Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL???

Poll ended at 13 Mar 2020, 02:40

Below the belt line (illegal)
53
77%
Above the belt line (legal)
16
23%
 
Total votes: 69

punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by punchoutsb »

^^^

Bending over does not afford the other fighter the right to land illegal punches. The picture you keep spamming the board with shows an illegal shot; more than half of Ward's glove lands below the belt-line. A low blow does not need to contact the actual nutsack to be illegal, it must simply land below the belt. There is absolutely zero doubt in my mind that Kovalev was wilting; his stamina last night is the worst I've seen it and Ward must be given credit for that. That does not excuse Ward's low blows, Weeks incompetence, and the abysmal stoppage. It is not the fighters duty to police his opponent, just ask Jack Sharkey. No fighter should have to fight through illegal punches just because they didn't do a certain amount of damage.
BAD INTENTIONS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1885
Joined: 22 Oct 2005, 17:45

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by BAD INTENTIONS »

tonymaccaroni wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote:When someone is bent at an almost 90 degree angle, it's almost impossible to not punch a little low from certain angles.
So can a guy who is hurt to the body do that to limit any body punches?
No, you just get hit a little low for bending like that.
Kovalev was yielding to pressure at the time of the stoppage.

Stop making excuses.
Dude was gassing from the 3rd.
Max and Roy were calling it (which ended up being the truth),
while many of you were chasing Lederman's fantasy card.
Thank you exactly what I thought, where the eff was Ward supposed to land when Kova is bent over like that lol. At this point it doesn't even matter anyway because Kova was finished. How many nasty punches do you see someone get hit in the head with on the way down to a KO, its boxing, it happens. Defend yourself at all times, thats all.

You people clinging on to this are just deluded and biased. That shot you keep linking video to is irrelevant and only shows what bad sports you are.

I will show the actual punch that matters again just so the delusional s cannot ignore it

Image

That was the punch that started it all. How is that so low that a world champion professional boxer couldn't take it and keep on fighting.

HE couldn't take it cause he hurt and gassed from a combination of being hit and also hitting a lot of thin air.

Excellent point BAD INTENTIONS someone who knows what they are talking about.
That was the exact punch I was asking someone to post. Thank you.
The replay shows the punch finished with a slight uppercut motion, so the brunt of the impact was on the belt line.

Typical liver shot, dude shorts was like Urkel.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

punchoutsb wrote:^^^

Bending over does not afford the other fighter the right to land illegal punches. The picture you keep spamming the board with shows an illegal shot; more than half of Ward's glove lands below the belt-line. A low blow does not need to contact the actual nutsack to be illegal, it must simply land below the belt. There is absolutely zero doubt in my mind that Kovalev was wilting; his stamina last night is the worst I've seen it and Ward must be given credit for that. That does not excuse Ward's low blows, Weeks incompetence, and the abysmal stoppage. It is not the fighters duty to police his opponent, just ask Jack Sharkey. No fighter should have to fight through illegal punches just because they didn't do a certain amount of damage.
Nice post, I gotta say everytime I see that picture I think two things. That's a low blow and kovalevs balls are at his knees in a cup.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

Liver shot? :lol:
punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by punchoutsb »

BAD INTENTIONS wrote: Typical liver shot, dude shorts was like Urkel.
You have no idea where the liver is, do you?
BAD INTENTIONS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1885
Joined: 22 Oct 2005, 17:45

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by BAD INTENTIONS »

punchoutsb wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote: Typical liver shot, dude shorts was like Urkel.
You have no idea where the liver is, do you?
The punch was not VERY low.

Whatever, it's Ward.
punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by punchoutsb »

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote: Typical liver shot, dude shorts was like Urkel.
You have no idea where the liver is, do you?
The punch was not VERY low.

Whatever, it's Ward.
Not sure what you're trying to say, but that's still not where a human liver is located.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

punchoutsb wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote: Typical liver shot, dude shorts was like Urkel.
You have no idea where the liver is, do you?
:lol: that was one of the funniest things I've read in a while.
BAD INTENTIONS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1885
Joined: 22 Oct 2005, 17:45

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by BAD INTENTIONS »

punchoutsb wrote:Not sure what you're trying to say, but that's still not where a human liver is located.
Isn't the liver to the right of the stomach?

The punch that started all the trouble was where a liver shot is generally located.
punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by punchoutsb »

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:Not sure what you're trying to say, but that's still not where a human liver is located.
Isn't the liver to the right of the stomach?

The punch that started all the trouble was where a liver shot is generally located.
The liver is above the stomach, and tucked away under the ribs. The punch in the photo is not even close to being a liver shot.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

punchoutsb wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:Not sure what you're trying to say, but that's still not where a human liver is located.
Isn't the liver to the right of the stomach?

The punch that started all the trouble was where a liver shot is generally located.
The liver is above the stomach, and tucked away under the ribs. The punch in the photo is not even close to being a liver shot.
Last night I was rubbing this girl's liver.....
Prediction...Pain
Super Featherweight
Posts: 3474
Joined: 13 Jun 2018, 19:52

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by Prediction...Pain »

Ward by stoppage odds were very high. Some big money was made off this surely.

My guess is Week's job was that if he saw a chance to stop the fight, he was ordered to take it.

He saw his chance and he took it. Easy money for the crooks

Just my two cents.
punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by punchoutsb »

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote: Isn't the liver to the right of the stomach?

The punch that started all the trouble was where a liver shot is generally located.
The liver is above the stomach, and tucked away under the ribs. The punch in the photo is not even close to being a liver shot.
Last night I was rubbing this girl's liver.....
Don't you hate when you cinch your belt too tight and squeeze your liver?
SFW
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1246
Joined: 11 Sep 2009, 11:04

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by SFW »

Prediction...Pain wrote:Ward by stoppage odds were very high. Some big money was made off this surely.

My guess is Week's job was that if he saw a chance to stop the fight, he was ordered to take it.

He saw his chance and he took it. Easy money for the crooks

Just my two cents.
First time I felt ripped off for 2 cents. Highly doubt Weekes was ordered to do take anything. Incompetent or negligent seems much more likely.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

punchoutsb wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:
The liver is above the stomach, and tucked away under the ribs. The punch in the photo is not even close to being a liver shot.
Last night I was rubbing this girl's liver.....
Don't you hate when you cinch your belt too tight and squeeze your liver?
:lol:
BAD INTENTIONS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1885
Joined: 22 Oct 2005, 17:45

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by BAD INTENTIONS »

punchoutsb wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:Not sure what you're trying to say, but that's still not where a human liver is located.
Isn't the liver to the right of the stomach?

The punch that started all the trouble was where a liver shot is generally located.
The liver is above the stomach, and tucked away under the ribs. The punch in the photo is not even close to being a liver shot.
So when a boxer lands a "liver shot" where does it land?
punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by punchoutsb »

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote: Isn't the liver to the right of the stomach?

The punch that started all the trouble was where a liver shot is generally located.
The liver is above the stomach, and tucked away under the ribs. The punch in the photo is not even close to being a liver shot.
So when a boxer lands a "liver shot" where does it land?
On the liver.
asdfjkl
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by asdfjkl »

armageto wrote:
asdfjkl wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote: Exactly how I see it.

The ones that Ward landed at the end were a little low (none to the balls).
However, Kovalev was already done before that.

I am extremely impressed with Ward and Kovalev. I still think they are #1 and #2,
because of the gap between Kovalev and the rest of 175.
But, Ward is the better fighter of the two. Big deal.
But again, the shots were below the navel right?
Are you slow? The punch zone was deemed legal by Weeks due to where Kovalev's trunks were. Yes, that last punch was low. These belt shots/borderline punches you are complaining about (reference 30:27) were legal punches.
Are you slow? I'm asking you a very simple question, repeatedly in fact, somehow you keep on talking about all kind of different subjects. Still ignoring what I asked. To keep it simple for you it was basically the only thing I wrote down, without anything around it, somehow you still continue to talk around it and even ask me questions instead of giving the simple, easy to answer question a 5 year old could answer. TBH I think 99.9 of the 5 year olds would have given the correct answer within the amount of attempts you received, but once again:
The shots were below the navel right?
Tanzio
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 12264
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 09:17

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by Tanzio »

SOGgy did what SOGgy does. He won another fight. Krusher was shredded like beets for borscht.
boxing_rocks
Welterweight
Posts: 7851
Joined: 20 May 2016, 13:11

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by boxing_rocks »

Tanzio wrote:SOGgy did what SOGgy does. He won another fight. Krusher was shredded like beets for borscht.
Does your wife punch beets in the nuts?
squiggy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2093
Joined: 04 Feb 2008, 03:35

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by squiggy »

tonymaccaroni wrote:
BAD INTENTIONS wrote:When someone is bent at an almost 90 degree angle, it's almost impossible to not punch a little low from certain angles.
So can a guy who is hurt to the body do that to limit any body punches?
No, you just get hit a little low for bending like that.
Kovalev was yielding to pressure at the time of the stoppage.

Stop making excuses.
Dude was gassing from the 3rd.
Max and Roy were calling it (which ended up being the truth),
while many of you were chasing Lederman's fantasy card.
Thank you exactly what I thought, where the eff was Ward supposed to land when Kova is bent over like that lol. At this point it doesn't even matter anyway because Kova was finished. How many nasty punches do you see someone get hit in the head with on the way down to a KO, its boxing, it happens. Defend yourself at all times, thats all.

You people clinging on to this are just deluded and biased. That shot you keep linking video to is irrelevant and only shows what bad sports you are.

I will show the actual punch that matters again just so the delusional s cannot ignore it

Image

That was the punch that started it all. How is that so low that a world champion professional boxer couldn't take it and keep on fighting.

HE couldn't take it cause he hurt and gassed from a combination of being hit and also hitting a lot of thin air.

Excellent point BAD INTENTIONS someone who knows what they are talking about.
Oh man, what a graphic.
Where's his dick at, in this moment? Can you mark his dick on there, for reference?
Tanzio
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 12264
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 09:17

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by Tanzio »

boxing_rocks wrote:
Tanzio wrote:SOGgy did what SOGgy does. He won another fight. Krusher was shredded like beets for borscht.
Does your wife punch beets in the nuts?
You have a particularly large beet lodged in an especially unshiny place, eh box of rocks?
armageto
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5259
Joined: 04 Nov 2004, 20:15

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by armageto »

asdfjkl wrote:
armageto wrote:
asdfjkl wrote: But again, the shots were below the navel right?
Are you slow? The punch zone was deemed legal by Weeks due to where Kovalev's trunks were. Yes, that last punch was low. These belt shots/borderline punches you are complaining about (reference 30:27) were legal punches.
Are you slow? I'm asking you a very simple question, repeatedly in fact, somehow you keep on talking about all kind of different subjects. Still ignoring what I asked. To keep it simple for you it was basically the only thing I wrote down, without anything around it, somehow you still continue to talk around it and even ask me questions instead of giving the simple, easy to answer question a 5 year old could answer. TBH I think 99.9 of the 5 year olds would have given the correct answer within the amount of attempts you received, but once again:
The shots were below the navel right?
They were legal shots on the belt line that you complained about. That pretty much answers your question. His belt line was covering his navel.
Freedom2013
Super Middleweight
Posts: 3879
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 11:35

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by Freedom2013 »

tonymaccaroni wrote:Image
That's NOT the punch that ended the fight. :shame:

Here's the real one:

https://twitter.com/brinicio/status/876314964314796032
tonymaccaroni
Super Lightweight
Posts: 93
Joined: 07 May 2017, 02:43

Re: Were Ward's controversial blows LEGAL or ILLEGAL?

Post by tonymaccaroni »

Freedom2013 wrote:
tonymaccaroni wrote:Image
That's NOT the punch that ended the fight. :shame:

Here's the real one:

https://twitter.com/brinicio/status/876314964314796032
I never said it was the punch that ended the fight? Is you reading selective as well as your vision.

Erm, so are you saying that the punch I linked (the first one Kova started crying about), was legit?

If so, how do you explain the beating he received for a minute before your video? Come on man, theres no shame in admitting you were wrong.

The shot you linked, was the only one I thought was controversial. It was also the least important, Kova was done at that point, he wasn't defending himself and as BAD INTENTIONS clearly pointed out, Kova was bent over, so he ran the risk of taking a shot there as there is literally no where else to hit.

It is the same as when a fighter is badly hurt and turns his back on the other fighter, then gets hit in the back of the head, he's not protecting himself and he is forcing the referee to make a decision.

Sorry your focusing on that one punch is illogical considering Kova was finished at that point anyway.
Locked