referee’s error cost Mike Tyson a knockout win against Buster Douglas

Douglas was following the count and was mindful to rise when he needed to. He could have risen anytime after 5.

 

I bought up the Ali-Liston bout which nobody seems to question the legitimacy of the stoppage (but rather whether the KO or KD was legitimate).I agree with you in that neither fighter was at fault.

 

Not sure on 5 but you are exactly right in that he would have rose when he had to. It's a non event. Also even if the count was quicker the bell still would have ended the round before anything else happened.

 

Not be funny buddy but this is spoke about quite regularly and the general consensus, from what i make of it anyway, is that its a combination of fleischer having no right to get involved and Walcott showing naivety for listening to him

 

This is nonsense.

There is no regulation that a count has to be ten seconds, and even if there was, you couldn't change the count retrospectively.

A fallen fighter will usually make full use of the count to recover, so they are entitled to assume that eight means eight.

Douglas beat the count end of!

 

The other big thing with the knockdown is this---why and how come Mike could not get rid of a Buster Douglas when the next round started? Only 60 seconds to recover. The fight I watched saw Tyson hurt and Buster started taking him apart later in the round. At no time was Tyson even close to landing anything significant the beginning of the round==then his parachute opened.

 

That was what my reference to the "Nat Fleischer school of officiating" was about. I have a huge problem with the way Ali-Liston II was handled. Have for years. Liston got the shaft. Whether he intended to throw the fight or not, Liston did get up before the referee said ten, or even one, and he and Ali continued to box for a few seconds before the bout was stopped.

 

That's not entirely true. The timekeeper begins the knockdown count so the referee can usher the guy standing to the neutral corner. Then the referee is supposed to pick up the count from the timekeeper and take it from there.

Referees are taught that when they get certified by states or organizations. It's a basic part of the job. The referee in Tyson-Douglas admitted he messed up immediately afterward. It was a mistake. But the referee has the authority in the ring, so that's just the way it went.

It's also why he didn't work a lot after that, too. (Like, it ruined his career.) And Octavio Meyran was a pretty big referee who participated in a lot of major fights (The No Mas fight in New Orleas, Napoles-Muniz, Napoles-Stracey, Minter-Antuofermo, etc.).

But you are SUPPOSED to pick up the count from the timekeeper. It's basic refereeing.

It would be like a judge scoring a round (where one fighter threw one punch and missed and did little else but cover up) 10-1 in his opponent's favor. Technically, I guess you could do that. Judges are encouraged to give the loser of a round 9 points. They don't HAVE to. They are encouraged to.

But, if a judge decided to do that, and one fighter is immediately 9 points down after one round, when the scores are read, that judge is going to have a lot of explaining to do and probably won't get too many big assignments, particularly world title fights.

That's an extreme example, but my point is a JUDGE COULD do it, like a ref COULD just decide not to pick up a count, and there's really nothing anyone can do about it after the fight. But there are repurcussions for the ref or judge.

And there were repurcussions for Meyran. He was sent back to Mexico and he was done.

There were for Walcott, too. He didn't referee again for 13 years, and when he did, he had to be the chairman of the New Jersey state athletic commission to give himself the assignment.

 

As Dubblechin says, the Ref should pick the count up from the Timekeeper. The count starts from when the Fighter hits the deck. In practical terms Buster reacted to the count he received.

 

It's not like Buster was on shaky legs, and the extra seconds saved him.

He took a decision to rise on nine, which is the optimum tactic when taking a count.

 

Thanks my friends.

 

Don't get me wrong, I do see it questioned but not nearly as questioned as it should be. I guess people are to scared to go against established boxing history in fear of being ridiculed.