Journalist Kevin Iole's biased tactics exposed and undressed - judge him yourself!

I always thought it would go to the scorecards after the 4th. Maybe that's just for an accidental headbutt.

 

Definately right, Reg, although it can apparently vary.

It's hardly a source, but as stated by Wiki:

Various reasons could be used for a fight to be ruled a no contest... In the modern game, rules in the United States now dictate that any bout which ends prior to the completion of the 4th round, due to an accidental headbutt, is to be declared a no-contest. Prior to this, accidental headbutt stoppages, had been ruled a technical draw.

Most other no-contests in boxing occur when unusual circumstances, which would include instances such as a bout being rained out, ring falling apart, or an unexpected injury caused by something outside of the boxer's control. One good example of an unusual circumstance occurred in 1983, on the undercard of the fight where Roberto Duran beat Davey Moore for the World Jr. Middleweight title at the Madison Square Garden, when Luis Resto and Billy Collins Jr boxed ten rounds. Resto appeared to win the fight cleanly, and the scorers gave the match to Resto. But, it was later discovered that he had cheated by tampering with his gloves before the fight. The injuries Collins received affected his sight, and, upon finding out what Resto and his corner had done, the New York state athletic commission decided to change the result of the fight to a no-contest.

 

from the WBA regulations:
If a boxer is accidentally injured and cannot continue fighting before the completion of the fourth round, the fight shall be declared a technical draw.

If a boxer is accidentally injured and as a result the referee determines that he cannot continue fighting in that or later rounds, the result of the fight shall be determined by the judges’ scorecards as long as four rounds have been completed. The fighter ahead on the scorecards shall be declared the winner by technical decision. If there is a draw in the scorecards, the bout shall be declared a draw.


I could see the ref ruling that punch accidental, but it wouldn't have made a difference in the outcome.

Also, its weird that its 2 points for a DQ in the tournament, cause at the bookies a DQ is in the same category as a KO

 

I noticed both fights presented in comparison had incompetent refs. Lawrence Cole in Abraham-Dirrel and Joe Cortez in Pacquiao-JMM.

 

Boxing journalists are **** I'm sorry to say.
Pac should have had 2 points deducted if one goes by the rules, correct?

 

:adminWOW... Nice to know this... BTW, funny to notice how Roideao has always been a dirty li'l *****!!

 

The point the TS is trying to make is total FAIL

The incident in the Dirrell/Abraham fight was the cause and result of the ending thus the topic....Suspension?Illegal?Dirty? what not

The incident in the Pac/JMM fight resulted into nothing, and the TS wants a writer to talk about it as to the same effect as dirrell/abraham.

thats what you call reaching

 

He was simply observing a difference in the reporting thats all , I cant see whats got you all in such a flap !

 

i have sent about 25 emails to kevin ,and havent recieved an answer..the main thing is that,he loves and puts mma fighters on a pedestal,and he is really bias....i dont like him at all!

 

Far from bias.

Marquez was trying to HOLD himself up. Pac cant see if his left arm is down or not.

While AA clearly saw Dirrell down.


You're agenda is rather null.

 

you make a good point, i think that people see it differently because pac was smashing juan about the place- and was on a rampage, and winning- so his act of aggression was seen in a better light- than Abraham = whom was behind on the cards and seen as a sore loser and a coward.

secondly pacqiuao didnt land cleanly or hurt juan. ur digging for **** all mate, no gold here. pac could have cleaned him out- but took a swing and seems to divert his punch to the shoulder , away from the face at the last minute. he couldve easily finished him there had he wanted- but threw a pucnh that was clearly the wrong punch at that stage- a straight to the shoulder?!? on a still target- pac clealry changed course in my opinion. if u disagree then that s ur opinion.

they both committed exactly the same act- but one got a different reaction because of the factors above.

context means everything. for example,
1. its inhumane and unethical to eat whale, BUt if i was a guest in an eskimo hut with a poor family- and it was ther hospitable offering , then i would eat it out of obligation to pay respect over my own and societies beliefs.

2. or its wrong to flop out ur dick and wave it around like a helicopter at work- , but at home in front of the kids, thats fine.

ive done both in both situations. so i should know.

 

That was not exactly the same act.

Pac didn't know if Marquez was down or not. Plus Marquez was trying to hold himself up from going down.

AA clearly knew Dirrell was down.

 

Marquez refused to act like Dirrell did. Dirrell was going to be knocked out and he saw a chance to fake a knockout.

Iole has always hated The Klitschkos, extremely biased. Cole is a piece of fecal matter and extremely biased as his record in TexASS shows.

 

The midget is looking down on Marquez and then punches down, and he does'nt know Marquez is down?

Marquez was clearly down, and the inept Cortez should have deducted a point from Pacquiao.

 

Deduction at best.

Even then, Pac saw Marquez was holding himself up on the ropes, he hit him to be sure he was down.

That's Marquez fault more than Pac's.