Why isn't this a DQ

Protect yourself at all times, the referee had not separated the fighters therefore Barker's punch was legal - the referee saying "Stop boxing" doesn't stop a punch that has been thrown a milisecond before it.

 

It shouldn't be a DQ. But a NC.

The fighter clearly went down but a lot of fighters if they aren't on their ass will keep fighting. Just natural instinct. Definitely a fight that should be a NC.

 

The guy in the yellow short threw a punch after the fighters gloves had touch the canvas which in it-self is a foul.. So If he had backed up, as he was suppose to, and not try to get in the "coupe de grace", he would not have gotten KTFO!!!

so judgment was served BOOM ***** !!!!!!

 

Split second stuff. A really hard mess to sort out. But like the Mayweather KO the other day it comes down to that first principle of boxing 'protect yourself at all times'.

 

i dont see why the fuss really it happened years ago.
this was split second stuff and just instinct

 

Samuels has been in some bloody fun fights hasn't he? The first one with Renda is another fun to watch one...

 

I agree, Barker touched the canvas with his gloves and got back up but the guy threw another punch, so Barker retaliated resulting in a knockout. However I dont have any problem with this being a W for Barker

 

Barker stops and sets himself, before throwing. Can't imagine that he saw the referee's hand, there, but odds are good that he heard the instruction.
I agree that it should be a NC, but being an undefeated champion goes a long way.

 

a more composed fighter would've taken a step or two back after his opponent had touched the canvas with his gloves; because he should've expected the ref do his job and give a count; Samuels didn't do that so he is the one responsible for the consequences