Khan conspiracy

Final round
Cruiserweight
Posts: 4911
Joined: 20 Oct 2010, 17:02

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by Final round »

Glyn Leach wrote:Clearly this is just a British controversy so far, otherwise an American would have stepped up and ID'd the fella. When Barry Hunter was on Sky Sports he didn't know anything about it, neither did other American fight people I talked to today. By tomorrow someone will name the fella, I'm sure, probably before then
On ESPN it says the IBF don't know who the man is....
Final round
Cruiserweight
Posts: 4911
Joined: 20 Oct 2010, 17:02

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by Final round »

The Dark Destroyer wrote:
Final round wrote:
Glyn Leach wrote:Clearly this is just a British controversy so far, otherwise an American would have stepped up and ID'd the fella. When Barry Hunter was on Sky Sports he didn't know anything about it, neither did other American fight people I talked to today. By tomorrow someone will name the fella, I'm sure, probably before then
On ESPN it says the IBF don't know who the man is....
Mustafa Ameen

http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/sport/story/129590.html
Ha! Seems I was looking at the wrong page. :TU:
Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by Finn »

So khans getting his rematch?

i dont care who the guy is unless he is an official designated to that fight just him being there is contraversial enough for a rematch to be ordered imo. Petersons team should sue for this though imo. This is supposed to be a proffessional organisation for god sake!
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by whiskey »

A loss to a fringe-level fighter = Khan Meltdown

They were so completely arrogant towards their opponent's chances, that they never for a moment believed that their cash cow could lose to a man that Timothy Bradley absolutely clowned for 12 rounds.

Now they have pressured the sanctioning bodies into performing their rematch clause on their behalf, with a constant stinking funk of press releases and baseless attacks on the judges, the referee, the governing bodies and now a 'mystery man' !

Like they were all in some huge laughable contingency, all together to rob Khan.

The fact is Khan was mediocre and found his level. Now sees fit to blame everyone apart from himself.

Because if it's close and controversial - would they give Peterson a rematch? no feckin way !! they didnt rematch Barrera, McCloskey, or even the man who blew him away in Prescott.
ArtOfWar
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1253
Joined: 24 Oct 2003, 11:54

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by ArtOfWar »

G0mez wrote:A loss to a fringe-level fighter = Khan Meltdown

They were so completely arrogant towards their opponent's chances, that they never for a moment believed that their cash cow could lose to a man that Timothy Bradley absolutely clowned for 12 rounds.

Now they have pressured the sanctioning bodies into performing their rematch clause on their behalf, with a constant stinking funk of press releases and baseless attacks on the judges, the referee, the governing bodies and now a 'mystery man' !

Like they were all in some huge laughable contingency, all together to rob Khan.

The fact is Khan was mediocre and found his level. Now sees fit to blame everyone apart from himself.

Because if it's close and controversial - would they give Peterson a rematch? no feckin way !! they didnt rematch Barrera, McCloskey, or even the man who blew him away in Prescott.
Absolute bollocks!

The ref was shite and clearly favoured Peterson and the mystery man sitting ringside should not have been interfering with the judge at all. Even with that I thought Khan won the fight. The homecooking was clear to see.
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by whiskey »

ArtOfWar wrote:
Absolute bollocks!

The ref was shite and clearly favoured Peterson and the mystery man sitting ringside should not have been interfering with the judge at all. Even with that I thought Khan won the fight. The homecooking was clear to see.
Your dead right.

The ref, the mystery man, the judges all met before the fight and agreed to shaft Khan and take his titles.

It had nothing to do with Khan losing the fight by a close, but decisive margin.

Maybe he should have put his fists on Peterson's face, instead of in the air whilst muttering "Im not hurt" every time he was pinned to the ropes and clubbed around the head ?

The manner of his defeat has been childish and unsporting. Their tirade masks the fact that they never inserted a rematch clause and now forcing everyone's hand to make it happen instead.
banjo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 26427
Joined: 20 Nov 2007, 03:17

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by banjo »

Modern day British moaning.

Could easily be solved with a rematch.
tear up
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1832
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 12:25

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by tear up »

there s defo somethink not on with the guy but it will come out im sure think the story is a great one ha :TU:
ArtOfWar
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1253
Joined: 24 Oct 2003, 11:54

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by ArtOfWar »

G0mez wrote:
ArtOfWar wrote:
Absolute bollocks!

The ref was shite and clearly favoured Peterson and the mystery man sitting ringside should not have been interfering with the judge at all. Even with that I thought Khan won the fight. The homecooking was clear to see.
Your dead right.

The ref, the mystery man, the judges all met before the fight and agreed to shaft Khan and take his titles.

It had nothing to do with Khan losing the fight by a close, but decisive margin.

Maybe he should have put his fists on Peterson's face, instead of in the air whilst muttering "Im not hurt" every time he was pinned to the ropes and clubbed around the head ?

The manner of his defeat has been childish and unsporting. Their tirade masks the fact that they never inserted a rematch clause and now forcing everyone's hand to make it happen instead.
That's the point. Many people feel he didn't lose in decisive fashion and when you factor in the bad (possibly corrupt) officating it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Saying the manner of his defeat is childish and unsporting is laughable as well. If I lost in that fashion I'd be annoyed to. Khan has done nothing except express his disappointment with the officiating.
jameswilson
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13394
Joined: 08 Jan 2004, 18:01

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by jameswilson »

MachoMan09 wrote:Surprise, surprise...he didn't start the great fire of London, has never hoaxed a moon landing, and he didn't create AIDS to wipe out the gays. He's just your run of the mill IBF official. No mystery. Poirot, mon ami, stand down; your services are no longer required.
So much irony in this post.
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by gobbles »

G0mez wrote:
ArtOfWar wrote:
Absolute bollocks!

The ref was shite and clearly favoured Peterson and the mystery man sitting ringside should not have been interfering with the judge at all. Even with that I thought Khan won the fight. The homecooking was clear to see.
Your dead right.

The ref, the mystery man, the judges all met before the fight and agreed to shaft Khan and take his titles.

It had nothing to do with Khan losing the fight by a close, but decisive margin.

Maybe he should have put his fists on Peterson's face, instead of in the air whilst muttering "Im not hurt" every time he was pinned to the ropes and clubbed around the head ?

The manner of his defeat has been childish and unsporting. Their tirade masks the fact that they never inserted a rematch clause and now forcing everyone's hand to make it happen instead.
Like your mate Carl constantly claiming he was victim of home cooking in Denmark
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by leforge »

One thing for certain the rematch is going to get very good viewing figures in the UK due to this conspiracy.Sky sports were all over it. Think Khan has the right to complain & demand a rematch dont think the result should be no contest though.
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by leforge »

The Dark Destroyer wrote:
leforge wrote:One thing for certain the rematch is going to get very good viewing figures in the UK due to this conspiracy.Sky sports were all over it. Think Khan has the right to complain & demand a rematch dont think the result should be no contest though.
Is there a chance of a no contest? A rematch is enough.
Schaeffer was angling for it I heard earlier!
tear up
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1832
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 12:25

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by tear up »

mustafa ameen so they sayin is the guy with the hat on works for the ibf but not on that night somethink fishy :TU:
Last edited by tear up on 07 Jan 2012, 12:11, edited 1 time in total.
Finn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5509
Joined: 07 May 2009, 15:56

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by Finn »

leforge wrote:One thing for certain the rematch is going to get very good viewing figures in the UK due to this conspiracy.Sky sports were all over it. Think Khan has the right to complain & demand a rematch dont think the result should be no contest though.
x 2
mrbassie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1563
Joined: 26 Oct 2003, 00:55

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by mrbassie »

I reckon the man in the hat shot Kennedy and probably Arch-Duke Ferdinand as well. He was most likely Hitler and Bin Laden's mentor with possible links to Genghis Khan (no relation). We can easily trace who he his by investigating all ebay sales of DeLoreans in the last six months.
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by whiskey »

gobbles wrote:
Like your mate Carl constantly claiming he was victim of home cooking in Denmark
Image
loaded_gloves
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1907
Joined: 09 Mar 2011, 12:18

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by loaded_gloves »

Khan has to go down as THE sorest loser of all time. What a graceless, whining little brat.
funso banjo baby
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 23 Sep 2005, 11:05

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by funso banjo baby »

ALI wrote:
stujones wrote:At least Khan is wording his questions well, he is just asking who is he and what's he doing. Nothing wrong with that.
Exactly!

It does not matter who you think won the fight, or if you think Khan is a sore loser. The point is nobody should be able to interfere with a judge during a fight at any level, never mind a title fight. This dude was all over the judge, he even had the efffing scorecard in his hand at one point. I dont care who won, or even who fought, this dudes actions need to be investigated.
amen :TU:
oliverc
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 61
Joined: 20 Jul 2009, 12:15

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by oliverc »

G0mez wrote:He's the biggest cock in the sport.

Chisora has far more to feel aggrieved about versus Helenious than this pillock.
Do you genuinely believe this?

Furthermore were you as vocal in your criticisms of Mr Froch after his many outrageous claims after his defeat to Mikkel Kessler?

A sensible answer please.
oliverc
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 61
Joined: 20 Jul 2009, 12:15

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by oliverc »

gobbles wrote:
gobbles wrote:
boxingchat wrote:The really interesting fact is. The Guy is wearing a credential issued by the Promoter. Who was the Promoter? Golden Boy! They don't know who he is? Come on please!

The Guy is quite obviously an official you can hardly sit at the Officials table unnoticed can you?

It's quite frankly pathetic and if his team were sat behind this situation why didn't they ask WTF he was on the night?

Crazy sour grapes. It's not like this was the guy continually pushing Petersen is it?

Golden Boy screwed up by not getting Petersen under contract and this is just a smokescreen to appease Khan and his wholely unprofessional rabble of a team rather than hold their hands up.

GBP would have known who the officials were in advance and could have checked their records and experience easily enough. They promoted the fight, they chose Washington as the site and they screwed up the contract. There would have been a British Board guy there and he would have picked up on any dodgy goings on at the table as that is what he is there doing, representing the Brit.

How can a guy tamper with three different cards and match three different sets of handwriting and go unnoticed? The individual cards are collected and then entered on to a master score card. It's as fool proof as possible.

He is clearly a accreditted official FFS.

It's pathetic!

After all, you're an expert in sour grapes and pathetic arguments
How's that Cox-Sai rematch coming along, Mr Integrity?
:lol: :lol: :bow:
The_Don1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1139
Joined: 15 Feb 2008, 07:32

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by The_Don1 »

Khan has a point, as much as he's been a whiney b*tch since the fight ended, this should not be happening in a professional sport.

On the other hand, Froch was beaten fair and square by Kessler.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45231
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

G0mez wrote:
gobbles wrote:
Like your mate Carl constantly claiming he was victim of home cooking in Denmark
Image

eh?
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45231
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

It does appear that something was amiss here with the officiating, why as someone not officially sanctioned to officiate the bout getting involved with the scoring?

I dont think the decision should be changed to a NC, though I see the argument for doing so.

A rematch seems relatively fair to me, so long as Peterson gets a fair payday out of it.

What I do hope is that we dont see some kind of dodgy decision in the return in favour of Khan.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45231
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Khan conspiracy

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

looks like is one of those so called 'hangers on' who rides around on the coat tails of fighters.
Post Reply