It depends on the complexion of the fight. If it's a close, nip-and-tuck affair that the fans and media have a by point in either direction - yeah, Bute will probably come up short and not get the benefit of the doubt. I don't think British judging is that bad so as to produce a Williams vs. Lara type situation, though. If Bute is dominant throughout, he will get the win.
I see one Canadian, one English and one American judge plus hopefully an American ref . . . but even then Lucy will have to KO him or literally 100-shots to 1 each round to get a close split decision. Heaven help him if that one shot lands flush because they will stop the fight! did you ever see Calslappy's KO highlight reel?
I say no. But if Froch gets Bute in trouble there could be an early stoppage. Bute definitely won't get the benifit he seen the Andrade fight.
A welcome voice of reason. Is it really that much of a stretch to believe this fight could be won fair and square?
I think that's very unlikely. As IB say's if its a close fight Froch will get the benefit of the doubt of course but that's true for visiting fighters all over the world. I'd be surprised and disapointed if there was an American style robbery. The worst decisions in recent big UK based fights that spring to mind are Froch/Dirrell, Clinton Woods/ Johnson I and Khan/MAB. Not at all good for boxing but no where near as bad as Cloud/Campillo, Kotelnik/Alexander or Helenius/Chisora. As for a premature stoppage if it's a neutral referee then it hopefully won't be a problem.
Bradley got a close decision against Junior Witter in England. Anyone thinking the UK judges are as corrupt as German or Canadian ones are delusional
:deal The answer is clearly between your two options. Froch will have a slight advantage, but the judging in England is pretty fair. At first, I thought Direll won the matchup with Froch; I was emotionally involved pulling for the American and didn't like Froch at that time. A couple of weeks later, I watched the fight by myself and scored it for Froch. BTW: Americans also consider the judging in Texas to be horrible. We consider them along the same lines as the Canadians and Germans.
Judging in England is on par with most places in the world. The home town fighter usually does better on the scorecards where ever you go. The refereeing however in England is absolute ****. So many times I have been robbed of a good fight watching English referees jump in way too quickly. Makes me want to die.
everywhere is bad for robberies tbh. as for people moaning about brit stoppages, pascal took a lot of shots and the ref never stopped it, so...
Don't think English judges are that bad. Didn't an English judge have him losing 118-110 to Ward, while the other guys had it 115-113? I don't think it's even comparable to Germany and I'd say they were much more competent, on the whole, than American judges. I don't know if US judges are corrupt or just terrible at their job but I'd honestly rather fight a British fighter in Britain than America - that's how bad it is. I'll take a little bias over severe incompetence. Campillo-Cloud and Shumenov II, Lara-Williams - the scoring lately has been awful.