I thought McCallum took that one as well, although it was close. On Toney-Jirov, i think i had it even going into the 12th.
115-111 for Toney here, clear enough but closer than the official scorecards. Jirov gave a fantastic effort, the fight was always competitive, this coming from a big Toney fan. Give credit where credit is due. It takes 2 to make a classic. Scores aside, a short look at the fighters at the final bell sometimes is enough to know who won - Jirov was all busted up and miserable, he knew he lost his belt, while Toney didn't have a scratch.
James Toney is almost insusceptible to facial damage though, in addition to having one hell of a chin. Even after Jones and Peter (rematch) blasted him for 12 rounds, he looked relatively unscathed.
I think the scores are a little wide.... but Toney was certainly the winner by three or four. Freddie Roach was certainly nervous (he said in Boxing Monthly that he is never 100% sure with modern judges and how they score) therefore he insisted Toney needed to drop Jirov to be confident. Modern judging is based far too much on aggression, rather than actual clean punching.... there is a difference between running (DLH vs Tito say), fighting effectively off the back foot (Mayweather vs Hatton) and fighting off the ropes (Toney vs Jirov). Clearly running should be penalised, but just because the ''aggressor'' is throwing allsorts and landing on gloves doesn't mean they win the fight, UNLESS the opponent does next to nothing in return.
I don't have my card anymore, but when I watched it, I had Toney winning substantially, with the knockdown being the icing on the cake, but not necessary to win. When Lederman announces his scores ("Ok, Jim") the other commentators seem a bit surprised that Lederman had Jirov up.