BBBofC head clash cut rule

[dookus]

Why on Earth hasn't this been changed? It just seems like an obviously bad rule. Has therebeen any sort of concerted effort to get it off the books, or is it one of those things that everyone forgets about until someone prominent loses a fight because of a headbutt?

[iamasadlittleboy]

It's stupid, everyone knows stupid but the BBBofC, like FiFa are run by idiots. Sorry to tell ya.

[crusader]

Worst rule in all of boxing, in my opinion. Have the BBBofC ever stated why they think it is a fair rule that should remain?

[oliverfennell]

Worst rule in all of boxing, in my opinion. Have the BBBofC ever stated why they think it is a fair rule that should remain?

Only to prevent a boxer who's ahead on points refusing to continue when accidentally cut and thus claiming a T-Dec win.

But the above scenario is hardly less fair than, for example, when Herbie Hide ended up with a TKO loss to a journeyman on his record despite having barely taken a punch.

[dondada]

I thought this was 'being looked into'?

[Chambers2]

I e-mailed the BBBC about this rule a few years ago (after Elcock VS McDermott), informing them it was an unfair sh!t rule. Their secretary e-mailed me back stating that the rule was fair and then compared the sport to tennis!! i.e if a tennis player gets injured then the opponent wins the match, I then proceeded to explain the differences betwenn tennis and boxing to them and I've heard nothing back since.

Fighter A Vs Fighter B, A boxes B's ears off for the first 10 rounds of a 12 round contest, B realises he's miles behind and in the 11th he decides to use the head abit freely (Sakio Bika stylee) causing a bad cut to fighter A. The fight gets stopped due to the cut and B is announced the winner

The international rule is the correct rule for this situation IMO, if the fight gets stopped on a cut in the first 4 rounds it's a technical draw if it's stopped after the 4th then it goes to the scorecards. It's not perfect (what in life is?), but it's a 100 times better than the BBBC version of it.

[LeedsLad]

I e-mailed the BBBC about this rule a few years ago (after Elcock VS McDermott), informing them it was an unfair sh!t rule. Their secretary e-mailed me back stating that the rule was fair and then compared the sport to tennis!! i.e if a tennis player gets injured then the opponent wins the match, I then proceeded to explain the differences betwenn tennis and boxing to them and I've heard nothing back since.

Fighter A Vs Fighter B, A boxes B's ears off for the first 10 rounds of a 12 round contest, B realises he's miles behind and in the 11th he decides to use the head abit freely (Sakio Bika stylee) causing a bad cut to fighter A. The fight gets stopped due to the cut and B is announced the winner

The international rule is the correct rule for this situation IMO, if the fight gets stopped on a cut in the first 4 rounds it's a technical draw if it's stopped after the 4th then it goes to the scorecards. It's not perfect (what in life is?), but it's a 100 times better than the BBBC version of it.

Agree with this.

It's almost as if it's worth taking the chance of being caught and getting DQ'd, given that you were losing anyway, to get the stoppage.

The problem with the international rule is that sometimes fighters do refuse to continue (Judah vs Clottey) and take the chance of being ahead - IMO Clottey was getting to him and would have stopped him in the last couple.

In that instance the doctor could rule one way or the other as to whether the fighter is fit to continue - if he says the fighter is OK but the fighter insists, then it's a quittage and should rightly go down as a KO loss.

[jonny]

Reading the home page looks like this is about to change