Rewatching Maskaev vs Peter

Steward and Lamps showed the final flurry in slow mo, Lamps saying "none of those punches landed on the back of the head" which was true, also it was true that the initial punch that hurt Maskaev was good, but if you go to the key sequence in between the final flurry and the first initial punch, at 30 down to 25 seconds into the fight, there is a series of back of the head shots mixed in, Maskaev even complaining about it, and right there and then the ref should have stepped in and taken a point from Peter, but instead he didn't even break the action up or even warn him.

As Lamps said, Maskaev had a lawsuit against the corrupt (they are all corrupt) belt org running the show, and both Max and Lamps wondered if Maskaev could even win a decision even if he did win, with a lawsuit pending agaisnt the shows organizers. I mention this only because the ref shows a helluva time to stop doing his job.

He had been doing it all night long. Earlier in the fight there was one sequence where Maskaev was bent over and Peter launched a vicious shot directly at the back of the head of Maskaev, if that thing landed it very well might have knocked Maskaev cold and should have been ruled a DQ victory for Maskaev. I watched it in slow mo and Peter clearly launched it aiming for the back of Maskaev's skull, it was a big shot aimed directly at the back of Maskaev's skull, and not something that simply appeared to be that way the way Steward had been going on about. Slow mo does not lie.

It is ridiculous what this guy gets away with. He is an improving figher and a very exciting fighter to watch, but there has to be some semblance of order in there.

Peter might have gone on to win the fight anyways. Honestly, with a ref that didn't allow back of the head punches, especially over and over again, I would actually favor Maskaev somewhat in a rematch.

The main thing here though, my question is, how long are they going to allow him to do this garbage? You warn a guy, you warn him again, you got to take a point. Then another, and another than DQ him, right?

It seems like nowadays we get these refs that warn a guy and than just sort of sigh to themselves, "ho hum, well I guess he isn't going to listen to me, and after all, I'm just the referee I don't want to be a factor"

bull****!!! If a fighter is clearly violating the rules ad nauseum than its the referees job to BE a factor and to possibly CHANGE the outcome by stopping the fouls with breaking up a fighter's rabbit punching sequence with warnings, then point deductions and then finally a DQ.

I had been taking some people's word for it that the rabbit punching wasn't that bad anymore. But it was still bad enough here that they should have put it a stop to it, and they didn't even bother to take a point, they let him do it right up until the end of the fight.

So why should Peter ever stop? Many people won't even care, they will flame me for posting this and they will say its whining. And if he beats down Vitali with rabbit punches they won't care either....

I guess the only way to respond is to smash him back in the back of the head or hit him low, or headbutt. Just foul back.

Honestly though, with all that said, I was still impressed by the way Peter handled himself in there for the most part, the final flurry was excellent and he has developed a calmness about himself which benefits him. He is a dangerous test for anybody, although I wouldn't be shocked to see him badly hurt and knocked out - those two things in the same fighter make him intriguing.

If Vitali isn't rusted half to death though and the referee chooses to enforce the rules, I think Peter will likely lose, and pretty good chance by KO.