Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post Reply
iamasadlittleboy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1877
Joined: 01 Mar 2010, 13:05

Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by iamasadlittleboy »

Story from Japan is that HH is willing to travel to our shores for a fight with Quigg, how'd we see it going?
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by lefty »

Horse
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 22335
Joined: 03 Jul 2005, 17:09

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by Horse »

Why have you posted that?
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by lefty »

Horse wrote:
Why have you posted that?
Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.
bripez
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4877
Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 18:07

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by bripez »

I do feel for Scott Quigg - he must cringe inside when he is referred to as World Champion.
Horse
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 22335
Joined: 03 Jul 2005, 17:09

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by Horse »

columbo wrote:Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.
Explain yourself.
jackukmma
Super Middleweight
Posts: 329
Joined: 10 Feb 2013, 01:32

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by jackukmma »

columbo wrote:
Horse wrote:
Why have you posted that?
Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.
There is no rematch clause Salinas will have to get himself back into mandatory position. Quigg should fight Cermeno on the Froch bill as his voluntary
DMA1987
Cruiserweight
Posts: 2927
Joined: 04 Jun 2011, 17:05

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by DMA1987 »

God I hope not.
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by lefty »

columbo wrote:
Horse wrote:
Why have you posted that?
Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.
There is no rematch clause Salinas will have to get himself back into mandatory position. Quigg should fight Cermeno on the Froch bill as his voluntary[/quote]

What do you mean there was no rematch clause? It was a mandated fight. It's not like it was made with any kind of conditions attached. Look at when Bellew fought Chilemba the first time. Ended up being a rematch with it being a draw.
expe
Super Middleweight
Posts: 6871
Joined: 07 Oct 2012, 10:10

Re: Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa

Post by expe »

columbo wrote:
columbo wrote:
Horse wrote: Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.
There is no rematch clause Salinas will have to get himself back into mandatory position. Quigg should fight Cermeno on the Froch bill as his voluntary
What do you mean there was no rematch clause? It was a mandated fight. It's not like it was made with any kind of conditions attached. Look at when Bellew fought Chilemba the first time. Ended up being a rematch with it being a draw.
Because Quigg was awarded the title, I believe Salinas counted as his mandatory and usually in that situation the result is final unless there's seriously dodgy officiating.
Post Reply