How common was RACISM in judging/refereeing in the 1900s?

Completely irrelevant to the thread, but nice try at a diversionary tactic.

 

I was up in the cheaper seats, and to our right there were guys shouting racial abuse during the booing of Marvin at the introduction stage, so it was only ever going to get worse once it was obvious Alan was outclassed, out punched, out boxed, and out fought.

 

I doubt many judges/referees have gone on record as saying they ruled against a fighter because they don't like his race.

I suspect judges/referees have ruled against a fighter because they don't like his race. I mean, it must have happened, human beings being what they are, etc.

 

Tangential not diversionary.

But better suited for another forum and a much more in depth discussion.

 

I remember the booing, very distasteful ,some respect for anthems should be a given.
Some of Minter's "fan club " were a pretty obnoxious crowd.

 

Sorry I am neither qualified, nor interested enough in US history to be able to discuss why after the abolition of slavery it took approx a further hundred years for institutionalised racism to be eradicated in that country.

But enjoy your discussion with someone who is by all means.:good

 

Nor am I interested in discussing how London, from Lloyds to the Bank of England to the Church of England, owes it's current place in the world of finance and beyond to profits made in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade.

 

As an atheist I would bet good money that the Church of England made / makes its money in the same way as the other ones. From the idiots who contribute to it.

Plus I think you will find when you have an empire ( Americans need not apply for a while, though they seem to be working on it with their need to control oil ) and you pillage all the mineral wealth and treasures from those countries, your own wealth increases somewhat.

The origin of the stones to make the Crown Jewels might be a good place for you to start.

All of this however has nothing to do with the way America treated blacks as subhuman up until the 1960's. So of course judges and refs were racist in a racist society.

 

I can't even think of any pre-1920 incidences that someone can point to as an incontestably racist decision. There might be some somewhere, but I haven't seen them. You definitely can't say it was the norm.

 

Hardly if you read my post. I thought your's tries to level a field that was terribly unlevel.

 

Surely it is a matter of simple common sense. If blacks were not allowed to sit among whites on public transport, not allowed to eat in the same establishments as whites, not allowed to drink from the same water fountains, had no say in the way the country was run ( couldn't vote ) had to form their own baseball league because they were not allowed top play against whites, then it is pretty stupid to believe that all things were equal in a boxing match between a black v white fight.

 

Then it should be simple to name a plethora of fights wherein this same discrimination occurred.

It is just much simpler to prove the road to the title was barred for fighters of color. Langford and Wills come to mind. On the other hand, Dixon, Johnson, Gans and Flowers all won championship bouts on US soil. So, perhaps, boxing at the highest level was a bit more progressive than other institutions in the US.

 

You are assuming the fighter is the one who benefits from boxing. I wouldnt have thought that was correct. The person with the most to win or lose is the promoter. If he (for example) can earn 10000 from a fight involving a white man and 10000 for a fight involving a black man he will make more money from the black man if his lower stature means that he can get him to fight much cheaper. Therefore, it is an was in the promoters interests to actual have the black fighter win and become more marketable. At least it was at the lower levels (since classy coloured fighters were actually quite well paid especially if they could draw)Obviously it is not this simple, but theoretically, there were some advantages for the coloured fighters, particularly at the lower levels. I dare say that price and stature is the main reason that Molineaux got his title shot against Cribb!

Also, let us not forget that despite being kept from the title, Peter Jackson, Harry Wills, Sam Langford earned more money than the vast majority of white fighters (i think i am right). In Wills case, he was the second highest paid fighter of the period (behind Dempsey). This is hardly racism.

 

Langford's biggest purse was in the UK, fighting Iron Hague.

 

:good