BBBoC to take a look at Big Terry's card for Smith v Simpson

[Coco]

Rubbish, the board appoint the officials not the promoters. Maloney never wanted O'conner on any of his shows again after the Fury v McDermot 1 fight but still had to have him and he will press this again after this fight but you will still see him reffing or judging on a maloney show

Promoters can tell the board they don't want certain officials, was it a co-incidence Mickey Vann was always reffing Hatton!!

That was the WBU that appointed Mickey Vann not the Board or the promoter. Promoters cant ask for a referee or judge

Technically you can't but thats how it works mate, refs also find it hard to move up the ranks if they don't tow the line

[stujones]

Off course we haven't had the outcome and I am NOT saying a decision of no further action isn't the correct decision in this case. However, it gets to a point in when most people can predict what the decision is going to be that you have to really start considering to investigate the investigation process.

It would appear that the BBBoC are looking at the views of the public far more now (via forums, twitter, etc) and doing the just thing by investigating it mainly as a PR thing. I don't think I can remember a single incident in which a fighter/referee/judge has lost out based on a AFTER the ruling/fight investigation. Sure fighters have lost purses as a result of DQ's and drug testing results but these are in the rules - but after the event and not strictly in the rules... I cannot think of an incident.

Before the internet revolution this card wouldn't have been investigated.

[jonny]

Off course we haven't had the outcome and I am NOT saying a decision of no further action isn't the correct decision in this case. However, it gets to a point in when most people can predict what the decision is going to be that you have to really start considering to investigate the investigation process.

It would appear that the BBBoC are looking at the views of the public far more now (via forums, twitter, etc) and doing the just thing by investigating it mainly as a PR thing. I don't think I can remember a single incident in which a fighter/referee/judge has lost out based on a AFTER the ruling/fight investigation. Sure fighters have lost purses as a result of DQ's and drug testing results but these are in the rules - but after the event and not strictly in the rules... I cannot think of an incident.

Before the internet revolution this card wouldn't have been investigated.

Billy Aird lost his refs license as did a few years ago top world class referee Mike Jacobs lost his, and i would put money on it there have been others that have

[stujones]

I stand corrected, what happened?

[Chambers2]

It was a shite scorecared IMO, but as there were so many close rounds it was probably a justifiable one