If you read the IBF rules, there is NO controversy. Bute won.

I hate to start another thread, but the truth seems to get lost in all the garbage (I initially thought this was a roberry, so I agree it's not straightforward).

After studying the IBF rules I'm convinced Bute won fair and square.

Taken from:
http://www.ibf-usba-boxing.com/userfiles/File/IBF-USBA%20Bout%20Rules.pdf.

So I think this is pretty clear.

The ref had to count to 8 (rule number 2).

The ref had to stop counting if Andrade was not in his corner (rule number 4).

Since Bute went down around 2:57 the fight should have ended after the count of 8 if Bute's hands were clear of the floor (which they were).

Based on the 'Referee section' the ref didn't have to end it if Bute was wobbly, because he could have decided that, given the amount of time left (i.e. none at all), continuing would not subject him to serious injury.

If you believe all that - as I do - then there was no robbery.

Ok - a lot of things were at the refs discretion, but ultimately he was right. Bute was not seriously injured after he allowed the fight to continue (because it was over straight away; you can debate whether it should have been stopped earlier though).

If you know the rules, the only way you can argue this was a robbery (I think) is to invoke rule number 1 and claim that Bute was 'hanging helplessly over the ropes as a result of a legal blow'. While I have some sympathy for this, I think it is difficult to claim he was 'hanging helplessly' - he did have his hands off the ropes once the ref got to 8...

If you think it was a robbery please state which of the above statements you disagree with. Thanks.

 

Well luckily the IBF does not divide wins into moral and immoral ;-)

Having said that I think you can make a case that he also won morally.
He won most of the rounds clearly. Even if you ignore what the referee was doing, he was up after 8 seconds. It took heart and courage.

I also want to see a rematch, though, and I think it will be good & kathartic for everyone involved.

 

Had Andrade done his thing a round earlier we would not be having this conversation. Perhaps he should try a bit harder next time ;-)

 

The rules are the same for everyone. Had Andrade knocked Bute down a minute earlier, he would have been the champ. The ref would not have been able to prevent that. I'm somehow convinced Andrade will not forget this during the rematch...

And - in response to your avatar - yes, we could have a new rule saying:

If the referee deems any fighter unfit to continue at any stage he has to finish the fight and declare the other one a winner.

However, all that does is it gives the referee more discretion. And in my humble opinion, all that would end up doing is sparking more conversations like the one we're having.

So we might as well stick to the rules as they are.

 

Please clarify what exactly you're referring to.

I think you can argue that the ref was favouring Bute during the fight. Personally, I don't think it affected the result.

As regards the last few seconds, even if the ref had not turned round and stopped the count, Bute was up after 8 or 9 seconds. According to the rules this gives the ref the right to stop the fight. Since technically it's 3:05 or 3:06 the bell then rings and the fight goes to the scorecards. The long count is thus also irrelevant to the final outcome.

 

Wow that's a solid argument.

I take it that in the 'real world' you, rather than the rules, decide who wins, right? :roll:

Having said that, I agree that a rematch is in order.

 

Goebbels knew what he was talking about: repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth.