When the ref gives a fighter an unfair advantage

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by 3rdegree, Apr 3, 2018.


  1. 3rdegree

    3rdegree Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    7,276
    9,450
    Aug 23, 2014
    This thread was intended to draw attention to the pre-fight planning that occurs when there is a large amount of money at stake and a hometown advantage.
     
  2. 3rdegree

    3rdegree Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    7,276
    9,450
    Aug 23, 2014
    I'm not an Aj hater. You're the hater putting that falsity out there.
     
    chitownfightfan likes this.
  3. OpinionOfACasual

    OpinionOfACasual Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    5,111
    3,981
    May 3, 2017
    I agree with most of this.

    Parker was looking to fight on the inside as much as mayweather.
     
  4. Brighton bomber

    Brighton bomber Loyal Member Full Member

    31,307
    29,483
    Apr 4, 2005
    The pre-fight planning you mean when Higgins picked the referee? Well that back fired then didn't it lol.
     
    rorschach51 and nickpoppunk like this.
  5. OpinionOfACasual

    OpinionOfACasual Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    5,111
    3,981
    May 3, 2017
    @3rdegree

    Why do you disagree with Kevin Barry?
     
  6. The Clan

    The Clan Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,501
    2,087
    Nov 11, 2007
    The point is that you’ve clearly stated in your op that Joshua was the beneficiary then absolutely undermined your whole argument by saying that “we’ll never know”.

    My second observation is that you clearly imply Joshua benefited as much from poor refereeing as Wilder did which is not the case at all!
     
  7. nickpoppunk

    nickpoppunk Unbelievable Bentekkers Full Member

    1,554
    552
    Feb 14, 2012
    ok no logic there
     
  8. 3rdegree

    3rdegree Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    7,276
    9,450
    Aug 23, 2014
    When I said 'we'll never know' I should of added "to what extent".
     
  9. 3rdegree

    3rdegree Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    7,276
    9,450
    Aug 23, 2014
    It makes perfect sense.
     
  10. 3rdegree

    3rdegree Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    7,276
    9,450
    Aug 23, 2014
    :nonono
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2018
  11. OpinionOfACasual

    OpinionOfACasual Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    5,111
    3,981
    May 3, 2017
    @3rdegree

    Neither Joshua or Parker were allowed to fight on the inside.


    Wilder was 'checked' by the ref, but Ortiz wasn't after being knocked down
     
    kriszhao likes this.
  12. 3rdegree

    3rdegree Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    7,276
    9,450
    Aug 23, 2014
    Causing a lengthy and inappropriate delay giving Wilder plenty of extra time to recover and an unfair advantage. Then Ortiz gets the opposite treatment.:sherlock:
     
    kriszhao likes this.
  13. OpinionOfACasual

    OpinionOfACasual Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    5,111
    3,981
    May 3, 2017
    Ortiz should have been checked by a doctor at the beginning of the next round following his knockdown.

    That would have been 'fair'.
     
  14. The Clan

    The Clan Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,501
    2,087
    Nov 11, 2007
    On the inside, Joshua was landing uppercuts and hooks while Parker was content with body shots, one or two which were kidney punches. Parker was the one initiating clinches when they came together not Joshua. These two facts indicate that Parker was the one benefiting from the referees early interventions, the truth however is that neither benefited to any significant extent.
     
  15. Robney

    Robney ᴻᴼ ᴸᴼᴻᴳᴲᴿ ᴲ۷ᴵᴸ Full Member

    93,142
    27,871
    Jan 18, 2010
    In boxing the referee's job is to make sure the home/featured fighter gets home with the win, by hindering the opponent as much as possible, making a couple of bogus calls and maybe even stopping the fight for something ridiculous.
    In other words, the referee is just doing the job he's paid to do.

    Seriously though, I see fans on both sides defending such practises, while they're blatant. Stop defending it, because that's why it keeps on happening (regurlarly) on both sides of the pond.

    With an inpartial referee, a lot of fights would have almost certainly went the other way, some would have been toss-ups and others would have ended the same. Still it happens, constantly and everyone knows it.
    Wilder might have lost, Joshua vs Parker might have developed differently....
     
    Serge, kriszhao and 3rdegree like this.