The last time a British fighter fought in Nuremberg...

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

For the world title was Robin Reid vs Sven Ottke.

If there is one place where a British fighter is never going to get a points decision - Its Nuremberg.
For obvious historical and geographical reasons.

Haye could knockdown Valuev is every round and still get jobbed on the decision.

Which I think will happen tonight. Haye gets shafted over the distance.

[thepocketrocket]

Sadly Britain is becoming no better, that kind of thinking can ruin boxing!!

Just hope if Haye deserves it he gets it, same as Valuev, let the best man win, should be that simple

[alexpaterson]

I think if Haye wins it clearly he'd get the decision if it's close then I would think that Valuev would get it but I see Valuev stopping him late

[knockout]

surely a young Haye is more promotable than a nearly retired Valuev.
I wouldnt assume the judges will lean for big Nicky!!

[mikewl]

Anyone know who the ref will be, the one in the Reid Ottke fight was horrendous, better not be someone that bias.

[gobbles]

Anyone know who the ref will be, the one in the Reid Ottke fight was horrendous, better not be someone that bias.

It's Luis Pabon from Puerto Rico. Judges from USA, Spain and Italy

[Autobarn]

to be honest we don't really know the underlying politics, betting, all that shite, all those undercurrents that sometimes have a subtle effect on how these shows are run and officiated.

[ERIC GUY]

For the world title was Robin Reid vs Sven Ottke.

If there is one place where a British fighter is never going to get a points decision - Its Nuremberg.
For obvious historical and geographical reasons.

Haye could knockdown Valuev is every round and still get jobbed on the decision.

Which I think will happen tonight. Haye gets shafted over the distance.

LOOKS LIKE YOU WERE WRONG

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

For the world title was Robin Reid vs Sven Ottke.

If there is one place where a British fighter is never going to get a points decision - Its Nuremberg.
For obvious historical and geographical reasons.

Haye could knockdown Valuev is every round and still get jobbed on the decision.

Which I think will happen tonight. Haye gets shafted over the distance.

LOOKS LIKE YOU WERE WRONG

I can see now why everybody says you are a bit of a prick.

Its OK now to come on here and start yapping after the fight but where were you before o' wise one? No-one is more suprised than me that David Haye got a fair roll of the shake in Nuremberg of all places - when that fight ended - who would of put their money on David Haye taking the decision? I bet you didn't?

I am glad to be proven wrong on this occasion - a shock result never the less - but bet your life there will be times when horrendous officiating and judging will mar boxing in that country well into the future.

[Big Ben]

I am glad to be proven wrong on this occasion - a shock result never the less - but bet your life there will be times when horrendous officiating and judging will mar boxing in that country well into the future.

Not any worse than in the UK..

[banjo]

I think they should abolish decisions, just keep fighting like the old days.

Save a hell of a lot of faffing around

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

I am glad to be proven wrong on this occasion - a shock result never the less - but bet your life there will be times when horrendous officiating and judging will mar boxing in that country well into the future.

Not any worse than in the UK..

The UK has got worse in recent times I agree - Germany has always been bad. I still remember results such as the third Andries vs Harding fight for the WBC title in which Harding was gifted the desicion though it was in Andries backyard. You probably don't remember the days when the winner 99.9 % of the time got the nod and British boxing was known as fair throughout the world. :geek2:

I feel sorry for young British boxing fans nowadays.

[banjo]

When making decisions is left down to men in suits and bow ties you know corruption is inevitable no matter if it's a boxing judge, an MP, a company director etc. doesn't matter where it is, it always takes place.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

I am glad to be proven wrong on this occasion - a shock result never the less - but bet your life there will be times when horrendous officiating and judging will mar boxing in that country well into the future.

Not any worse than in the UK..[/quote]

The UK has got worse in recent times I agree - Germany has always been bad. I still remember results such as the third Andries vs Harding fight for the WBC title in which Harding was gifted the desicion though it was in Andries backyard. You probably don't remember the days when the winner 99.9 % of the time got the nod and British boxing was known as fair throughout the world. :geek2:

I feel sorry for young British boxing fans nowadays.[/quote]

How has it gotten worse? One bad decision dirrel-froch? What else?[/quote]

Christ almighty - do you want me to name them all? From Benn vs Malinga 1 to present day - sorry - I don't have 5 hours to spare.

But you know what - I remember a time in British boxing where this kind of bent judging NEVER happened. And in fact the visitor was sometimes lucky to keep their belt - again Andries vs Harding III and Billy Hardy vs Orlando Canizales I spring to mind - would not happen nowadays I tell thee. :geek2:

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

[quote="sg1985]
You said it has 'gotten worse' I didn't name old ones because I presumed you meant it has gotten worse since......

It is no worse now that it has been in the past.[/quote]

What on earth are you talking about? The first sentence - explain it to me - that makes no sense.

Ask anyone who watched British boxing in the late 1970s to around the early 1990s to comapre it today for crap
refereeing and judging. You obviously didn't because you wouldn't say 'it is no worse now that it has been in the
past'

It's 20 times worse, I have never ever seen anything like it today.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

How has it gotten worse? One bad decision dirrel-froch? What else?

in my opinion yes and there was a thread on this the other week.

How? Show me some evidence that it is worse than it ever has been in the past? It is just as bad now as it always has been.

How long have you been watching boxing for?

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

[

What do you need explaining to you? It's quite obvious, You said 'it has got worse' since when? what point in history are you talking about? since the 90's? the 80's? What refereeing and judging decisions make it so much worse that it has been in the past?

How long have you been watching boxing for?

You are 24 years old - lets say since 1995 - around the time Naz won the belt. Thats probably a decent estimate.

British boxing went through a massive change around 1989 when the old Duff/Lawless/Barrett cartel made way for Fwank Warren.

Loads changed around that time. Not saying the cartel was perfect, the majority of British fighters who wanted to make it had to go to London such as John Conteh, Jim Watt, Tony Sibson, Keith Wallace, and nearly every big fight was in London, there were also some bad imports that came to fatten up the records of the cartel fighters - usually from Mexico. (because eastern europe was still under the Iron curtain) they were called the 'Tijuana Tumblers'

One of the good things though was the cartel were pretty straight in having the right man win. It was probably because they were too tight to bribe judges and referees but still - 99.9% of the time - the right man got the desicion.

You won't remember any of this so your statement of 'British boxing has always been bent' is nonsense.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

How long have you been watching boxing for?

Oh here we go

Here we go nothing - your perspective is very limited to be making such statements.

I know it is hard, but really - take the word from someone who was there that it has never ever been as
bad as this.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

What do you need explaining to you? It's quite obvious, You said 'it has got worse' since when? what point in history are you talking about? since the 90's? the 80's? What refereeing and judging decisions make it so much worse that it has been in the past?

How long have you been watching boxing for?

You are 24 years old - lets say since 1995 - around the time Naz won the belt. Thats probably a decent estimate.

British boxing went through a massive change around 1989 when the old Duff/Lawless/Barrett cartel made way for Fwank Warren.

Loads changed around that time. Not saying the cartel was perfect, the majority of British fighters who wanted to make it had to go to London such as John Conteh, Jim Watt, Tony Sibson, Keith Wallace, and nearly every big fight was in London, there were also some bad imports that came to fatten up the records of the cartel fighters - usually from Mexico. (because eastern europe was still under the Iron curtain) they were called the 'Tijuana Tumblers'

One of the good things though was the cartel were pretty straight in having the right man win. It was probably because they were too tight to bribe judges and referees but still - 99.9% of the time - the right man got the desicion.

You won't remember any of this so your statement of 'British boxing has always been bent' is nonsense.

The first fight I remember watching was in 1990. Nigel benn got stopped by Chris eubank in the ninth I remember that fight very well, so a good few years off. But come on, I've heard of misquotations but to put quotation marks around a phrase which was never even close to being written down is laughable. I have never even suggested British boxing has always been bent, I said there are no more terrible decisions nowadays than since I started to watch it, point to some terrible decision now in this country? But to write 'the uk has got worse in recent times' is a joke, it has always gone on. I'm not suggesting it's 'bent' as you seem to be doing, I accept this sport comes with bad decisions it's unfortunate but you make it sound as if every fight is a wrong decision which they aren't, most are correct. Bad decisions and shady business in boxing is as old as the fight game.[/quote]

You remember Benn vs Eubank at the age 5? You are having a laugh!

I have been watching boxing years but I would be a liar to tell anyone on here that I remember Green vs Palomino when I was 5 years old - don't know many 5 year olds I can have a boxing conversation with thats for sure!

I have never even suggested British boxing has always been bent, I said there are no more terrible decisions nowadays than since I started to watch it.

Now, if you had said that in the first place. No-one would have argued your point. Because boxing has been more or less constantly the same with the same promoters (give or take one or two minor, regional players going in or out of the business) since around 1989. However - it was a lot better and a lot fairer years ago. Especially the domestic fights - there is a reason why title fights are not scored by the ref anymore - nobody used to complain thats why but now - nobody trusts the refs desicion anymore.

The UK has got worse in recent times. You just weren't around during the times when most fighters got a fair shake. Especially fighters from abroad in title fights.

And where did I say that every fight is the wrong desicion? Point that one out - I must have missed typing that out. Must be my dementia.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

How long have you been watching boxing for?

Oh here we go

Here we go nothing - your perspective is very limited to be making such statements.

I know it is hard, but really - take the word from someone who was there that it has never ever been as
bad as this.

Age has nothing to do with it sunshine. I spent two years studying world war II at college, can I by age not know anything about it because I wasn't there?[/quote]

But you can't lecture a guy who fought on the beaches of normandy or a woman who survived the bombing of coventry can you?

[Big Ben]

But you can't lecture a guy who fought on the beaches of normandy or a woman who survived the bombing of coventry can you?

Actually you can because these people would have a heavily biased and limited point of view.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

But you can't lecture a guy who fought on the beaches of normandy or a woman who survived the bombing of coventry can you?

Actually you can because these people would have a heavily biased and limited point of view.

Everyone in world war 2 is going to have a heavily biased and limited point of view - It doesn't matter if you are German, British, American, Polish or whatever so no-one who took part in world war 2 has a valid point to make? according to you?

The only people who can lecture other people about world war 2 are spotty history students!

And the Swiss!

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

But you can't lecture a guy who fought on the beaches of normandy or a woman who survived the bombing of coventry can you?

No you very much right I can't I wouldn't claim to, but it still takes nothing away from me being able to learn about it does it? My age has nothing to do with it. To be fair people alive now probably know a fair but more than most who fought in it. Not the actual experience of it but about the war itself.

And thats probably not true either - in Great Britian - programmes like 'dads army' world war 2 documentaries like the 'world at war'
were always on TV, commando books and comics like warlord and valiant were widely read, I mean - how many of your mates have read a Sven Hassel book? Our dads and grandads in those days fought in world war 2 and it wasn't like we didn't go a week without knowing something about it? World war 2 was a big part of British, male, youth culture right up until the late 1970s

Did you ever play tommies and jerries in the woods? Maybe not...

You think todays kids would know much about world war 2? Unless they studied it at school and university? I know of kids at my university in Wales who knew nothing about Austwicz so I doubt it very much...

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

I presume you're from Wigan? I think I remember you saying from Goldbourne or around there anyway, I presume from your location you don't live there any more?

Thats right - I live in China where I teach English at a university.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

[quote="sg1985]
I didn't say I could have had a conversation about it, it's just the first fight I ever saw and I remember it well. This conversation started with me asking how it has gotten worse, you said recent times, I take recent times to mean upto about 10 years, you clearly didn't, but I'm sorry I don't care how old you are anything longer than 10 years is not recent times. Also I never said you said every fight is a wrong decision, read things through, I won't quote myself you can read it again yourself. Fighters from abroad do get a fair fight, sometimes they don't just like fighters travelling to any country, bradley got a fair fight against witter walked away with the title in 'recent times'.[/quote]

I accept this sport comes with bad decisions it's unfortunate but you make it sound as if every fight is a wrong decision which they aren't

I never suggested that - but - if lets say for example 99.9% of the desicions were correct 25 years ago and nowdays 84% of the desicions are correct - it has got worse - it doesn't matter by what percentage but quality and fairness are gradually deteriating.

Don't take my word please - I mean, ask anyone who remembers British boxing pre-1990 - there are a few of us on here.

And for me 1999 and beyond are recent times. To my dad - 1977 is 'just recently' it all depends who you are and how old you are.