THE LACK OF FOULS CALLED AND POINTS TAKEN IN BOXING

[Kalan]

I think certain fouls in Boxing are acceptable under certain circumstances.

If you're badly hurt you need to hold your opponent so he can't finish you off. You're risking a point deduction to stay in the fight. It's a little like giving up a base on balls. You're allowing a dangerous hitter to get on base. You pitch around him to get to a hitter where your odds of getting him out are better. Possibly it will backfire. You'll give up an extra run which will cost you the game in the end - but you're playing the odds. You sometimes see "hack a Shaq" type fouls in basketball. Maybe you give up 2 free throw points you didn't need to and it costs you the game -- where you wouldn't give up ANY points if you just defended well for 24 seconds. That's strategic fouling. But boxers foul strategically believing referees aren't going to take ANY points. So they foul away freely.

One problem with Boxing is, referees make the excuse, "I didn't think it was intentional" ... You didn't??? ... Do referees in basketball ask, "Did you foul him deliberately LeBron? If so he's getting to score points on you at the free throw line right now." In fact, there are more points awarded in the average 12 round boxing match than are scored in the average NBA game, but referees are afraid to take a single point for fouling. They'll be criticized by someone.

If boxing referees called more fouls, we would see cleaner fights, with one Hell of a lot less holding. There's nothing more boring than hearing "STOP PUNCHING.. NO punching gentleman.. break clean.. break.. break.. let go.. let go of him John.. step back.. step back.. step back.. back.. back.. Let's keep it clean gentleman. Both of you now, keep it clean... BOX!" -- but he just lectures them and never takes a point.. If he took a point for holding he wouldn't have to break them 100 X in a fight.. Maybe he just likes to get in on the action and been seen and heard by the viewer. I enjoy fights where you don't even know the referee exists -- where there's no holding and other fouling so he's not even noticed by the viewer.

I'm of the opinion that fans don't want to see a wrestling match when they pay to see 12 rounds of Boxing.

[gilgamesh]

In most cases I don't think holding merits a point deduction, when it's excessive though and you got a guy like John Ruiz who clinches his opponent anytime he gets within striking distance...yeah...take a point.

A guy holding his opponent when he's badly hurt to avoid being KO'd I have no issue with at all.

[Kalan]

If there's like 2 or 3 inadvertent holds in a round and they're broken off quickly and cleanly on command I agree 100%...

If there's 5 to 15 holds in a round it starts disrupting the action... Then it's just being used as a substitute for an inside game and inside defense... and holding is not allowed under Queensberry Rules -- but it does happen frequently... Many times too frequently and stinks up the fight and flow of the action.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Like when Khan got penalized for pushing Peterson?

Or was that excessive? like Wlad vs. Povetkin?

[Kalan]

Like when Khan got penalized for pushing Peterson?

Or was that excessive? like Wlad vs. Povetkin?

I WELCOMED the foul calls and point deductions in those 2 fights... Most referees are scared to death to call fouls on a world famous boxer... WHY?

[Ruthless-RKO]

Like when Khan got penalized for pushing Peterson?

Or was that excessive? like Wlad vs. Povetkin?

I WELCOMED the foul calls and point deductions in those 2 fights... Most referees are scared to death to call fouls on a world famous boxer... WHY?

Famous boxers have big followings.

It's kinda like Bradley beating Pacman, due to it being controversial, all the backlash he received. He was suicidal.

It's like Weeks, apologised that very next day

[Tanzio]

Is it possible that it is partially the mma effect?

[Kalan]

Most boxing referees are intimidated... Some aren't... But I've never seen basketball or football referees who are afraid to call fouls on star players... They call them and catch Hell... But the opposing player goes to the free throw line, or their team loses a down and takes a penalty -- that could cost them the game.

Referees know they're going to get bitched at by players and coaches -- it's human nature to deny responsibility and try to shift blame to somebody else -- so they're going to hear plenty of complaints... But if you can't take criticism you shouldn't be a professional referee for any sport

[asdfjkl]

It could be interesting, for example, give 5 points for winning a round, take one point for holding and 5 points for wrestling, or lowblows, give 15 points for a knock down, take 10 for not defending for 10 seconds, and if the difference in points is over 40, the fight is over.


Klitschko vs Povetkin would have been a lot more exiting and so would Kovalev vs Ward have been, assuming the ref has his eyes open.

[Ricky_]

I just got round to watching the Lomachenko-Sosa fight last night.

Loma was giving the ref a glance and letting him know every time he was fouled.

TBH i don't like to see that from fighters, it's a fight at the end of the day, you gotta allow for rough house now and then. It;s either a sign of over-protected professionals/prize fighters, or, years of inadequate refs not applying the rules at all. There needs to be a middle ground.

[Kalan]

Great boxers like Lomachenko don't appreciate referees who don't call fouls... They say you're supposed to foul your opponent back... Are we going to have nothing but ridiculous donnybrooks like Giardello vs Fullmer??? Fights where the dirtiest and most snidely fighter wins the contest???

Or are we going to demote referees who don't call fouls so that boxing fans can actually see a boxing match???

[Lackeos]

No one referee should enforce the rules differently than all of the other referees in the world. This isn't the sort of thing that a referee can just arbitrarily start doing one day without warning. It would be different if there was some sort of directive that went out to all referees and boxers that a worldwide rules enforcement change was coming down the pipe.

[punchoutsb]

I just got round to watching the Lomachenko-Sosa fight last night.

Loma was giving the ref a glance and letting him know every time he was fouled.

TBH i don't like to see that from fighters, it's a fight at the end of the day, you gotta allow for rough house now and then. It;s either a sign of over-protected professionals/prize fighters, or, years of inadequate refs not applying the rules at all. There needs to be a middle ground.

It's not a fight, it's a boxing match. There are rules, and the referee has essentially one job: enforce those rules. When they don't fighters try and help them. I don't like to see it either, but for a different reason than you. The referee should be doing his job.

The planets must have aligned or something because Kalan is actually right this time. Boxing referees are generally terrible at enforcing rules, and there should be no interpretations made on whether something was intentional or not.

[Ricky_]

I just got round to watching the Lomachenko-Sosa fight last night.

Loma was giving the ref a glance and letting him know every time he was fouled.

TBH i don't like to see that from fighters, it's a fight at the end of the day, you gotta allow for rough house now and then. It;s either a sign of over-protected professionals/prize fighters, or, years of inadequate refs not applying the rules at all. There needs to be a middle ground.

It's not a fight, it's a boxing match. There are rules, and the referee has essentially one job: enforce those rules. When they don't fighters try and help them. I don't like to see it either, but for a different reason than you. The referee should be doing his job.

The planets must have aligned or something because Kalan is actually right this time. Boxing referees are generally terrible at enforcing rules, and there should be no interpretations made on whether something was intentional or not.

It's a fight. The point i'm making is it can get a little ugly from time-to-time. Styles make fights, what good is the sport if everyone is a clean slick counterpuncher? The sport needs rough and tumble fughters. If the occasional shot fires low or a guy roughhouses a little on the inside i'm fine with the ref showing some leeway. The sport could get very pernickity if the ref pulls up EVERY foul. But for the most part I do agree that refs are way too lenient with consistent & deliberately foulers.

[punchoutsb]

I just got round to watching the Lomachenko-Sosa fight last night.

Loma was giving the ref a glance and letting him know every time he was fouled.

TBH i don't like to see that from fighters, it's a fight at the end of the day, you gotta allow for rough house now and then. It;s either a sign of over-protected professionals/prize fighters, or, years of inadequate refs not applying the rules at all. There needs to be a middle ground.

It's not a fight, it's a boxing match. There are rules, and the referee has essentially one job: enforce those rules. When they don't fighters try and help them. I don't like to see it either, but for a different reason than you. The referee should be doing his job.

The planets must have aligned or something because Kalan is actually right this time. Boxing referees are generally terrible at enforcing rules, and there should be no interpretations made on whether something was intentional or not.

It's a fight. The point i'm making is it can get a little ugly from time-to-time. Styles make fights, what good is the sport if everyone is a clean slick counterpuncher? The sport needs rough and tumble fughters. If the occasional shot fires low or a guy roughhouses a little on the inside i'm fine with the ref showing some leeway. The sport could get very pernickity if the ref pulls up EVERY foul. But for the most part I do agree that refs are way too lenient with consistent & deliberately foulers.

It's a boxing match. I get your point, it's just a tad off the mark. I don't have a problem with some roughhousing. My favorite fighters tend to be brawlers and sluggers. When a fighter looks to the referee consistently to complain about low blows or rabbit punches then we have a problem and it's not the fighter complaining.

[lazboy]

There needs to be some consistency. You can imagine how different Ward Kov 1 and 2 would have been with say Kenny Bayless. Not saying that I like Kenny Bayless, he is too disruptive. There was a moment in Canelo Chavez, where they were going to go toe to toe, actual toe to toe not clinch toe to toe. Meaning they were going to just stand there and trade, lean on each other a little(prob the reality was that Chavez was just going to stand there and take it) but Bayliss pulled Chavez up about apparently leading in with the head which is something I havn't seen warned in a very long time. He really wasn't, he was just going in, traditional boxing. It was ruined but strange because I havn't seen proper toe to toe or that warning in a long time. I hate the grappling as an offensive weapon, really something should be done about that but I appreciate clinching becomes a natural thing when you're up that close to each other.

[Badhusker]

Most boxing referees are intimidated... Some aren't... But I've never seen basketball or football referees who are afraid to call fouls on star players... They call them and catch Hell... But the opposing player goes to the free throw line, or their team loses a down and takes a penalty -- that could cost them the game.

Referees know they're going to get bitched at by players and coaches -- it's human nature to deny responsibility and try to shift blame to somebody else -- so they're going to hear plenty of complaints... But if you can't take criticism you shouldn't be a professional referee for any sport

I hope you know that your analogy of boxing vs BB refs is not relevant at all.

[jas80s]

You can bet that the first ref that starts liberally calling fouls and taking points (particularly from star fighters) will produce another refrain regarding referees and the sports they officiate...."we didn't pay money to watch you ref!! Let the fighters fight!"

I'm not saying the OP doesn't have a point, just saying it's tricky to get it just right. A point deduction in a boxing match is far more likely statistically to change the winner of a fight then is a lone foul call in the first half of an NBA game. As a fan, I don't find matches decided on point deductions particularly satisfying as results go, either.

But, I don't want to be a downer. I just wish judges would pay attention to this stuff and score accordingly. If a guy is spoiling by holding excessively, don't give him any close rounds. Don't reward a guy for avoiding a fight. and obviously, don't reward things like elbows, headbutts, and low blows. We hear it over and over, judging fights is subjective, so there is no reason judges can't factor what they see in this regard into their scoring. What's the worst? Could judging get any worse?? I think not.

[Ezzard]

The clinching thing needs addressing. Jab-jab-grab... Jab-jab-grab... has ruined the art of in-fighting... Leave them fight out of it. Or start to take points.

[Kalan]

There needs to be some consistency. You can imagine how different Ward Kov 1 and 2 would have been with say Kenny Bayless. Not saying that I like Kenny Bayless, he is too disruptive. There was a moment in Canelo Chavez, where they were going to go toe to toe, actual toe to toe not clinch toe to toe. Meaning they were going to just stand there and trade, lean on each other a little(prob the reality was that Chavez was just going to stand there and take it) but Bayliss pulled Chavez up about apparently leading in with the head which is something I havn't seen warned in a very long time. He really wasn't, he was just going in, traditional boxing. It was ruined but strange because I havn't seen proper toe to toe or that warning in a long time. I hate the grappling as an offensive weapon, really something should be done about that but I appreciate clinching becomes a natural thing when you're up that close to each other.

First of all, Chavez doesn't just lean in with his head -- and often warnings ARE issued for that infraction because leaning in is illegal use of the head -- Chavez uses his head as a battering ram like Henry Armstrong.. He's gotten away with it forever because of friendly referees...but Canelo was the big star in that match-up and Chavez was warned in the dressing room by Bayless.. "Julio, we're going to call all the illegal head work in this fight. You cannot come in with your head down... bull with your head... lean or push with your head... or use it for leverage in any way." Or words to that effect warning JCC about all illegal head use.. That took away 60% of Chavez's game.. He's not a boxer.. All he does is bull in with his cast-iron head and brawl.

Secondly, Bayless is a guy who selectively enforces the rules.. He was very strict when Robert Guerrero -- who fouled his ass of when he beat Berto with Lou Moret refereeing -- fought Mayweather. When Guerrero fought Keith Thurman, Bayless let him get away with murder, including a massive headbutt that almost cost Thurman the fight.. Thurman beat Guerrero by a much wider aggregate margin than Mayweather beat Guerrero, and also put him down for a 9-count -- but Bayless seemed to be trying to get Thurman beat more than anything.

The last thing is, clinching isn't natural when you're infighting. Lomachenko doesn't do it. He creates space with his feet and keeps firing 10, 20, or 30 punches at a stretch. If you're grabbing you're looking for a respite. You shouldn't need one because you get to rest every 3 minutes. The only other reasons to grab are for holding-n-hitting purposes which is another foul... because somebody is pushing and shoving you which is illegal... or because somebody grabbed you first, in which case you didn't initiate the holding and wrestling... The initiator should get called and point deducted.

[lazboy]

There needs to be some consistency. You can imagine how different Ward Kov 1 and 2 would have been with say Kenny Bayless. Not saying that I like Kenny Bayless, he is too disruptive. There was a moment in Canelo Chavez, where they were going to go toe to toe, actual toe to toe not clinch toe to toe. Meaning they were going to just stand there and trade, lean on each other a little(prob the reality was that Chavez was just going to stand there and take it) but Bayliss pulled Chavez up about apparently leading in with the head which is something I havn't seen warned in a very long time. He really wasn't, he was just going in, traditional boxing. It was ruined but strange because I havn't seen proper toe to toe or that warning in a long time. I hate the grappling as an offensive weapon, really something should be done about that but I appreciate clinching becomes a natural thing when you're up that close to each other.

First of all, Chavez doesn't just lean in with his head -- and often warnings ARE issued for that infraction because leaning in is illegal use of the head -- Chavez uses his head as a battering ram like Henry Armstrong.. He's gotten away with it forever because of friendly referees...but Canelo was the big star in that match-up and Chavez was warned in the dressing room by Bayless.. "Julio, we're going to call all the illegal head work in this fight. You cannot come in with your head down... bull with your head... lean or push with your head... or use it for leverage in any way." Or words to that effect warning JCC about all illegal head use.. That took away 60% of Chavez's game.. He's not a boxer.. All he does is bull in with his cast-iron head and brawl.

Secondly, Bayless is a guy who selectively enforces the rules.. He was very strict when Robert Guerrero -- who fouled his ass of when he beat Berto with Lou Moret refereeing -- fought Mayweather. When Guerrero fought Keith Thurman, Bayless let him get away with murder, including a massive headbutt that almost cost Thurman the fight.. Thurman beat Guerrero by a much wider aggregate margin than Mayweather beat Guerrero, and also put him down for a 9-count -- but Bayless seemed to be trying to get Thurman beat more than anything.

The last thing is, clinching isn't natural when you're infighting. Lomachenko doesn't do it. He creates space with his feet and keeps firing 10, 20, or 30 punches at a stretch. If you're grabbing you're looking for a respite. You shouldn't need one because you get to rest every 3 minutes. The only other reasons to grab are for holding-n-hitting purposes which is another foul... because somebody is pushing and shoving you which is illegal... or because somebody grabbed you first, in which case you didn't initiate the holding and wrestling... The initiator should get called and point deducted.

First of all Kalan.......I agree, except, the fights I've seen Chavez fight such as his demo of Andy Lee he fights proper toe to toe, not bull rush, real infighting trading.

[Kalan]

You can bet that the first ref that starts liberally calling fouls and taking points (particularly from star fighters) will produce another refrain regarding referees and the sports they officiate...."we didn't pay money to watch you ref!! Let the fighters fight!"

I'm not talking about ticky tac fouls.. Salido threw more than 50 low blows at Lomachenko.. Laurence Cole was noted for being a corrupt referee.. You get much more action and a cleaner fight if you issue stern warnings and take points.. If points are taken, boxers start abiding by the rules.

I hope you know that your analogy of boxing vs BB refs is not relevant at all

It's very relevant. If the referees didn't call fouls in an important NBA game, all HELL would start breaking loose -- which has happened in boxing matches.

The clinching thing needs addressing. Jab-jab-grab... Jab-jab-grab... has ruined the art of in-fighting... Leave them fight out of it. Or start to take points.

True... Jab and grab stinks the joint out -- so call fouls on this practice...

And referees need to CONSISTENTLY tell boxers to "Let go and fight out of there" ... The problem comes when 1 of the fighters refuses to let go and fight out -- but instead of taking points the ref gives up and physically breaks them again.. This gives the advantage to the chronic clincher -- because he gets to reset from the outside every time and just keeps clinching when his opponent battles his way inside where no infighting is taking place -- just holding.

BTW... referees always yell "NO HOLDING!!!" ... They never yell "NOT TOO MUCH HOLDING!!!"

[caldo2025]

I have to agree for once with Kalan here. I think that the referees need to push their weight around more inside the ring and they shouldn't be hesitant to take points away from these boxers. It should be a very common occurrence in fights as this is the most effective way to ensure that a fight is entertaining and cleaner.

Could you imagine if they really called a fight with no holding? No fight would make it 12 rounds without any holding. Guys use the hold for so much and I'd love to see them start penalizing these boxers for holding unless they are hurt. If they are holding to keep from getting knocked down then there's no reason to penalize the boxer because the judges can see he's holding because he's hurt thus score the round accordingly.

I've been saying it for years now. We need to have younger refs with some balls that will call these top fighters for fouls that they are committing. Imagine if Floyd got penalized for holding Manny? Floyd would have been DQ'd by the 5th round and we might have seen an all time great fight instead of the worst fight in the history of man.