Joe Cortez

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 20 Apr 2008, 00:17

Always thought Cortez was a quality ref, but he had a bit of a stinker in the Hatton fight and tonight he went in the other direction and still had a stinker.

He's the American Micky Vann: i.e a homer ref.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2008, 00:27

I think Joe won the fight, only on one condition: that Cortez should've taken a point or two off Hopkins for use of the head. That way, with imaginary PTS deducted, Joe definitely won.

The ref needed to regulate Hopkins' dirty work, so that we could have an actual fight not a frigging Sakio Bika style maul. In this - even worse than being biased to the home fighter - Cortez failed miserably. By not keeping control of the foul-instigator, he let the fight stay poor.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 20 Apr 2008, 00:30

Autobarn wrote:I think Joe won the fight, only on one condition: that Cortez should've taken a point or two off Hopkins for use of the head. That way, with imaginary PTS deducted, Joe definitely won.

The ref needed to regulate Hopkins' dirty work, so that we could have an actual fight not a frigging Sakio Bika style maul. In this - even worse than being biased to the home fighter - Cortez failed miserably. By not keeping control of the foul-instigator, he let the fight stay poor.

Agree with that all..... and I think it would have actually helped Hopkins' cause - had he needed to chase the fight a bit.

Think Hopkins should have had a point deduction, Joe could have had a sterner warning for his rabbit punching.

Although it would have been harsh - I was a little surprised that given the Showboat and the complaining by Hopkins, that Calzaghe wasn't deducted in the 10th.... NOTE - I wouldn't have agreed with that, but I was expecting Cortez to dock him.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2008, 00:35

Hopkins has had Cortez conned since that 3rd Robert Allen fight.

I won't dispute the verdict. But refs have a duty to the fight and Cortez effed up badly.

In case Joe and Enzo start getting bigheaded, I'll just keep on repeating: "Yoyu beat a great fighter, who was 43, only by split decision."

don't call it a comeback · Post by **don't call it a comeback** » 20 Apr 2008, 04:54

Autobarn wrote:Hopkins has had Cortez conned since that 3rd Robert Allen fight.

I won't dispute the verdict. But refs have a duty to the fight and Cortez effed up badly.

In case Joe and Enzo start getting bigheaded, I'll just keep on repeating: "Yoyu beat a great fighter, who was 43, only by split decision."

Lol I dont think they are listening to you...too busy celebrating with champagne with family friends and stars of stage and screen whilst they count their millions. Sorry if that makes you even more depressed.

To BHop I might say: "You lost to a 36 year old fighter, in his first fight at the weight, who was away from home, fighting for the first time in Vegas and despite having him down in the first round. How depressing is that?"

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 20 Apr 2008, 05:08

Nice to see that Cortez applies himself fairly isnt it? Im so glad Calzaghe won despite that, although Cortez at least didnt let Hopkins con him with the second low one.

All the septics are basically saying that its ok because Hopkins only did it in his last two fights, whereas Hatton does it all the time..... any lingering respect I had for some of them has fled the building.

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 20 Apr 2008, 05:18

don't call it a comeback wrote:
Autobarn wrote:Hopkins has had Cortez conned since that 3rd Robert Allen fight.

I won't dispute the verdict. But refs have a duty to the fight and Cortez effed up badly.

In case Joe and Enzo start getting bigheaded, I'll just keep on repeating: "Yoyu beat a great fighter, who was 43, only by split decision."
Lol I dont think they are listening to you...too busy celebrating with champagne with family friends and stars of stage and screen whilst they count their millions. Sorry if that makes you even more depressed.

To BHop I might say: "You lost to a 36 year old fighter, in his first fight at the weight, who was away from home, fighting for the first time in Vegas and despite having him down in the first round. How depressing is that?"

The truth will set you free.

But since i'm (insert sarcasm here) perfect, how are the ladies in Britain eh? I find you fellows (more sarcasm) boring. Joe Cortez let the fight be poor eh? Didn't have anything to do with two grown men with more physical strength than himself? I suppose they must have been like magnets with all that clinching from both sides which I didn't see because I smoke pot while you clean your whistle? Hows that for a pinch in the ass? I blame learning to type in school, learning to write in school, and learning to read everything I get my hands on, after all there's more than one side to every story. Humored or at least amused yet? I'm out for the night. Until tomorrow ladies and gents, let it never come for you ladies and always for you gents.

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 20 Apr 2008, 05:26

MatthewS wrote:Nice to see that Cortez applies himself fairly isnt it? Im so glad Calzaghe won despite that, although Cortez at least didnt let Hopkins con him with the second low one.

All the septics are basically saying that its ok because Hopkins only did it in his last two fights, whereas Hatton does it all the time..... any lingering respect I had for some of them has fled the building.

Perhaps I spoke too soon? Or too late? Or should I just not have spoken? That is the question! Rest easy British friends and huckleberries, for I will return with more silly stupidity whether you like it or not. (I just hope my informative posts still outnumber my attention whoring ones, it's my goal in the boxrec life.)

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 20 Apr 2008, 05:27

who paid cortez for the fight and his expenses.....

shit, it was the promoter...and that was golden boy...

and hopkins is golden boy (with DLH of course)....

so therefore, one of the fighters was paying the refs wages..so now surely you can understand why hopkins was not deducted the points..

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 20 Apr 2008, 05:29

vagabundo55 wrote:
MatthewS wrote:Nice to see that Cortez applies himself fairly isnt it? Im so glad Calzaghe won despite that, although Cortez at least didnt let Hopkins con him with the second low one.

All the septics are basically saying that its ok because Hopkins only did it in his last two fights, whereas Hatton does it all the time..... any lingering respect I had for some of them has fled the building.
Perhaps I spoke too soon? Or too late? Or should I just not have spoken? That is the question! Rest easy British friends and huckleberries, for I will return with more silly stupidity whether you like it or not. (I just hope my informative posts still outnumber my attention whoring ones, it's my goal in the boxrec life.)

just keep the drivel in Other Sports, where the rest of us do

don't call it a comeback · Post by **don't call it a comeback** » 20 Apr 2008, 05:52

vagabundo55 wrote:
don't call it a comeback wrote:
Autobarn wrote:Hopkins has had Cortez conned since that 3rd Robert Allen fight.

I won't dispute the verdict. But refs have a duty to the fight and Cortez effed up badly.

In case Joe and Enzo start getting bigheaded, I'll just keep on repeating: "Yoyu beat a great fighter, who was 43, only by split decision."
Lol I dont think they are listening to you...too busy celebrating with champagne with family friends and stars of stage and screen whilst they count their millions. Sorry if that makes you even more depressed.

To BHop I might say: "You lost to a 36 year old fighter, in his first fight at the weight, who was away from home, fighting for the first time in Vegas and despite having him down in the first round. How depressing is that?"
The truth will set you free. But since i'm (insert sarcasm here) perfect, how are the ladies in Britain eh? I find you fellows (more sarcasm) boring. Joe Cortez let the fight be poor eh? Didn't have anything to do with two grown men with more physical strength than himself? I suppose they must have been like magnets with all that clinching from both sides which I didn't see because I smoke pot while you clean your whistle? Hows that for a pinch in the ass? I blame learning to type in school, learning to write in school, and learning to read everything I get my hands on, after all there's more than one side to every story. Humored or at least amused yet? I'm out for the night. Until tomorrow ladies and gents, let it never come for you ladies and always for you gents.

You may be perfect but (insert sarcasm here) you can't read. I never mentioned Cortez. not once.

oops.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:31

Hatton wasn't docked any points for holding he was just seperated like they were tonight. As for use of the head, Bernard does it very cleverly and doesn't technically headbut he leads with his head into clinches so its hard to dock points for it.

Its not like a Reid-Otke incident by any means and its not an easy job reffing a contest like this.

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 20 Apr 2008, 12:32

I think in you're in the minority of one on this mate - I know you think Bernard does beautiful work with his head, and should be applauded for it, but that isn't boxing, and the ref should be looking after the other fighter.

Let alone the auto clinching every 10 seconds - Or is that good work too?

Like someone else said, Hopkins is a light heavy John Ruiz.

Arbachakov · Post by **Arbachakov** » 20 Apr 2008, 12:35

Cortez has always been a hack.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 12:40

Twinkle Toes wrote:I think in you're in the minority of one on this mate - I know you think Bernard does beautiful work with his head, and should be applauded for it, but that isn't boxing, and the ref should be looking after the other fighter.

Let alone the auto clinching every 10 seconds - Or is that good work too?

Like someone else said, Hopkins is a light heavy John Ruiz.

As a ref what would you do differently, maybe warn BHOPs for the head but its suttle not blatant. Its notable people ignore Calazages illegal behind the head shots, which are dangerous if they had any pop on them. If BHOPs got warned for the head, then Calazage should have been warned for the behidn the head shots.

As for the holding, it wasn't as if Cortez didnt break them up as quick as the Hatton fight, so whats everyones problem other than Hatton not being able to turn his fight into an MMA fight?

As for the low blow, it did spoil the fight BUT Calazage hit him low so he was entitled to 5miniutes, thats the rules

Scrap · Post by **Scrap** » 20 Apr 2008, 12:43

I like my Sportmen to be Heroes, Im starting to dislike Hopkins big time When he got put away was it for Fraud

Coco · Post by **Coco** » 20 Apr 2008, 16:44

Cortez knows which side his bread is buttered, this has been proved by the Hatton and Calzaghe fights

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 20 Apr 2008, 17:06

I for one was surprised when they chose Cortez especially after the Hatton fiasco. Why not Kenny Bayless or Tony Weeks? Both competent referees who could have done thr job.

observer1 · Post by **observer1** » 20 Apr 2008, 18:22

wish we could give them cortez bashing a rest

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 20 Apr 2008, 20:44

Coco wrote:Cortez knows which side his bread is buttered, this has been proved by the Hatton and Calzaghe fights

Hatton was the home away from home fighter.

Hatton was the fighter who signed with GBP... Hatton was the fighter the promoter publically declared who he wanted and expected to win. Hatton was the one who DLH wanted to fight.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 20 Apr 2008, 20:50

rhino222 wrote:who paid cortez for the fight and his expenses.....

shit, it was the promoter...and that was golden boy...

and hopkins is golden boy (with DLH of course)....

so therefore, one of the fighters was paying the refs wages..so now surely you can understand why hopkins was not deducted the points..

Question.... doesn't actually the commision (NSAC) pay the officials wages, and they promoter pays for expenses?

Might be naive of me to say - but GBP started as a quest to rid corruption of the sport.... have to say - so far, not doing a bad job... Certainly the promoter himself had no favours in the Mayweather fight. Hatton was pie who DLH want to get hold of, personally and in terms of promotion - not Mayweather. So any advantage Cortez was giving (and he was giving alot) wasn't benefiting GBP.

Okay this scenerio is different, but if Cortez was corrupt - then he would have docked a point for Joe's low punch and jesture. Alot of refs would have done.

Cortez needs to retire, he's lost it - but he aint corrupt - just old.

Coco · Post by **Coco** » 21 Apr 2008, 10:50

stujones wrote:
Coco wrote:Cortez knows which side his bread is buttered, this has been proved by the Hatton and Calzaghe fights
Hatton was the home away from home fighter.

Hatton was the fighter who signed with GBP... Hatton was the fighter the promoter publically declared who he wanted and expected to win. Hatton was the one who DLH wanted to fight.

It must be a nationality thing then!

Poncey · Post by **Poncey** » 21 Apr 2008, 10:54

I will regret to my deathbed being stood next to him for Cherry v Ferguson and not breaking his legs. I'd have been thrown out, but it would be worth it.

Fair but firm my arse.

Floyd · Post by **Floyd** » 21 Apr 2008, 14:17

Also if you want to get real technical, and correct me if I'm wrong. But isn't it against the rules to dip your head below the waistline. There are quite a few times Bernard dips his head low when coming in after throwing his right.

Tykemania · Post by **Tykemania** » 21 Apr 2008, 18:24

don't call it a comeback wrote:To BHop I might say: "You lost to a 36 year old fighter, in his first fight at the weight, who was away from home, fighting for the first time in Vegas and despite having him down in the first round. How depressing is that?"

I think I'd throw in "and you need to accept, as regards your pathetic racist boasts, that you are indeed aliar".