I didnt think Diaz-Mallignaggi or Berto-Collazo were robberies

I watched these fights in the last week after only reading about them on ESB. I expected Mallignaggi to outspeed and school Diaz and for Collazo to somehow expose Berto. I was thinking Diaz maybe shot and Berto was all hype

My thoughts on Mallignaggi-Diaz

1. Mallignaggi did outland Diaz but not by that much, I was expecting him to vastly outland Diaz but there wasnt a huge amount in it
2. Diaz landed the much harder punches, Mallignaggi is a really weak puncher and his punches were shoe shiners but he did land the better stuff. If anything I'm biased against Mallignaggi as I always see his punches as ineffective because well they are.
3. Diaz treated Paulie like a ragdoll on the inside, landed combinations to the head and body, all big meaty hooks, none of that shoe shinning Paulie was doing.
4. Diaz snapped Paulies head back on several occasions, Paulie never managed the same.

My thoughts on Berto-Collazo (this 1 I didnt watch as recently so its not as fresh in the mind)

1. Action packed fight, hats off to both men
2. Berto landed the better harder, flusher punches, Collazo landed more but his punches had much less on them than Bertos.
3. The early and mid rounds were back and forth but I had Berto in the lead coming into the last 3 championship rounds I much preffered his work and the way he bullied Collazo. In the championship rounds he clearly pulled away

Am I the only 1 who didnt see the controversy in these 2 fights?

 

Another thing I forgot is the commentators in both fights had it to the guy that supposedly was 'robbed', I think people get led by commentators who's cards may be well off