|
Post by Paul Magno on Oct 19, 2009 3:49:50 GMT -5
Two fights, Two point deductions...One questionable decision...Can the American fighters get a fair shake during Super 6 Tournament bouts in Europe?
Watching that Dirrell fight again, I really do feel bad for Dirrell...It's almost painful when the quality of the judging and officiating doesn't match the quality of the fighters in the bout.
They should've done like baseball's World Series and chosen the very best officials for this tourney...I could go with Steve Smoger and Kenny Bayless working the entire tournament...
|
|
|
Post by PBD on Oct 19, 2009 6:56:12 GMT -5
I think the Americans can get a fair deal , we just can't be handed the fight to the other fighters like Dirrell did. To be honest though I don't think the Americans can win any of the remaining fights versus Abraham,Kessler or Froch. Dirrell really should have pressed on a little more and he would have had that fight.
|
|
|
Post by littlelee on Oct 19, 2009 9:15:07 GMT -5
It's not easy for a US based fighter to win a close fight in Europe, no.
But you know home-town decisions, refereeing bias and promoter shenanigans aren't restricted to Europe, right?
|
|
|
Post by boriblaze1 on Oct 19, 2009 14:34:38 GMT -5
No we can't we always get robbed out there! I have not watched the fight yet I have it on my DVR. But a very good friend Of mine and someone who know a lot about boxing said that he thought Andre Dirrell won the fight!
|
|
|
Post by mecky1888 on Oct 19, 2009 18:39:53 GMT -5
i thought dirrell clearly won the fight had it been anywhere else in the uk and not frochs backyard he would have won
|
|
|
Post by ste100 on Oct 20, 2009 4:21:37 GMT -5
to be fair, this is a problem in boxing worldwide, but there are obvious examples in europe recently, although uk fighters will complain about europe officials and vice versa im sure.
bradley got a fair decision against witter if i remember correctly, it happens.
what exactly are we saying here? ive always wondered how it happens, are we saying that promoters pay officials? or officials are told they wont get the big fights unless the home fighter is helped, whats the procedure?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Magno on Oct 20, 2009 4:35:18 GMT -5
to be fair, this is a problem in boxing worldwide, but there are obvious examples in europe recently, although uk fighters will complain about europe officials and vice versa im sure. bradley got a fair decision against witter if i remember correctly, it happens. what exactly are we saying here? ive always wondered how it happens, are we saying that promoters pay officials? or officials are told they wont get the big fights unless the home fighter is helped, whats the procedure? Promoters DO pay the officials...and it's certainly implied that, as a judge, you won't be getting any further paydays from that promoter if you rule against his guy...It's a big problem and a complete conflict of interest as long as promoters are allowed to act as managers and sign guys to exclusive contracts... Make the promoters bid on fights instead of fighters and this problem erases itself overnight...
|
|
|
Post by ste100 on Oct 20, 2009 4:41:39 GMT -5
paul, do you mean officially? surely if there is a record of a judge getting an unusually large amount of money and giving a score that everyone sees as bogus there would be an investigation?
or are we talking about brown paper bags and a nudge and a wink?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Magno on Oct 20, 2009 5:07:27 GMT -5
paul, do you mean officially? surely if there is a record of a judge getting an unusually large amount of money and giving a score that everyone sees as bogus there would be an investigation? or are we talking about brown paper bags and a nudge and a wink? It's on the up and up...The promoter pays the commission and the commission pays the judges, so the judge's pay is coming directly from the pockets of the promoters. It's literally as cozy as the promoter handing an envelope to the commission rep who then turns around and hands that same envelope to the judge or ref...Plus, the promoters pay for airfare, hotel and a per diem that covers food and incidentals while the judges and ref are on the clock. So, if Froch's promoter is footing the bill, bringing you over to the UK, hooking you up with nice accomodations and a generous per diem, there's certainly pressure to side with the promoter's fighter...Also, factor in the hometown effect and the pressure of sending the rabid hometown fans into a rage... As a licensed judge, I've been in similiar situations, but on a MUCH smaller scale, of course...nobody ever came right out and told me to fix a fight (although it does happen), but I've certainly felt pressure to favor with the promoter's guys...and when I'm not willing to play along, I simply don't get anymore calls to officiate... For the big-timers, who wants to lose paid vacations to glamorous cities across the globe? I think even among the most honest judges, there is at least a subconscious leaning toward the house fighter...
|
|
|
Post by ste100 on Oct 20, 2009 6:52:11 GMT -5
thats interesting paul,
its seems another reason why we need a strong worldwide governing body in the sport.
|
|
|
Post by Damon on Oct 20, 2009 21:03:27 GMT -5
I'd say no, that it's clear based on the Froch-Dirrell nonsense, and I don't think I'm being melodramatic when I say that fight, alone, put a damper my interest in this tournament. It's all right. I'll be okay. I'll just watch these old fight tapes or something.
|
|
|
Post by zd on Oct 21, 2009 10:01:00 GMT -5
I'd say no, that it's clear based on the Froch-Dirrell nonsense, and I don't think I'm being melodramatic when I say that fight, alone, put a damper my interest in this tournament. It's all right. I'll be okay. I'll just watch these old fight tapes or something. Although I'm still mad at you over something that happened almost 2 weeks ago, I totally agree with you. IMO, I don't understand how anyone in their right state of mind thought this fight could have gone either way, sure Froch was pressing the fight, bit ineffective pressure does not count, he was hitting nothing but air most of the fight, tripping over himself at times, and when frustrated he relied on rabbit punching. Now the ref's job is another story, it seemed as if Dirrell was fighting against 2 guys inside the ring, then to make matters worse he gets a point deduction while Froch's rabbit punching is being ignored. I don't know about anybody else but this fight was very frustrating for me. I think Dirrell did more than enough to win. In a fair decision Froch should've only won 4 rounds and he should've been deducted at least one point.
|
|
|
Post by Justfish1 on Oct 22, 2009 13:44:04 GMT -5
I'd say no, that it's clear based on the Froch-Dirrell nonsense, and I don't think I'm being melodramatic when I say that fight, alone, put a damper my interest in this tournament. It's all right. I'll be okay. I'll just watch these old fight tapes or something. Although I'm still mad at you over something that happened almost 2 weeks ago, I totally agree with you. IMO, I don't understand how anyone in their right state of mind thought this fight could have gone either way, sure Froch was pressing the fight, bit ineffective pressure does not count, he was hitting nothing but air most of the fight, tripping over himself at times, and when frustrated he relied on rabbit punching. Now the ref's job is another story, it seemed as if Dirrell was fighting against 2 guys inside the ring, then to make matters worse he gets a point deduction while Froch's rabbit punching is being ignored. I don't know about anybody else but this fight was very frustrating for me. I think Dirrell did more than enough to win. In a fair decision Froch should've only won 4 rounds and he should've been deducted at least one point. I agree with u Z I thought Dirrell won that fight I only saw five clean punches that Froch landed.
|
|