After seeing Froch/Groves with a clear head, I still can't understand how some of the judges had it so close. IF (big if I know) it had gone the distance, Christ knows what the final tally would have been. I like to think that they aren't physically handed cash for favouring the home fighter, but as another poster on an earlier thread suggested, these type of decisions come from judges trying to please the promoter and on the lookout for handouts and further prizes. Does anyone know how much these people get paid? Would a way to reduce the type of bias would be to pay them more? Kind of like the problem with subcontinent cricketers and spot-fixing. If you're paying someone relatively small amounts, don't be surprised if they look for more in other ways. Not saying it's right at all, but human nature. Or make them more high profile. I'm not saying we'll all know names of judges and in no way want them to be in the limelight, but regularly showing photos of them before contest, or having cameras next to them scoring, may force them to be more neutral.
