Regarding tonights FNF. In a situation when the boxer is not in an exchange and he hears the 10 second warning, do they really try to be consciously stop throwing punches when he hears the bell? I really thought Barthelemy was going to throw those punches until he was stopped by the referee dispite hearing the bell as his intension was to finish Mendez in that round.
Well, you can't prove it was intentional, so the ref should've been allowed to give Mendez 5 minutes to recover. They do it w/ low blows . . . and this was a similar kind of foul. And I guess a point should've been deduced from Barthelemy.
The punch that Broner landed on Maidana was clearly after the bell and it was intentional.........................
Maybe this question is better for the forum members who have boxed. Do they almost always hear the bell or despite hearing the bell just continue the onslaught until the referee breaks?
I've (amateur) boxed and was well aware of the bell ... I was also usually adrenaline-rush gassed and happy to hear it
You've got to know the rules. You can't punch after the bell indicates the round is over. Blame should be on the ref and fighter. I don't think Rances should be viewed horribly, although he fouled Mendez multiple times, but the fight decision should be rendered invalid somehow. It's really not much different than Dawson/Hopkins I. You can't factor how the fight was going into determining the following of the rules.
I also don't buy this. Rances would have been throwing as the ref jumped in rather than striking the pretty epic pose he struck after delivering the blow.
