Should Bute have been counted out against Andrade?

If a fighter is in no contition to continue the referee has to weave the bout off. It just doesnt matter wheater there is time left bc a fighter cant be saved by the bell in any round and the referee can stop the fight at any stage.

the timekeeper did what he had to do.
Bute rised. the referee approved his condition and allowed him to continue. same procedure that occurs after any knockdown.
timekeeper rang the bell and the fight was over.
the rules say the bell shall by no means ring before the fighter has made his way to his feet no more no less.

 

You're still doing it. You need to learn what things mean.

 

You've made your preference quite clear and I've told you mine, end of story. This ain't no debate about...is 1 + 1 = 5....with one party insisting it is 5 !!

Some organizations see it the way I see it too, like I said, it's a matter of preference in the rule book.

 

Bute was saved by the bell.:blurp

 

I'm not sure what you're talking about? Bute wasn't knocked down at all. In fact, he didn't even fight Andrade :?

 

This content is protected

 

He was up around 8 seconds, and you have to beat the ref count not 10 seconds from when you went down (Andrade initially went to the wrong corner). Just like the Dempsey Tunney fight, it's not 10 seconds from when you hit the canvas, and if your opponent doesn't go to a neutral corner than that's their fault and you get the extra seconds. He was exhausted rather than seriously hurt, so I think he deserved to be allowed to carry on for at least one more potential KD. I agree the ref screwed up badly not letting Andrade have the final seconds to have a go at him. But IMO Bute would just have taken another knee and been saved by the bell.

If Bute had been on ***** street from punches then yeah I would stop the fight. But for pure exhaustion I think you have to let him go on until his opponent actually stops or at least seriously hurts him with punches.

So yeah, controversial fight ending but I don't think it's decisive enough to count as a "moral loss". Chavez Taylor, McCall Lewis, even Leonard Hearns were all far worse decisions.

Ultimately at the top levels of boxing I think the bias should be to keep the fight going unless one boxer is hurt really bad and about to suffer permanent damage. Being a bit ****ed up, exhausted, wobbling a little are not enough reason to stop a title bout or any top level bout IMO. Back in the old days they would laugh at some of the stoppages we have now.

 

The poll should be : The referee was corrupted.

Yes
**** Yes
Obviously

 

actually i just feel Bute is a pride fighter knocked Andrade out in the remtach and doesnt have to stand for such absurd protection ****..:deal

 

How many seconds are left when a fighter takes an 8 count after going down with two seconds remaining?

 

People need to understand the difference between having hometown bias, and refereeing in your favour, vs actually losing.

Example, Hatton vs Tszyu, Hatton clearly had hometown advantage, the ref was biased towards him and let Hatton wrestle Tszyu and wear him down illegally. Does that mean Hatton was "KOd"? No. Kostya was stopped. It was unfair refereeing but that's boxing - Hatton won the fight.

In this case, Bute definitely benefited from hometown refereeing. But the rules give the ref the final decision on whether to stop a fighter if he is no longer in condition to go on. The ref decided to let him carry on one time, and Andrade did not stop him. Bute beat the count and ended the fight on his feet. Andrade lengthened the count by not following the rules.

Bute didn't cheat, he didn't break the rules, even the ref didn't break the rules because it's *his decision* if a fighter can't go on. It's not like Bute was knocked cold. It was a controversial call but there is a case either way within the rules, so Andrade was a bit unlucky but it was not a blatant robbery. Far worse has happened in boxing. Ultimately Andrade needed to stop Bute in the 3 minutes and he failed.

Even the question in this thread is biased - if it had been stopped, it would have been a TKO not a KO.

 

The question isn't biased, it simply asks should Bute have been counted out.

As you imply, as Bute was clearly on his feet within eight seconds of going down by any way that you can possibly measure it, it's a very simple question with a very simple answer - no he shouldn't have been counted out.

The fact that 60% of people have so far answered yes is as much an indictment of the level of boxing knowledge and basic intelligence of the forum as anything else.

 

Per the IBF rules, yes.