The better referee: Mills Lane or Richard Steele?

A lot of people are saying Lane was biased towards Tyson, but did you realise he absolutely hated Mike and Evander was one of his favourite fighters of all time?
There has been many cases of biting in fights, and not many see a straight DQ.

 

Mills Lane is the best. Mitch Halpern was good too.

 

Cappuccino was great, but he retired about a month ago. He said he didn't feel right refing because he was more worried about his knee or ankel holding up than the fighters. He's gonna be a judge though.

 

Randy Neumann absolutely sucks as a referee. His actions during the first Miranda/Abraham fight was amateurish to say the least. I met him before the Gatti/Gomez fight and he seemed like a nice guy, but in terms of his competency as a referee, I would hate to see him in any championship fight or any fight of significance for that matter.

As for the actual topic, I prefer Mills Lane. I thought Steele had a penchant for stopping bouts prematurely.

 

Mills Lane. Steele was not only no where near the ref Lane was, he was one of the all-time worst. For one thing, Steele was always in the way. He stopped fights too early. Lane was an excellent ref. He was always in control but low key.

 

Christodoulou and Mercante were the top refs. Steele could be bought off.

 

mitch halpern also commited suicide

 

Lane easily.

 

That was the name I couldn't think of Mitch Halpern ,he was a fine referee ,sadly now gone.

 

I prefered Mills Lane.

 

Lane missed the first bite, virtually everyone did, but we are not paid to ref, Lane was. Mills blew it, but somehow came out the fight as some cult hero! :conf

 

That's draconian! I cannot hold that against him because it was quick, unexpected, and subtle. No ref would have been looking for that.

 

Cortez is a fair referee in the Eddie Cotton mold. He'd firm but he's fair.

 

Richard Green

 

No, he's not fair, and he's overly firm.