Maybe a little... I've watched loads of fights where I've thought the judge/s, ref have been dodgy, so I expect it...
What's the big fuss anyway? Scotsman gets a possible hometown decision in his favour? The Yanks have been doing this for years. Remember they used to say you had to get a knock out in New York just to get a draw.
I think the number of draws is open to interpretation and I can see the logic in the interpretation you have presented. The GAA have taken steps to get rid of this problem by trialling use of a hooter. Already used by the ladies. Today Cork got a couple of handy frees. I complained at the time the ref played 30 seconds extra but I did retract that when I calmed down a bit.
And that is the approach the chief is taking too. I think he looked at the end result. A bashed up Jockanese man and forgot all about the actual scoring and then needed a reason as to why the bashed up guy got a draw. The fact is that those who scored (nomarks like me and those in the trade) the fight came back with the notion that it was pretty close.
Rebel, I actually quite like you, but ****ing hell, if even the crowd were cringing at the result, then. surely the score was a farce? ****ing play the white man, just because he is a wee coatbridge fenian bastard, doesn't mean to say that he won the fight! I didn't see the fight and to be honest, I couldn't give a ****(as Burns is still alive) but surely everybody can't be wrong and you are correct? I don't even care that it was a **** decision, British boxers get them all the time in the States, but we complain, so, tell it how it is mate.
Don't get me wrong. Every ****ing ref in the county is out to get our club. The same was true of my club in London as well. This is a 100% fact. The ref maybe played for a draw today.......he knew I got no ticket. So wanted me to be there for the replay
Gerard, I think Burns lost. I think it was close. I don't think it was a fix. In my opinion the crowd were expecting something else. I'm not just saying this about Scotch crowds, I'm saying this about fighters who attract people to see them as an event rather than as boxing fans. Probably Martin Rogan would be an example from here. If they aren't boxing the other guys ears off, they don't really get what is going on. I think that explains a lot of it. I don't even think I am a lone voice on this. Plenty of people have scored the fight by one or two to Beltran (me among them) and that is close enough
Sven Ottke was the world's worst in Germany. Robin Reid wasn't even allowed to punch him in one round or the ref was on warning him. It was a hometown decision last night, but that is different to a fix. You don't have to watch but here are a couple of rounds from the Reid v Ottke fight even if you just watch the first 90 seconds you'll get a flavour for how it was officiated. It's a million miles from the officiating last night. [video=youtube;HXmSPbWJ2_4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXmSPbWJ2_4[/video]
Burns had a broken jaw for 10 rounds and the **** couldn't finish him off! Huns on here going on about dodgy decisions! How times have changed
There was a British Heavyweight who was as recently as 2011 set to be billed as the next big thing. He faced an American lad in an 8 rounder who should be made to fight anyone with any serious ideas of fighting at any level. This American lad lost plenty fights before and plenty fights after but this fight he thought he won because the other guy was getting protected. It was a nothing fight, but in my opinion was the decision was worse than last night in terms of controversy. Here is what the yankee said. [video=youtube;Yd7vw8NHeww]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yd7vw8NHeww[/video] I believed him.
What Gabriel Montoya of Max Boxing actually said ............ Against Beltran, Burns’ jaw broke in the second, he was dropped in the eighth but threw enough leather to make the fight apparently close enough that judge Carlos Ortiz, Jr of Queens, New York had the fight 115-112 Burns, Richard James Davies scored it 114-114 and Andre Van Grootenbruel actually saw the fight and scored it 115-113 for Beltran. Conducting a special “Hometown Benefit of the Doubt” experiment, I scored the fight 114-113 Beltran. However, a score of 7-5, even 8-4 for Beltran is quite feasible. On no planet, in no dimension or in any reality besides the world of boxing did Ricky Burns earn a draw or a victory. http://www.maxboxing.com/news/promo-lead/beltran-beats-a-split-draw-out-of-burns
Betran talking about corruption in boxing .............. "Politics, always the same thing in boxing,” said the 32-year-old Mexican, who looked to have won the fight clearly. “There is money involved, it is business, every time they have a chance to protect their investment they do it.” "They play with the business, they have the power. If I got beat I got beat, I've been getting robbed every time. It is just so frustrating, there is so much sacrifice. We put ourselves on the line. But it is business.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...icky-Burns-controversially-called-a-draw.html
You inferred nobody thought it was a close fight, yet your link quotes two people who think it was a close fight. Care to explain? I notice you added your own title as to what Beltran was commenting on. Way to go champ That lends a load of credence to your argument.
HAHA brilliant . I asked you to find anybody who thought it was a close fight . You quoted Burns who said he thought it was a close fight . Hard for him to tell though as he was in the process of getting pummelled at the time . You quoted Eddie Hearn , Burns's manager and promoter And you MISS quoted Montoya from Max Boxing . I have posted what he actually said and not just what you decided to cherry pick to suit your argument . You will also see that Montoya states that the only judge who actually seen the fight was the one that scored it 115-113 Beltran . Much the same as i said at the start of this thread .
So people protecting their investment to the detriment of others in sport isn't corrupt ? You are obviously willing to act as stupid as you can to avoid or ignore the obvious . I think i'll leave it at that . folk can read whats been posted and judge for themselves . Mibbe you could loan them one of your cards you weird ****
You mean I found people who thought it was a close fight and then relayed their thoughts to you...this appears to be a commentary rather than a point. You also neglected to comment further on the close cards of Jim Watt and Alex Arthur. Nope I quoted him accurately. No miss quoting [sic] at all. If you are upset that I didn't quote everything he said, then that is on you. I readily accept a bit of hometown bias may be involved, therefore that score in which he factored that in would very obviously be the one to cite. It's like you fell out of the ****** tree and ****ed every one of your relations on the way down. You said at the start that you had not scored the fight. Now you are saying you see it as 115-113. You also said this; You are citing this fight as evidence of corruption. All day long you have been inferring this fight wasn't close. now You are telling me it is as close as the interpretation of a single round with a score of 115-113. If arguing with you was a boxing match, there'd be no need for scorecards [video=youtube_share;8mztqVm4g0Y]http://youtu.be/8mztqVm4g0Y[/video]
