Thats what the steps were. Determining if Fury was fit to continue. He clearly was. I've seen dozen of refs ask for a few steps out of a fighter after a bad KD. Jack did his job perfectly. As evidenced by the fact that Fury was fine and survived to push Wilder back within 30 seconds.
Oh yeh, we all forgot about the rules... THANKS SEPH!!!.... Fury should have had longer shouldn't he?? Remember that silly little dance Wilder did from the neutral corner???? Bloody rules tho eh??? I agree, Jack didnt follow the rules............. boring
Oh he was great, and I was a huge fan of both. Ben was the rock of that squad, Sheed was just so goofy, he has a cult following in Detroit, Portland too I would imagine.
Maybe but how close do you feel their rematch would have been? I was bloody looking forwards to his also!
Jesus wept, do I have to spell everything out for you people on here?! When Wilder was dancing he was already in a neutral corner, which is why Reiss did not have to signal for him to move As for these steps I have never seen a ref ask for a fighter to walk to one corner and back, to assess whether a fighter is fit to continue. A ref will usually assess, by asking the fighter to hold their gloves up and ask if they are ok to continue. Anything more than that, then they are giving additional recovery time. Not even Jack has done it before the fury fight, he usually assesses them through swift questioning and if they are not giving any answer calls the fight off without hesitation . If you have seen dozens examples as you claim, then it shouldn't be a problem to show me, since I have never seen a ref instruct a fighter to walk around the ring to walk off the pain to ''determine they are fit to continue'' Laughable The fact is Jack Reiss abandoned and violated the rules which clearly leaves no room for interpretation ''If either man falls through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, 10 seconds to be allowed him to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner, and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the 10 seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his award in favour of the other man.'' That's what we call Gross Misconduct. What would be poetic justice, since Jack loves , cares and wants to be like Fury, is to one day, accidentally bump into one of Wilder's bombsquad goons on the street, who then piledrivers Jack, head first on to the pavement. Then have the goon stand over him and give him a slow 10 count and after 9 seconds has passed, pick him up by the neck and have him walk to the end of the street, before finally asking if he is alright to continue to walk home unaided
This content is protected Sorry no, just apply the video to the rules, I've posted them a dozen times, I know you've read them at-least once. Fury, as per the rules, should have had longer. The method used to ascertain Fury's condition I haven't seen before but i believe its within the rules and the fighters were both briefed on this method prior to the fight, so no fault there. The count, slightly over 10 seconds maybe but still a valid 10 "count" as per the rules. Me personally, In a world championship fight I would expect the referee to use the full count, for either boxer, to ensure both he is safe and that the fight can continue. I do not want a "British stoppage" but of course the fighters safety has to remain paramount. Then after picking up the count from the time keeper (as can be seen in videos about the 2/3 count mark and is another link in this "blame counting game") to then still get that count within half a second under the stressful situation was remarkable by Jack Reiss. He then acted exactly as he had proposed to the fighters previously, Fury proved his ability to continue, as per the rules and then he arguably went on to win the round. Again proving the referees actions correct despite the circumstances. Other than Jack Reiss missing Wilder leaving the neutral corner during the count, he acted accordingly. I'd have him ref the re-match, if it ever happens.
The method used to ascertain Fury Jack has never been used before. I've seen all his fights he has officiated in and Jack has delivered many British style stoppages. He knew he ****ed up, which is why post fight, he did an interview to cover his own back whilst being ultra defensive and insulting the fans who questioned his method I have never heard a referee be so defensive and release a statement like that. Sadly the rematch will never happen now,thanks to Fury who knows he was lucky to get out of the ring in one piece. Having said that, we can debate the 1st fight until the cows come home, there was controversy and I say the argument for a Wilder win is far more credible for a fury win, considering fury did not have any great defining moments in the fight and there was no large margin of punch output to say he definitely won every round comfortably. Every round was close and difficult to score until the knockdowns if you were judging impartially. I watched the fight without sound mind you, while the majority was taking on board the bias commentary and pro fury crowd so of course they will repeat what they hear. But honestly for me, it was hard to say who was winning, until around 7-8 Fury was looking like he could comfortably neutralize Wilder and win on points. But then the knockdowns came and I wasn't surprised the judges gave a draw which you can say is fair all around for both fighters, since you can say Fury won the boxing match, and Wilder won the fight.
