If Cotto 'quit' v Margo, why did Hatton not quit v PBF??

I direct you to 1min 30secs in the round:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=PMBJ5F3j04c

To those who say Cotto quit, did you say that when Ricky Hatton went down the second time v Floyd Mayweather?

As I saw it, Hatton took a few shots on the ropes, the fighters separated, and as Mayweather came at him again Ricky went down to avoid the attack, a split-second before the ref intervened.

Now let me be clear from the outset: I do not call what either Cotto or Hatton did 'quitting'. I am not exactly a fan of either boxer, but I think they are both brave, excellent fighters, I favour not one over the other, I am a fan of boxing and therefore I suppose a fan of both. (I do have fighters I do not consider myself a fan of, but neither of these guys nor Margarito nor Mayweather fall into this category)

Two points to note:

- If you watch both fights, Miguel Cotto had taken FAR FAR MORE punishment, more head shots, and appeared to be in FAR FAR WORSE shape than Hatton by way of facial injuries and general condition by the time he took the 2nd knee.

- Cotto took the knee and did get up, though Evangelista Cotto then took the decision out of his hands. Hatton went down and although the ref then took the decision out of his hands, I think it's a fair bet he would not have tried to beat the count as he was in a bad way.

Two questions for those who reply:

- the ref stopped the Hatton-Mayweather. Is this what saved Hatton from these horrible 'quitter' slurs? If the fight had gone on, and he hadn't made any attempt to get up, would he have been tarred as a quitter too? If it had been Kenny Bayless instead of Evangelista Cotto that made the decision to end the fight, would Cotto then not be a quitter in the eyes of those who believe he is now?

- is the fact that Hatton fell on his back and did not make an attempt to get up rather than go down on a knee and make an attempt to get up but have the fight stopped by your corner, that means Hatton doesn't get these slurs? If Cotto had went down just out of the clinch with Margarito immediately after he got up from the first knee, and went down onto his back rather than his knee, would he then not be a quitter?


My own opinion:

Neither Cotto nor Hatton are quitters. Neither of them quit. Neither of them deserved to be criticized for the way those two fights ended. Both men fought bravely on the night, both had taken punishment, both had to go down because of the physical effects of the punches taken leading up to them going down. In Hatton's case, the referee decided to end it. In Cotto's case, Evangelista Cotto forced the referee to end it.

However, is it fair that Miguel Cotto is widely being criticized for being a quitter and/or a fighter lacking heart, and Ricky Hatton isn't?? I am only bothering to make this point to show how illogical and stupid and ill-founded the 'quitter' accusation is.


PS: I only chose Hatton to make this analogy as it was the 1st example that came to mind. I'm sure you can all think of others.

 

Yes I agree, but was Hatton only not a "quitter" to those who called Cotto a quitter, because the referee stepped in? Is that it?? They both went down to avoid attacks. My point is that Cotto must be considered to be less of a "quitter" then, as he tried to get up, whereas I don't think Hatton would've... hopefully thus exposing the "quitter" accusation as stupid and meaningless as it is untrue.

 

You have missed the point entirely. Neither man quit.

 

I agree. Doesn't that highlight how absurd these people are??

 

There's no way Hatton recognizes the fight is stopped before he goes down. Cortez is coming up behind Floyd when Ricky is already on the way down. Hatton was in trouble yes, but Cotto was definitely in a worse state IMO.

 

But why is falling to the floor, when it is not the direct result of a punch causing you to lose your balance, why is that so much more acceptable than taking a knee to recover when your intention is to survive the round???