Benn -v- McClellan: A guilty pleasure?

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 12 Oct 2007, 07:31

Whenever I watch this fight, there is a tangible sense of guilt about the fact that I think it was a tremendous fight.

I watch it & I marvel at the way that Benn came back from certain defeat to win, but this is tempered by the fact that he did not beat the 'real' McClellan.

However, it is quite obvious (in hindsight) that there is something not quite right with McClellan, as he is blinking heavily, from about round 5 onwards.

Is it wrong to think that this was tremendous fight or do you take the view that due to the outcome, you cannot watch it?

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 12 Oct 2007, 07:35

You are hereby granted absolution....enjoy the fight. To each their own...no worries. It was a sporting event. Some have bad outcomes. IF you happen to feel particularly concerned you can always give to the McClellan fund upon each viewing.

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 12 Oct 2007, 08:01

I thought it was the best fight I've ever seen, certainly in a British ring. However, I only saw it live and would never watch it again because of the tragic outcome

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 12 Oct 2007, 09:30

I agree. Absolutely brilliant back and forth action fight, but it's a little creepy to watch knowing you are watching a man getting permanently damaged.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 12 Oct 2007, 11:27

To be honest I watched this recently and have to say that technically it isnt the best fight I've seen by far, far too much holding and wrestling... too messy in other words, I'd say the Finnegan vs Minter fights were better, especially their 2nd bout... and also Eubank vs Watson 2 was a better all round fight imo.... though obviously just as tragic...
as for the guilt, it does leave a mark on the fight, at least with Watson he has made some form of recovery while with Gerald there seems to have been no such improvement at all. What I find most disturbing about the fight though is that I'm sure that Gerald was severely hurt from early on when he started blinking strangely, yet this went unnoticed by nearly everyone else (though Gutteridge commented on it in around the 6th).....

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 13 Oct 2007, 14:58

The referee allowed Benn to use repeated (and heavy) rabbit punches throughout the fight.

That should never have been allowed and led to the result.

theone · Post by **theone** » 13 Oct 2007, 16:45

granberry wrote:The referee allowed Benn to use repeated (and heavy) rabbit punches throughout the fight.

That should never have been allowed and led to the result.

Very true. Rabbit punching is probably the most dangerous illegal tactic in boxing but for some reason the least penalized for. I've seen fighters get more shit from the ref for holding or back slapping than rabbit punching.

Diamond WEAPON · Post by **Diamond WEAPON** » 13 Oct 2007, 18:32

theone wrote:
granberry wrote:The referee allowed Benn to use repeated (and heavy) rabbit punches throughout the fight.

That should never have been allowed and led to the result.
Very true. Rabbit punching is probably the most dangerous illegal tactic in boxing but for some reason the least penalized for. I've seen fighters get more shit from the ref for holding or back slapping than rabbit punching.

I'd say the fight with Julian Jackson had a lot to do with McClellan's eventual condition as well, that's when he started having weird symptoms like that of a concussion or head trauma victim, but neither he nor anybody else thought much of it, just figured it was bound to happen with a puncher like Jackson hammering at you, it does seem like that fight kinda set the stage for the eventual condition of McClellan which was then multiply exasperated thanks to the many rabbit punches in the Benn fight.

RazorKO · Post by **RazorKO** » 23 Oct 2007, 13:47

One of the greatest fights of all time plagued by the tragic outcome.

Though what spoilt this fight was the referee's incompetance, he gave a slow count when Benn climbed back into the ring (Benn was out of the ring for more than 10 and was actually pushed back in by a person from ringside) he repeatedly put himself between McClelan and Benn during the first round onslaught to give Benn more time to recover and he failed to penalize Benn for his repeated rabbit blows.

Knucklez · Post by **Knucklez** » 25 Oct 2007, 14:12

Diamond WEAPON wrote:
theone wrote:
granberry wrote:The referee allowed Benn to use repeated (and heavy) rabbit punches throughout the fight.

That should never have been allowed and led to the result.
Very true. Rabbit punching is probably the most dangerous illegal tactic in boxing but for some reason the least penalized for. I've seen fighters get more shit from the ref for holding or back slapping than rabbit punching.
I'd say the fight with Julian Jackson had a lot to do with McClellan's eventual condition as well, that's when he started having weird symptoms like that of a concussion or head trauma victim, but neither he nor anybody else thought much of it, just figured it was bound to happen with a puncher like Jackson hammering at you, it does seem like that fight kinda set the stage for the eventual condition of McClellan which was then multiply exasperated thanks to the many rabbit punches in the Benn fight.

Gerald experienced symptoms before Jackson.

In one of his earlier fights, I think it was Carl Sullivan, his opponent didn't land a single punch during the fight (60 second KO for the G-Man) yet in his post-fight interview, Gerald said that his eyes were stinging. Was this some sweat in his eyes or a sign of something already wrong inside his cranium?

(source: Kevin Mitchell's "War Baby")

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 26 Oct 2007, 01:41

I saw it once, I don't feel the need to see it again. There are a lot of great fights in boxing history, its not like we don't have options.

RazorKO · Post by **RazorKO** » 26 Oct 2007, 11:37

Decagon wrote:
RazorKO wrote:One of the greatest fights of all time plagued by the tragic outcome.

Though what spoilt this fight was the referee's incompetance, he gave a slow count when Benn climbed back into the ring (Benn was out of the ring for more than 10 and was actually pushed back in by a person from ringside) he repeatedly put himself between McClelan and Benn during the first round onslaught to give Benn more time to recover and he failed to penalize Benn for his repeated rabbit blows.
Actually, what happened was that McClellan kept trying to push his way forward before the ref called for them to fight again.

Even so, the ref was trying his best to make sure Benn got through that first round. But credit to Benn whom came back from the brink of defeat and defeating arguably the hardest middleweight puncher seen in the last 20 years.

squiggy · Post by **squiggy** » 10 Apr 2008, 01:23

Haven't seen it... Frustrated that they don't seem to allow it on youtube.

harrygreb · Post by **harrygreb** » 10 Apr 2008, 12:45

its tragic that people only grudgingly give nigel his due for winning this against all odds.

Arbachakov · Post by **Arbachakov** » 10 Apr 2008, 15:34

harrygreb wrote:its tragic that people only grudgingly give nigel his due for winning this against all odds.

Unfair or not, it's to be expected considering the amount of viscious fouling Benn did during the bout.

harrygreb · Post by **harrygreb** » 10 Apr 2008, 16:34

whatever gets you through..

..how about duran and buchanan. any comments on durans attitude to the rules in that one?

ben geoghegan · Post by **ben geoghegan** » 14 Apr 2008, 23:11

No guilt involved. Unless you watch for the ghoulish notion to see a man suffer permanent crippling a lot can be gained from viewing the fight. And it is a great fight. Though commentary by Showtime is really disgraceful throughout.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 14 Apr 2008, 23:43

You could make the case Buchanan started it by punching after the bell. He wouldn't have won anyway.

There's hundreds of fighters, Duran included, who came before Benn who did the same kind of thing who need to be criticized for it before we single him out. Its unfortunate that McClellan was injured, but we can't single out Benn for fouling simply because his opponent happened to get injured while another fighter who might have fought just as dirty didn't happen permanently injure his opponent, and we don't know that Benn's fouls caused McClellan's injuries to begin with. One poster I wont name in this forum has no problem with someone like Marciano fouling, for example, but attacks the referees in Gomez and Benn's fights. I guess Cockell needed to be permanently injured for it to have been wrong?

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 15 Apr 2008, 00:29

If the fight were in Las Vegas, NV, the fight would have ended in the first round. What the heck that referee was doing? I do not know...But he was a BAD REFEREE

harrygreb · Post by **harrygreb** » 15 Apr 2008, 08:02

i posit the buchanan - duran fight to indicate that roughhouse tactics dont mean that youre not the better man. duran ruffed ken up big time but had ken been a little smarter and worked out that this was going to get rough before the first bell he may well have edged the fight. i dont think he was well prepared for that eventuality. we all know about the habits of greb and fritzie zivic and others in the history of our sport.
its a grim battle and when youre facing obliteration as benn did against mclellan the survivor takes over...and its absorbing entertainment

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 15 Apr 2008, 16:57

elmersalsa wrote:If the fight were in Las Vegas, NV, the fight would have ended in the first round. What the heck that referee was doing? I do not know...But he was a BAD REFEREE

Not really. We saw that recently with Casamayor-Katsidis. I'm glad Casamayor won, but he should have been KO'd when he went through the ropes. The referee stopped counting at 9 and Casamayor wasn't even back in the ring. We've seen some stupid Brit referees, but that doesn't mean we don't have plenty of idiot refs in the U.S.

As for Duran-Buchanan, I don't think any foreknowledge of Duran's fouls would have helped him. He still couldn't get out of the way of Duran's right. Sure, Duran roughed him up, but I think Duran should get a bit more credit for the fact that he did batter Buchanan with hard shots; some make it sound as if Duran only won because of his fouls, which is obviously not true.

And Buchanan wasn't going to go foul for foul with Duran, if thats what you mean. He tried that, anyway, by hitting Duran after the bell in the 13th, and Duran made him pay. He wasn't going to out Duran Duran in terms of fouling.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 15 Apr 2008, 17:27

its the same premise as mancini-kym (?) fight. before the Korean would slip into a coma that would lead to his death, it was a tremendous fight, no question about it. same with benn-mcclellan. hell, i loved watching page's comeback, and the crowe fight wasnt that bad a fight either.

griffith-paret is another, same with baer-cambell; they were all great fights while they lasted, and to regard them as a guilty pleasure is nothing more than taboo. those men fought and either died or risk their lives and abilities to even function, doing what they loved the most.

So, my opinion? Watch away. Those men didn't fight all their lives and shed blood, sweat and tears for a particular fight or even series of fights, if not their whole careers, to be determined as a "guilty pleasure".

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 16 Apr 2008, 00:29

I Feel Fine wrote:
elmersalsa wrote:If the fight were in Las Vegas, NV, the fight would have ended in the first round. What the heck that referee was doing? I do not know...But he was a BAD REFEREE
Not really. We saw that recently with Casamayor-Katsidis. I'm glad Casamayor won, but he should have been KO'd when he went through the ropes. The referee stopped counting at 9 and Casamayor wasn't even back in the ring. We've seen some stupid Brit referees, but that doesn't mean we don't have plenty of idiot refs in the U.S.

As for Duran-Buchanan, I don't think any foreknowledge of Duran's fouls would have helped him. He still couldn't get out of the way of Duran's right. Sure, Duran roughed him up, but I think Duran should get a bit more credit for the fact that he did batter Buchanan with hard shots; some make it sound as if Duran only won because of his fouls, which is obviously not true.

And Buchanan wasn't going to go foul for foul with Duran, if thats what you mean. He tried that, anyway, by hitting Duran after the bell in the 13th, and Duran made him pay. He wasn't going to out Duran Duran in terms of fouling.

You don't think that the referee was horrible in the Benn vs McClellan bout?

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 16 Apr 2008, 00:52

Did I say he wasn't? Nope. I even made reference to "stupid Brit referees." My point was that the same could have happened in the U.S. Learn how to read

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 16 Apr 2008, 05:56

I think the ref in the Benn fight was french.