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

Under the current set of rules it is NOT the job of the referee to have the fighter walk towards him. We can argue whether it should or shouldn't be a rule (I don't think it should - see above), but as it stands he isn't required to (the fact that many refs do means little - every fight is different and timing is key here...).

 

That's very true and an important point I missed yesterday.

According to IBF championship bout rules (rule number 7 governing championship bouts) there is no standing eight count.

http://www.ibf-usba-boxing.com/userfiles/File/Uniform%20Championship%20Rules%20-%20September%202006.pdf

So the ref could not have, even if he wanted to, start counting Bute out when he had his back against the ropes and was being pummeled earlier in round 12.

Again, what many argued was favouring Bute turned out to be just playing by the rules.

 

Ok, so you know better what the ref thought and knew. I trust you, of course.

Sadly, the other points you're making are not much better.

He has to signal for the fighter to continue for the bell man to know that he is allowed to ring the bell (see fighter cannot be saved by the bell rule). So the answer to your final question is: because he was doing his job properly.

 

I'm not disputing that.

 

Even if we assume you're right with your measurements, the rules say the fighter has got to be in his corner rather than two or three feet away from it. The rules also say that if he is not in his corner the ref has to stop counting. Just the rules baby - no corruption here.

This does need to happen again.

 

The exact phrase used is if he is hanging helplessly over the ropes rather than leaning on the ropes... Subtle difference there. I think this point is debatable and if we disagree here, threre's no point in arguing. We're debating differences in shades of gray, the ref had to make a call and had to make one quickly. Could have gone both ways, but that is not controversy to me. Either would have been debatable.

The fact that all the other refs do things is no argument. They often use different sets of rules, to begin with... If we play it by the IBF rule book, he did not have to order Bute to walk to him.

On your second point. He took the time from the timekeeper and then, after a few secs, started enforcing rule number 4 (which would imply that the reason for his arguing with Andrade is rule number 4 ;-)). Also, he didn't argue with Andrade for 15 secs... Either way - I believe these events had no impact on the final outcome - Bute was standing after nine seconds.

Again, I'm not claiming this fight was fair for its duration. I'm arguing that what the ref did in the 12th round was the right and only thing to do. Hence no controversy there.

On your final para. Would any other ref have looked at Andrade? I hope so, cos this was the right thing to do. Further, I've seen fights where the fighter has his back against the post while waiting for the opponent to recover. This was not the case here, so Andrade is himself to blame for giving the ref the opportunity to stall (if that's what you want to call it). Ultimately - no impact on the final verdict, though.

 

Repeating that something is a sham does not make it one.

If you have no arguments, why bother posting? It's not like you're going to convince anyone is it?

On the other stuff. I'm not a Bute fan. In fact I like Andrade more - can you live with that? I'm pissed off cos Andrade chose his timing terribly - had he done the same thing two rounds ealier he would have been a legit champ, no discussion. He'll have another chance - I don't doubt that.

As to what Kessler will or will not do - we'll see. It does not affect what this thread is about, so go start another one.

 

Quote properly. The rules refer to hanging helplessly. Precisely the bit you omitted makes it contentious.

 

Repeat x10. It's NOT the job of the ref to make the fighter take a few steps forward. I'm starting to get a bit frustrated hammering this home. The job of the ref is to enforce the rules. The rules state what they do, and there is none saying anything about taking steps in the direction of the ref.

 

Doesn't add much substance to the discussion does it? Nice Kessler K.O. though.

 

I haven't seen an IBF rule saying that kotjinx is wrong ;-) But on substance. A knockdown is the same in any round. I won't argue that. The rest is garbage and is NOT rules. The rules are:

1) A boxer shall be deemed to be down when any part of his body except his feet are on the floor, or if he is hanging helplessly over the ropes as a result of a legal blow as ruled by the referee, who is the only person authorized to determine this.

3) [...] If the contestant taking the count is still down when the referee calls the count of ten (10) the referee will wave both arms indicating the contestant has been knocked out.

Bute was down. Rule 1). He was no longer down after nine seconds. Hence no reason to invoke rule 3. The only reason the ref could have stopped it then is because of rule 3 in the referee section

3) He shall have the power to stop a contest and render a decision at any stage if he considers it to be too one-sided, or if either contestant is in such condition that to continue might subject him to serious injury.

But at that point allowing the fight to continue did not put either contestant at the risk of injury. The fight was over. This is why timing does matter. If the exact same knockdown had happened at the beginning of round 10, the ONLY right thing to do would be to stop it and declare it an Andrade T.K.O.

That the bell rang when it did certainly proves nothing other than the fact that the rule according to which the fighter cannot be saved by the bell was correctly implemented.

 

Explain this to me. According to what you say, real boxing sounds like a pretty simple and straightforward affair, right? So why bother with f-in rules anyway. And if you don't buy rules how are you going to claim this was a robbery? Say, I don't believe in rules either, but I belive Bute won. Let's have an informed discussion, Baby... ;-)

Anyway, it so happens this thread is all about rules - obviously not for real 'fans' like you. So why post here?

As to shoving the rules up mine... Thanks for the suggestion. I now realise where most of your arguments came from... :yep