Jeff Fenech awarded belt from WBC for "victory" over Azumah Nelson?!!

This is like if when evander and Lennox rematched evander stopped Lennox and then 30 years later gave Lennox the title undisputed hw champ bc the draw in the first fight was bs.

 

Goolagong could have lined up all those snotty-faced brats and beaten them one after another in a ping pong tournament while getting her hair done. And then taken her paddle and spanked them with it.

As for Court, I wouldn’t judge by google. I mean if you google Mike Tyson you have to scroll quite a ways to get to him biting Evander’s ear but that and Douglas are the two fights he is most remembered for — your casual fan knows Mike Tyson but most probably couldn’t name a single fighter he beat.

 

Interesting.

It’s been referenced a few times that Fenech lost the rematch as if to say that is one of the logical reasons to preclude this post dated awarding of the belt.

I can understand several other reasons for arguing against this award but Fenech losing the rematch isn’t one of them and has nothing to do with considering the merits of this award.

 

Explain yourself more in depth?

From my view the WBC simply err's in awarding any belt retroactively as if writing a wrong, in other words in their view reversing a decision that history allready recorded.
None the less, one would rationalize that if they were to chose such an action it would be in a case so egregious and the decision so outrageous that it has caused (in this case Jeff Fenech) not to be viewed in the light he should be by such awful decision.
This is simplly not the case with the draw decision handed out in the first Nelson-Fenech fight.
Even without Nelson's dismantling of Fenech just months afterward its not the case. But the fact that we do have a rematch to look at a few months after should inform us that Fenech had his chance to right what he thought was a wrong, but simply could not do so.
Had Fenech not had that opportunity to right a wrong though I would still disagree with the WBC overturning the decision, but at least they would have some form a leg to stand on to make a case to awarding Fenech a retro-active belt.

When I look back at both the Nelson-Fenech fights it simple for me to guage who the better featherweight fighter is, a close competive close fight followed by a mauling of Fenech in a rematch in Fenech's own back yard. I think that should play into the thinking and opiniating of someone like myself to say "what the hell is the WBC thinking in this case to open a pandora's box like that and award this particular fighter (Jeff Fenech) a retro-active title belt on from competive fight that did'nt go his way.

One I think of bad decisions in boxing history, the Nelson-Fenech fight is'nt even on the radar.

 

There’s no further depth required.

It’s simple, irrefutable logic.

Fenech could never right the wrong.

He was robbed in the first fight - this is the ACTUAL fight in question - no more, no less.

If he won the rematch, he would’ve STILL had the robbery on his record in the first instance and a win in the second instance.

Whether he won or lost the rematch he was ROBBED of the title in the FIRST INSTANCE
and ROBBED of annexing a 4th world title - putting him in a highly elite class of fighters.

Much is made of Nelson being under par for the first fight, - I disagree that he was and even IF he was - it doesn’t matter IF Fenech clearly won THAT fight - which Fenech did.

Does anyone properly account for Fenech losing some heart and fighting spirit after being ROBBED?

He put everything on the line the first time around, including his body ONLY to be screwed over.

The longevity of a fighter like Jeff was never going to be extensive. Much wear and tear. A good deal of the durability he upheld owed itself to a steely, unwavering mindset.

So no, the rematch has NOTHING to do with the determination that Fenech was robbed and deserved the decision for the fight in question.

And stating same is completely separate to other reasons as to why the retroactive awarding of the belt is perhaps the wrong way to go.

 

We differ in our views of that fight, I did'nt think Fenech got robbed. If memory serves me correctly I believe I scored that fight a draw.
What was your score of the fight?
.....and with the WBC stating that had various people re-score the fight and its the reason why they decided to retroactive hand Fenech the belt, I'd much be interested in these peoples or new judges scores of the fight.
The WBC is full of **** to not make the scores of these judges public.
If you're going to change the outcome of a fight at least make the scores of these new judges public.

 

Brilliant post.

 

Sure, you don’t believe it was a robbery - and that’s fine. I do believe it was. I agree that they should be transparent as to the re-scores that gave cause for their decision to give Jeff the belt. There’s really nothing more for me to add.

 

Muniz has one, I think.

 

I had it a draw too, 114-114 when watching on you tube.

 

Something for boxing scribes to ask Mauricio Sulaiman is why out of the many fights in question were erroneously scored, why did the WBC pick Nelson-Fenech to overturn?
Nelson-Fenech is not one of those fights that most point to as an example of an outright robbery and travesty.

 

On the contrary most do point to it as a robbery and travesty. Sulaiman himself called it a "grave controversy". It won robbery of the year in magazines and various articles described it as a robbery, highway robbery etc.

 

What was your score of the fight?

 

I can't remember at this point but it sure wasn't close to a draw.

 

I had it in the region of like 8-4 not sure how you came up with a draw, the early rounds were competitive but Fenech completely took over in the 2nd half of the fight. Maybe I'll rewatch it again as I haven't seen it in so long, but I felt the 2nd half of the fight was all Fenech from memory.