do, You **** off know it all!!!!!
IMHO the Smith-Degale stoppage was probably correct. Smith was done. The Bellew-McKenzie stoppage was very poor. Ovill deserved the same chance that Tony had in the first couple of rounds.
I would never call you a noob or to stfu squire, lager hmm sounds like a good dinner would of been better if you stuck to the vino though :smooch
i used to love british refs because they let you work on the inside but now they stop anything for any reason. Bellew stoppage was poor, DeGale stoppage was poor, journeymen are always stopped for any reason.
degale/smith stoppage was fair. maybe slightly early but there was no sense letting the guy just keep getting beaten up
i think the british refs have allways got the like's of Michael Watson and Paul Ingle in the backs of their minds. and they dont want to be the ref that was in charge of that sort of injury to a fighter.
its bulll**** , once a fighter gets stuck on the ropes i fear the ref is just gonna dive in when there's no need as in alot of occasions the fighter is blocking and ducking the hits. this is boxing u cant protect the boxer to much - there in a sport where u get hurt.
it will turn fans off. The Khan fight will have been stopped at 10 different points if it was in the UK.