What have the board done wrong exactly?

IMO the board should have banned Chisora for 6 months, which to the non-boxing world would have seemed like punishment and would have appeased the press etc. What they did is listen to all those idiots who write crap about the sport whenever something bad happens, but don't write about any of the good. Same thing in trying to appease the majority of the public who don't follow the sport, instead of doing what is best for its members and the boxing fans. But everybody makes a mistake. The board needs to change, but those changes need to be made for the good of the sport, not the good of Mr Rabbithole.

I didn't want to see this fight before the brawl happened, and I cringed a little bit when it got announced. The whole thing is a bit WWE for me. I'd rather have seen Chisora fight Price, or go after relevant opponents and Haye stay retired. I'm not going to lie and say I won't watch it, but I fear it will be a cheesy build-up with the two of them doing the sport no favours, acting like a couple of buttnuggets.

If they took the opportunity to shake hands, and say forget about Munich, lets show some respect for each other as fighters and show the world that boxers aren't complete knobs all the time it could rescue some of the sports reputation. But they won't, because this is pantomime and about making money. If a car salesman tries to bull**** me, it pisses me right off. Don't see why I should get all excited and bend over because a fish-eyed **** is trying to bull**** me.

 

An interesting form of justice where an indeterminate sentence is handed down, whereby no indication of how long that sentence will last is given. Especially when that sentence restricts the ability to ever work in that field again.
I can't think of another profession where this would be possible/legal, and it was always going to be open to a challenge.
It should have been clear from the hearing what the punishment was and how long it would last for, even if that was a lifetime ban.
Any disciplinary case should be totally transparent and clear of what particular behaviour is unacceptable, and therefore what the punishment is. This was a cruel and unusual punishment which effectively left him in a state of flux until they decided he'd learnt his lesson. Basically it was unprofessional in the extreme and the board found themselves out of their depth and unable to effectively undertake the role they assumed for themselves. If you put yourself in the position of effectively controlling professional boxing in this country, you need to be able to back it up with the responsibly that entails.

Justice, sporting or not isn't really an appropriate term for the BBBoC actions on this matter which is why they are wide open to criticism.

 

I think the issue with the board is they havent been consistent or decisive. They are a reactionary body at the moment reacting to what happens as opposed to dictating what should happen for the good of the sport.

If they said to Chisora we will ban you for 3 months and fine you £50k and donate it to the ex boxers association that would be the probably resolved. Chisora would fight on Haye would get a fine but regain his licence and fight on and this would all be under the auspices of the board and we would have a BBBC sanctioned fight.

The boards "suspension" of licence was a baffling decision. The fact that the May appeal couldnt be heard because "not enough members were about to hear it" demonstrates the unprofessionalism of the body in this matter. They succumbed to outside media pressure in essentially condoning the sport. Instead of acting in a way the would be condusive to reconciliation and comprimise. They reacted in an uncertain manner and allowed this situation to occur.

The BBBC is a good body overall it does good for boxing in the UK but they are sometimes terribly slow to act or actively act on improving the sport. Those rigorous medical standards that are raved about are because Allegedly forced them into a corner to improve standards. Why does the board not have monthly British rankings for each weight? Why is the old fashioned system of "nomination" for title shots still employed? Why do they recognise 5 world governing bodies including the IBO? All questions that need to be asked.

 

Sets a dangerous precedent IMO.

Like the Margarito handwraps, he lost his licence in America, fought abroad. What's to stop someone who gets caught for that fighting here with a foreign licence?

 

It would depend on his ban wouldn't it?

If the BBBoC had handed down a 6 month ban then the EBU would have recognised that and therefore setting up Luxembourg wouldn't be an option. Simply a clear ban would have stopped this happening, the BBBoC have screwed themselves over by wanting to continue to kick Chisora whenever they fancied.

Chisora I suppose could have applied for a foreign licence but he would have to fight away from a recognised boards control. Any board sanctioning it would rightly have been wide open for criticism for allowing a fight during his ban. Finding a board to do this might have been a problem, and how much money would he realistically make from who would sanction it?
In short for a 6 month- 1 year ban it wouldn't have been worth the hassle.

 

i love how frank has tryed to turn everything onto other people

 

Can you imagine the **** frank / the sport will take if;

a fighter is badly injured in a fight (even though more than enough medical care is there)

the crowd kicks off in a big way like a lot are thinking will.

 

Spot-On:good A feudal dictatorship:yep

 

Common sense:deal

Even my missis said do something like that & she hates boxing.

This BBBc are not fit for purpose period:deal

Look at the way the ****s had to be dragged in the 21st century screaming & kicking about having to have 3 judges score the fight instead of the ref:yep

 

Great post :thumbsup

 

If the BBBofC take away a license, but tell Chisora that he can apply for one elsewhere, and that's what he does, how has he avoided justice? As I think Bunce was saying, the "punishment" in this case may only be a day or a week or a month. It's just not clear.

If they just do what they were told they could do, they deserve to be bullied over that?

If anyone is risking a split in British boxing here, then I would put the blame on the BBBofC for making threats about people's licenses.

Why shouldn't another European governing body sometimes be involved in UK shows? The BBBofC has a right to a monopoly? When they apparently work with Sauerland? (Austrian license used in Germany.)

 

I'm still so confused on this pro-****** crap!

Clearly you lot have no idea how bad this could lead to, do you really think this is happening for the fans?

This is going to be used as a loop hole for good now.

This is the same guy who says Krasniqi is a worthy world title challenger.

 

Do we stop any fight from happening that involves a brawl?

Tyson/Lewis? That did pretty well on PPV.

 

If there is a "loophole" here, then it was one given by the BBBofC. Next time, just give a 9 month ban or whatever. I hope they are smart enough to have learned that lesson.

Soft defences can happen whether it's the BBBofC or anyone else. As far as I know, they don't see it as their responsibility to impose quality control on events.

 

Not a big fan of either really. I felt Chisora deserved to be punished for his actions so don't think they did anything wrong their apart from not stating how long the ban should be. They couldn't do anything about Haye so can't blame them on that front either. They were then pushed into a poition by Rabbit Hole and made a statement that they obviously haven't looked into very well.

I would love to think they would change due to the situation but its more likely that we get an influx of different boards/belts and more mismathces due to this in the future imo. Even if its not Rabbit Hole there will be plenty groups/promoters/boxers etc looking to break away from the BBBofC as soon as they disagree with anything they rule (rightly or wrongly). A big nail in the coffin for British pro boxing imo.