WBC may award SOTO the INTERIM title

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by psychopath, Jul 9, 2008.


  1. shelterr

    shelterr Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,886
    0
    Sep 7, 2006
    It wasnt intentional or damaging. Seriously, thats the only question?
     
  2. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    Yup....it's subjective. If the ref deems it intentional or damaging (not both, it can be either/or I believe) they can DQ the fighter. I don't think it was either. The question is, can anyone prove that?
     
  3. shelterr

    shelterr Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,886
    0
    Sep 7, 2006
    A ref could waive off a fight for no reason, wouldn't make it right bit they could do it. All I am interested in is the justice.
     
  4. theunderdog

    theunderdog Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,814
    1
    Jul 4, 2006
    it should have been a tko win for soto.

    the title should be with lorenzo because he won, and i do use "won" very lossely.

    cortez should never be allowed to ref an important fight again

    awarding the title to soto will only complicate things.

    if the wbc can't accept lorenzo as their champ, at least make them fight again. it will be an extremely biased decision for them to award the title to soto
     
  5. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    26,390
    2
    Mar 13, 2007
    How do you know it's not intentional??? You can claim that it's not damaging but other than that is beyond us. :D

    Never have I heard that a governing body declared a NO CONTEST and a winner at the same time.

    In case I missed it . . . anyone can tell me when and who?
     
  6. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    26,390
    2
    Mar 13, 2007
    If it's a NO CONTEST . . . then it's a "status quo' . . . means no changes, so the title should remain vacant.
     
  7. JMotrain

    JMotrain Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,682
    2,621
    Sep 30, 2005
    Yeah I don't like this either. They should order an immediate rematch and Soto can just give that phony another beating and win the strap legit. I don't think, no matter how unjust the decision goes, that the WBC can just give the strap to which fighter they deem won a fight in their eyes. IF that were the case, then Meldrick Taylor should have kept his strap and Santa Cruz should have been awarded the belt, but the official verdict should be upheld. IF their is wrongdoing, set a rematch.
     
  8. o_money

    o_money Boxing Junkie banned

    11,894
    1
    Apr 8, 2006
    I don't think that they would be declaring a no contest and then a winner. i think they'd first declare the fight a no contest and then separately award the belt to Soto. Awarding a belt to a fighter without them having to win it in the ring is not (I believe) unheard of. And overturning or changing the decision or outcome of a fight is also not unheard of. Its just a little odd that they'd have to do both in order to make up for the colossal screw up of a completely useless ref.

    Personally, I appreciate how strongly the WBC is reacting to this. Its about time some of these attention grabbing refs with there pre-fight sayings and premadonna personalities got a good shot of reality.

    And also guys this "if you bend to rules once in the name of good..." fear is pretty funny. Cause this is boxing we're talking about. The rules get bent all the time. Frankly its nice to see them bent for a good purpose for a change.



    Also I don't feel Soto should have to fight again just to prove he's the champ. Everyone saw he won the fight. Guys work there whole lives to become a champoin. There is no need to make him fight lorenzo again.
     
  9. 41fever

    41fever Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,811
    0
    Jul 16, 2005
    Ditto to da mf most
     
  10. 41fever

    41fever Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,811
    0
    Jul 16, 2005
    i feel u to da max...rules are bent 24/7 for the influence of money...how about justice for once
     
  11. Spitfire7

    Spitfire7 Gadfly Full Member

    4,498
    2
    May 18, 2007
    WBC's Sillyman had been glaringly too "nationalistic" for his own good...:yep
     
  12. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    26,390
    2
    Mar 13, 2007
    That's exactly my point. Thay can't declare it a NO CONTEST then award the title to the other fighter . . . the title should remain vacant.

    That's why I'm reacting strongly against the artticle.
     
  13. Boom_Boom

    Boom_Boom R.I.P Boxing 6/9/12 Full Member

    38,291
    23
    Sep 21, 2006
    Another dumb ruling by the wbc just to make them feel like they're the good guys.

    The fight should be ruled a no contest, and have an immediate rematch for the title, get it over with soon and let us never discuss of it again.
     
  14. Axe

    Axe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,013
    3
    Jan 23, 2005
    Agreed. :good
     
  15. CJLightweight

    CJLightweight Lightweight Kingpin Full Member

    6,598
    2
    Feb 23, 2008
    i'm glad the belt was an interim belt and not the full belt, lorenzo would have to fight the vacant belt with someone and this time he'll lose