and so it continues.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Yet again we see a fornicating piss poor job of scoring a fight/blatant corruption, depending on your viewpoint.

How that wasn't a robbery is beyond me. After the first two rounds, Dazzo barely landed a fornicating glove on him.

you have to wonder if he and his corner knew something we didn't, there didn't seem to be any concern on Williams part that he was losing the fight.

It's time to end the fornicating ridiculuous situation of referee's scoring a fight. what possible justification is there for continuing for this ridiculous situation? At least with 3 judges there is a better chance of two out of three getting it right.

That was a bloody travesty of the highest order. it wasn't even close.

[stujones]

you have to wonder if he and his corner knew something we didn't, there didn't seem to be any concern on Williams part that he was losing the fight.

Dai Gardiner's inspirational words were "come on the Buddy Boy".

Seriously, I thought exactly the same and was actually shouting at McCory/Smith "Williams is going to win this", and I scored it as they did exactly.

I'm getting a knack for picking these decisions - I knew which way the ref was going to turn for Monaghan vs Murphy, Both Vanzie vs Earl fights, Barnes vs Vincent, and Sprott vs Williams.

Its getting to the point where it is suprising if the guy who has clearly won the fight actually gets the decision.

I felt a bit for Nicky Piper, he wasn't given alot of time to put his point of view across and I think hopefully Sky might discuss it more in depth on Sunday. Its something that needs adress and giving robbed fighters immediate rematches is not the answer. We need to overturn decisions.

But first and foremost, we need 3 referee's - you cannot focus on the fight and the scoring, all the refs have said it cannot be done effectively.

[Manos de Oro]

The worst thing was... I was completely expecting Dazzo's hand to be raised. The referee simply wasn't up to the task of scoring the fight. Was completely and utterly intimidated. Pathetic.

Sure, it's great that Dazzo is hot shit in his home town, selling loads of tickets and getting mad support, but come on... this was the British Featherweight title they were fighting for, one guy was attempting to win it outright, which elevated the fight to a 'historical' stage, in my view. The featherweight belt is one of the most prestigious of the Lonsdale belts for me, and I think any fighter who wins it outright should do so convincingly and legitemately. One newbie referee who has been completely caught up in the moment has taken the prestige down a notch. No matter how unpopular the decision would have been, the prestige of that great belt depends on one fighter going into anothers backyard, winning it, then defending it in his hometown till the same happens to him... that's what the belt's legacy has been built upon, shame on that referee. And shame on Piper too, who came across as being completely in the pocket during his post-fight comments.

[Manos de Oro]

I'm getting a knack for picking these decisions - I knew which way the ref was going to turn for Monaghan vs Murphy, Both Vanzie vs Earl fights, Barnes vs Vincent, and Sprott vs Williams. .

Snap! Wasn't shocked the moment any of those were announced either. Something I was surprised at, was how Dai Gardner and Steve Robinson kept talking at the same time to Williams - both those two certainly know what to do in a corner, what were they thinking talking to Dazzo at the same time?! Maybe that's what made him seem so confused... :)

[stujones]

I'm getting a knack for picking these decisions - I knew which way the ref was going to turn for Monaghan vs Murphy, Both Vanzie vs Earl fights, Barnes vs Vincent, and Sprott vs Williams. .

Snap! Wasn't shocked the moment any of those were announced either. Something I was surprised at, was how Dai Gardner and Steve Robinson kept talking at the same time to Williams - both those two certainly know what to do in a corner, what were they thinking talking to Dazzo at the same time?! Maybe that's what made him seem so confused... :)

Yes, I have raved about the way Robinson has transformed Williams, but tonight Williams didn't even listen to him at all - Robinson was asking him to take in deep breaths and hold (something, I've never really believed is beneficial) but Dazzo never did it. The respect didn't seem to be there.

[steve689]

I didn't see the fight as i am stuck at work on the graveyard shift but i echo the calls for relieving the ref of his scoring duties, how can he possibly see everything, score shots AND look after a fighters health all at the same time. If they insist on using the ref as a judge then why not add two others at ringside to score with him.

[Twinkle Toes]

James why don't you use you power as a journo to do a feature about it?

[glittermonkey]

I wouldn't go so far as to say it was blatant corruption, James. I think the referee was just influenced by the crowd. That irks me even more than the outcome itself. He was clearly the wrong appointment, there just was not enough experience there. I know that the refs have to start somewhere, but reffing your first title fight in front of such a partisan crowd, is a huge ask, and one that the guy just wasn't up to.

As for the fight itself, i scored it to Simpson by five rounds. And even then i felt (before the verdict) that i'd been a little lenient on Williams. Really poor decision, and yet another bad night for British boxing.

[KOJOE90]

Well watching it on TV I had it 117 - 112 to Simpson. Although I do understand that seeing a fight on TV and ringside can be quite different at times. I saw the first Benn V Malinga fight live and had Benn an easy winner. But the next day when I watched it on tape I scored it much closer, although still had Benn winning.

It may well be time as others have all ready said to bring in 3 judges for British title fights. Does anyone know why the BBBofC ar against it? I assume money is a factor.

[The Hawk]

Yet again we see a fornicating piss poor job of scoring a fight/blatant corruption, depending on your viewpoint.

How that wasn't a robbery is beyond me. After the first two rounds, Dazzo barely landed a fornicating glove on him.

you have to wonder if he and his corner knew something we didn't, there didn't seem to be any concern on Williams part that he was losing the fight.

It's time to end the fornicating ridiculuous situation of referee's scoring a fight. what possible justification is there for continuing for this ridiculous situation? At least with 3 judges there is a better chance of two out of three getting it right.

That was a bloody travesty of the highest order. it wasn't even close.

I fully agree here James, what a mess this is, again! At the end of the fight I seen Simpson getting robbed, it was sickening and no surprise. The Scotsman fought the fight of his life, against the odds, you could see he thought about everything and he did what he was to do to win a Championship. He took the fight to the Champion, out worked him in every department and out landed Dazzo with clean effective punching and ring general ship.

The British Boxing Board of Control, need to pull themselves out of the "Dark Ages" and get three judges, how many more young men's dreams are going to get wrecked due to this?

I like Dazzo Williams he a good guy in boxing, I seen him win the title in a hail of boo's here at the Kings Hall in Belfast, where he was given the verdict, although not as bad as this. To his credit he's been in exciting defences from that and beat Rutherford in a rematch.

Simpson was put in against the odds and won the fight fair and square. He should have been the British Featherweight Champion and at 21 it could have changed his life. Im not saying he's the next big thing, but he won that title and was robbed at the highest level.

A picture is better than a 1000 words and Dazzo's face throughout that whole fight said "I'm losing my title".

I know Dazzo now owns the belt outright, but surely deep down in his heart seeing that title in years to come, he'll know he really should not have owned the Lonsdale belt like this. He may never say it, but it will always be there to remind him.

Now a young fighters dream chance has taken away from him and a British Champion left feeling, "I won this belt outright by not winning the fight". That cannot be right for either fighter and here we are again saying, this needs addressing.

[KOJOE90]

At the end of the fight I seen Simpson getting robbed, it was sickening and no surprise. .

The fact that it was no surprise was sickening in itself, and a sad thing indeed for the sport in general.

[Exile]

Just proves that hometown descisions arent confined to German soil


Seriuosly though, this is becoming a far to regular occurance on these shores (Murphy, Dazzo etc) and again is making a mockery of British boxing.

Out of curiousity what other countries have the ref as sole judge?

[Freiheit]

Just proves that hometown descisions arent confined to German soil


Seriuosly though, this is becoming a far to regular occurance on these shores (Murphy, Dazzo etc) and again is making a mockery of British boxing.

Out of curiousity what other countries have the ref as sole judge?

In Germany the non-EBU sanctionbody uses only the ref but thats the only one I can think of at the moment.

[Exile]

The way things are going they might aswell just do a poll of fans in attendance to pick the victor

[The Hawk]

The way things are going they might aswell just do a poll of fans in attendance to pick the victor

Very true Exile, I reckon if that was the case we'd get the correct verdict,

The fan's are not stupid and how can we create more fans with these things happening.

I was going to ask some friends around to watch the fight, but I ended up having a quiet night in front of the telly to watch it. Afterwards Im gald I did not ask them, for when these things happen, they always ask me questions I cannot answer and they think its all a joke.

Sad truth is when casual watchers of boxing see this, they are left wondering what is this all about and why I love the sport so much.

I'm keen to see were Simpson will go from here, I hope Tommy Gilmour does his upmost for this young man and Im sure he will. I know this is not the first case of this, but it was like a final wake up to what is happening again and again.

[Manos de Oro]

Its something that needs adress and giving robbed fighters immediate rematches is not the answer. We need to overturn decisions.

Let's say Simpson goes on to get sparked early in a rematch, then continually loses and ends up with a 15 - 40 record or something. Does this somehow legitimise last night's decision? Does it fornicate! Even if he fought the fight of his life - to a standard that he may never fight again - he deserved to get the decision for rising to the occasion during those 36 minutes of those 12 rounds. The word 'rematch' is banded about by Nicky Piper and co. as if a rematch reverses the original injustice. It was the same with Barnes - Vincent, 'the board will order a rematch and everything will be okay'. NO! NO! NO!

Decisions need to be overturned, and I don't actually think there would be too much of an outrage within real boxing circles if decisions were reversed in extreme cases. The type of fans who typically sway the refs and judges are the archetypal lads in designer shirts who know little about boxing but enjoy going along to the fight while pissed and shouting the odds as if they're hard. Like their hangover, they’ll tend to forget about the fight after it has happened. Yeah, they’re likely to cause a scene on the night, but are they likely to influx BN with complaint letters and stand with placards outside the BBBoC main offices? Erm, no. Is this the type of person we want judging fights in Britain? Of course not. That's why the board needs to employ ref's with some balls, or give the timid little ref some aviation earplugs, or else have two judges and a ref. But of course it costs too much to reimburse the travel for these people, doesn't it? Well, there is usually more than three fights on your average undercard, so why not have the referees for the previous bouts judge? You often see them sitting watching the action at ringside anyway, they're likely scoring the fight in their head, so why not have them sit with a pen and piece of paper? The BBBoC are all too eager to harp on about their reputation, but when injustice is being perceived to be done they _must_ address it to retain any sort of credibility at home. The subjectivity card just does not wash. You know - the one that Nicky Piper constantly plays after a shaky decision and he comes under pressure: "scoring fights is a very subjective thing." That is not good enough and is no more than a weasel's excuse for not knowing what else to say. A fight is scored the world over according to three main criteria: 1) effective aggressiveness 2) ring generalship 3) defence with a strong emphasis on clean, effective punching. Take last night's fight as an example:

1) Neither fighter came forward Gatti-Ward style, so you have to take into account who was most effective in the exchanges when they did go toe to toe. I'd say the balance tips slightly in favour of Simpson, closely but clearly. Dazzo landed a number of wide left hooks that made a smacking sound and made the crowd cheer, unfortunately the smacking sound was made from them being blocked by Simpson’s right glove. Likewise Simpson landed many good body shots, which didn't make a great impact on Dazzo or the crowd, but for me are scoring punches (memories of DLH - Sturm). Since you also didn't have one fighter clearly being the aggressor in the fight you have to look at a) who landed noticeably the more punches b) who had better economy / a higher success rate. This was obviously Simpson; was the Sky stats even needed to notice this? Dazzo looked completely confused and befuddled working backwards all during the middle stretch, while hardly landing anything.


2) Ring Generalship: who controls the centre of the ring, who controls the pace, tempo and flow of the fight. This was probably the easiest of the three criteria to judge. Dazzo skirted around the edges of the ring flicking out backhands, switching southpaw, throwing double left jabs and combinations that practically always missed. Do you get points for looking good in shadowboxing now in British title fights? The reason he looked so bad was because he could not get near the centre of the ring to take hold, that area was completely shut off by Simpson, who took the fight away from Dazzo after the opening two rounds, and never let him have it back for the remainder. You'll be hard pressed to find a clearer case of dominant ring generalship (Mayweather - Corrales springs to mind), embarrassing that a Board referee did not recognise this.


3) Neither fighter looked like the stronger puncher, neither was hurt or marked up at any point, so that excises any DLH - Moseley 2 type arguments of 'his punches were stronger'. Again, you have to look at a) who landed noticeably the more punches b) who had the higher success rate. The only way I can think how the ref might have saw Dazzo being the victor in this category is because he doesn't count body shots. The very thought of this makes me cringe like I've just taken a Micky Ward left hook liver shot. As for defence, watch the tape, BBBoC experts, it's as clear as day that Simpson constantly slips the majority of Dazzo's attacks, and backs away successfully whenever Dazzo charges. Textbook calm slipperiness, you'd have to be blind to not see that Simpson had the better of the defences between the two. How can it even be argued?

[jamesmcdonnell]

James why don't you use you power as a journo to do a feature about it?

power, what power?

nobody gives a fornicate about corruption or poor decisions in boxing, nobody cares about boxing full stop.

[Priff]

It is important NOT to overturn the decision.
Once you do, a fight night decision will mean NOTHING, and boxing scoring will change forever into a post fight administrative/legal free-for-all.

To say that the opinion of the Ref, or the scorers was not valid, and that the opinion of the board is more important sets a precedent that boxing simply can't live with. The board (and their lawyers) know this. The board have to remain 'powerless' to effect the result after a match, or face 24/7 legal action from corners who feel hard done by.

It'll have to be tackled through re-matches, or though prevention of bad decisions in the first place.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I agree, it would create an impossible situation. It's the same with all sports, you have to have judges/umpires etc who have the authority.

The board can order a rematch, and hopefully that is what will happen, although Dazzo made it clear he intends to move on up, and will probably vacate the title. Therefore there's no guarantee that the guy will get his title shot.

You've got to feel for simpson, he really fought an excellent game plan, and stuck to his guns. Once he figured Dazzo out, he never looked close to losing the fight.

I just think that the fight reflects badly on the sport once more. I watched it with a mate, and even though he's no boxing fan, he was disgusted with the decision.

[steve richards]

you have to wonder if he and his corner knew something we didn't, there didn't seem to be any concern on Williams part that he was losing the fight.

Dai Gardiner's inspirational words were "come on the Buddy Boy".

Seriously, I thought exactly the same and was actually shouting at McCory/Smith "Williams is going to win this", and I scored it as they did exactly.

I'm getting a knack for picking these decisions - I knew which way the ref was going to turn for Monaghan vs Murphy, Both Vanzie vs Earl fights, Barnes vs Vincent, and Sprott vs Williams.

Its getting to the point where it is suprising if the guy who has clearly won the fight actually gets the decision.

I felt a bit for Nicky Piper, he wasn't given alot of time to put his point of view across and I think hopefully Sky might discuss it more in depth on Sunday. Its something that needs adress and giving robbed fighters immediate rematches is not the answer. We need to overturn decisions.

But first and foremost, we need 3 referee's - you cannot focus on the fight and the scoring, all the refs have said it cannot be done effectively.

I totally agree stu, Monaghan beat Murphy hands down, Vanzie was on the end of a really bad decision, Three judges should be installed for all british title fights, Funny thing is Monaghan won the fight easily did'nt get the decision and did'nt complain, as he did when Lockett beat him and Elcock beat him, Just seemed a bit strange when everyone else thought he beat Murphy hands down, Vanzie will always get the shitty end of the stick because of how he is with people, Jimmy vincent got robbed good and proper but will come back and win a wbu inter whatever im sure, and Danny williams will be riding the train after he beats Klitchko, We need 3 judges for all title fights simple

[knockout]

Monaghan beat Murphy hands down........... Funny thing is Monaghan won the fight easily did'nt get the decision and did'nt complain, as he did when Lockett beat him and Elcock beat him,

if you keep getting bad decisions it eventually drains you and you get used to it..... Poor old Moneghan knows there is no point complaining about it

[THEBUTCH]

I had to feel for Simpson and the sport of boxing. He appeared a clear winner and it hurts boxing too when it would seem obvious who won the contest. It adds insult to injury when the British title is on the line.

But in my view, replacing the referee with three judges won't sort the problem out OR reduce the number of controversial decisions. It will happen in time (three judges) that is a certainty, but we'll still have just as many contentious verdicts when it does.

Don't forget, if we uses three judges for British boxing, that's 4 officials instead of 1 being used. Some promoters struggle to make ends meet as it is. Who's going to stump up the extra funds needed?

As a paying fan, I feel I pay enough for a ticket, so not me.

The boxer? I doubt they want to get paid any less for putting their life on the line.

The referee/judges? Unlikely, But someone will have to pay.

This is probably a minor concern in the scale of things, but it's not as simple making change as it sometimes appears.

[Twinkle Toes]

power, what power?

nobody gives a fornicate about corruption or poor decisions in boxing, nobody cares about boxing full stop.

Maybe if your opinon of boxing is that jaded, you should be looking to cover another sport.

You're lucky in that you have outlets for your writing were many people get to read your thoughts.

Excuse me for thinking you had any power

[J]

yeah come on James power to the people and all that, you'd make a good citizen smith mate
in sderiousness you coud write an article on refs still being in charge being so out of date...would be fornicating boring to write about though, me at the moment im struggling to even post on here such is my distaste and dissillusionment at present.

it just doesnt excite me at the momenet, i have these phases though

[jamesmcdonnell]

That wasn't directed at you, just a bit frustrated with things right now. I think it's these long winter nights...

I do wonder myself sometimes. I get so exasperated with the lack of change or improvement in the sport. Admittedly it's not all bad, but this year domestically has been really poor, so many contests have fallen through.

Danny Williams has been the real eye-opener and the highlight of the year for me would certainly be if he manages to turn Vitali over.