Was Hatton warned 4 times im 4 rds against Castillo

I can't in this hyperthetical situation but this is hyperthetical right ?

but...

what you have just descibed didn't happen in the fight so it doesn't really have any bearing does it ?

 

Basically, I skip all the posts in this thread and go right to your question - No, Joe Cortez didn't warn Hatton many times and warned Castillo in the end of the 5th round ( last 30 seconds) when he rematched with Floyd for what was hitting and holding and that was triggered by Mayweather complaining to Cortez. The famous "hook n hold" line used by Harold Lederman in the Hatton-Castillo telecast has to do with who initiates the clinch n not with something illegal. Remember the same Lederman scored rounds for Winky against Bernard for that reason and that has to do with scoring criteria, not with judging the ref.

 

I don't think that Hatton won because of the ref. I think that he fought the fight of his life and used the right strategy. however I disagree that the ref'ing was fair. Tzyu was warned for fair body shots as low blows, Hatton was allowed to hold and hit, and it is completly unexusable to not take a point after such a blatantly intentional and damaging foul.

 

No I am not, but how do you know it was intentional ?

You don't, so as has been said a point deduction was too extreme and a warning sufficed.

 

You just lost all credibility if you do not acknowledge that low was intentional. Ricky himself admits that it was intentional and anyone watching can see it.

 

I agree it was intentional, and respect your point of view especially in light of the normal crazy responses on here. However I still think Dave Parris got too much stick for this fight when both fighters were giving and taking their fair share.

 

I desagree with you here. Tzyu's blow was right on the belt line (the replay actually showed that it was a legal blow) and clearly unintentional if it was low. I don't blame the ref for the call as the blow was right on the line and he does not have the benefit of instant replay but I do blame Ricky because he knows where the blow landed.

Ricky's blow on the other hand was clearly intentional. For a foul that is intentional IMO the only acceptable aproach is a point deduction. Even if the ref believes that it is in retaliation to another shot the ref should make it clear that that kind of behaiviour will not be tolerated.

 

Yeah, they're really reaching by claiming that Hatton got away with a deliberate and vicious foul without the ref so much as batting an eyelash. What a load of nonsense from a bunch of biased fools who will stop of no length to diminish Hatton's biggest victory...

This content is protected

Oh wait, never mind.

 

Ehh...the shot from Tszyu that Hatton was responding to was borderline IMO. At the very least, Tszyu should have been given the customary five minutes to recover. Parris's inaction was inexcusable. I'm not claiming that Ricky should get credit for a tough fight against a very game opponent, but the officiating in that fight was terrible.

 

:good

 

It looks intentional, I will give you that

but it was a roughhouse fight and Kostya was at it himself. Going back to woos original question of whether a fighter should be docked a point for such an offence then possibly he is right, but , sometimes you would end up with points docked all over the shop in fights of this brutalness, thus it is down to the ref to use his better judgement.

Going back to my point of people saying silly things to discredit Ricky then look around and read some of the shite that has been posted about Tszyu fighting two people and people claiming Hatton doesn't stand a chance under any circumsatances against pbf, horseshite :roll: