Is it just me, or were announcers during Ali's time incredibly biased toward him?

Now as a replacement we have his equally biased fans for the ball swinging and dick riding!

 

Bokaj,

I take it you never saw the two Norton fights Ali " won ", or the Shavers fight, or the Young fight, or the BS scoring in the Lyle fight ( Ali was way behind on a fair score card ) prior to landing a bight right hand late, and a somewhat controversial stoppage. Nah, the judges weren't partial to Ali at all, and the ref did not doc Ali points for illegal and excessive clinching either. Don't call those out with sily icons and think your making a point.

 

In the seventies, I think they were very biased. The British announcer on the Foreman fight openly roots for him.

 

You do indeed concede that Ali was far past his prime by the time of the Shavers, Young, and third Norton fight. You know this? Controversial stoppage? Ali landed 12-15 unanswered shows on Lyle. He left the referee literally no choice.

Change your avatar whilst you discredit the greatest Heavyweight of all time if you would, it's insulting to me.

 

Hey Addie,

If you have to bring rooting interests to the fold to make a point, you are not making much of a point at all. The score cards in many of Ali's fights were full of gift rounds. And the announcers were more Pro Ali than anyone else I can think of.

Now if you disagree with the topic of the thread, the forum is yours to embarrass yourself.

 

Anyone who knows anything about Ali knows he got a couple of controversial decisions. But guys like you blows it out of proportion. Lyle got an unfair shake? Get out of here. And isn't it you that also claims Lyle was outjabbing Ali, even though Ali landed his right over Lyle's jab almost at will at times?

What it boils down to is that Ali won a couple of close decisions (Jones, Norton II, Shavers) that were fair but could have gone the other way, and two that were at the very least highly disputable (Norton III, Young). But you can say the same about most popular champions.

Louis had his very disputed win against Walcott, and a couple of other close ones (Godoy, Farr, Pastor) that some claim could have gone the other way. Holyfield had his "draw" with Lewis and a very close win over Bowe. Tyson was actually level with Douglas on the scorecards when he got KO'd and so on. Robinson won a couple of close, disputed decision as well.

So the BS about Ali getting ahead by being a darling of the liberal media or whatever, is just that. And the "controversy" regarding fights such as Frazier II, Lyle, Norton II etc is just revisionism based on this BS viewpoint. Ali got the advantages of most hugely popular champions. The mystery really isn't much larger than that.

 

It was amazing during the 1970's.....he'd get hammered from corner to corner...do practically nothing in return...and he'd win the round on every scorecard...it was pathetic!!! He'd win most of these fights
on his name alone!!

 

I made it pretty clear that I strongly disagreed with your comments regarding he Lyle fight. The scorecards were rendered irrelevant on the account of Lyle reeling around the ring, failing to defend himself. Nothing controversial about it.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AbL5M976pI[/ame]

I counted 45 unanswered shots, how many did you count?

 

OMG, Lyle was up for sure prior to the stoppage. When was the last time you saw this fight? Granted Ali came on late toward the end, but Lyle took most of the early rounds. My point that the judges were biased to Ali is sound. You can't give Ali rounds is he hangs on the ropes and does not throw many punches while Lyle is.

Maybe its just me, but Lyle was in fine shape the second the fight was waived off. I'm not going to harp on the fact that he was not throwing punches back. Maybe he just wasn't as good of an actor as Ali was covering up and claiming to rope a dope. If I was the ref, I would have let Ali vs Lyle go on a bit longer.

And for the record, I think Ali got a gift decision vs Norton in the 3rd fight, and favorable nods vs Young, and Shavers. The Young and Shavers fights could have been draws or losses, but because his name was Ali, that was not going to happen.

I'm not saying Ali had multiple gift decision. He had one gift decision, and some close calls go his way. A better way to put it is Ali should have 7 losses, not 5, and maybe one of his wins should have been a draw.

 

My point is the judges were pro Ali in this fight, and the score cards prior to the stoppage certainly reflect that. What we have here is biased judging for Ali. Do you care to argue this point?

Back to point, this thread is Ali had cheerleaders announcing his fights, and in the case of the Lyle fight, blind judges scoring for him to prevent a loss on points prior to Ali coming on late and landing a big shot that lead to the TKO.

As others have stated, Champs like Louis got the betefit of the doubt, and bogus scoring to. Louis ref ( and I say this because he was the ref in 15 or more of Louis fights ) Donnvan was a real crook. He gave Tommy Farr but one round!

If you want a more modern example, the scoring in Tyson vs Douglas was crap prior to the stoppage too. Popular champs get this, but in Ali's case I think he get the most.

 

My question to you is, Mendoza, what was controversial about a fight being stopped after one guy is hit with 45 shots without reply?

 

Lyle's corner was up in arms. The controversy is that Lyle had full awareness about him, and was clearly not weak at all when the fight was stopped. If you add the fact that Lyle was likely ahead on a fair score card and this was for the heavyweight championship of the world, you have some controversy.

Could Lyle could have survived the round? Maybe Ali would have slowed down to avoid being punched out. Maybe Lyle would have fallen down if the fight had gone on. We will never know.

If a fighter is covering up, and moving aroudn the ring he's doing so willingly and is not out on his feet or defenseless. The ref stoppages I think are warrented when was one guy has already taken a beating or has been down a few times and is in a bad way for more than one round.

There was no rematch.

Now for my questions for you.

1 ) Do you think the announcers were Pro Ali?

2 ) Do you see instances when the judges were also Pro Ali by giving him rounds he did not deserve in his career?

If you say " YES " then we agree on the central points of this thread.

 

Duplicate post

 

Lyle was ahead on two of the judges cards. One of them had him way ahead, so I don't see where the controversy is here. It's not like Lyle put in a fantastic perfomance, he mainly won rounds Ali did nothing in. Personally, I had Lyle ahead by a point or two going in to the 11:th. But could be even as well, since most rounds had been very unenventful.

And I don't see the controversy of the stoppage, either. It's clear to see that Ali was holding back, but still he landed every punch flush. Lyle had no defense whatsoever. He wasn't covering up, punching back or even trying to clinch. He stood in a corner and ate every punch flush in the face. That's a stoppage.

This is entirely reasonable. But you could say similar things about Louis, Holyfield and Robinson as well. Just like Ali they were popular champions and just like Ali they benefitted from it.

 

The Ron Lyle stoppage was fair.
Lyle was ****ed up.

Yeah, his cornerman Chickie Ferrara was up in arms but he's an old school guy. He's the type that probably cussed Jess Willard out for quitting against Dempsey. :yep

Lyle was gone. That was one of Ali's very best right hands he ever landed, very powerful, very explosive. Ali could bang when he got it right. Lyle never recovered and was shipping all sorts of blows and was totally unable to fight back, and Ali was easing off on him out of pity.