@Valmar: You're very kind (me being idealistic not naive). My knowledge of and interest in boxing is largely confined to fights and fighters, everything else I've picked up over the years is merely peripheral, so I could be talking shite here:
Correct me if you know better, but surely the promoter doesn't even get to know who the referee and judges are going to be until a short period before the event takes place? The appointments are selected by the governing body. I would have thought that the officials are paid by the BBBC in the UK and all the BBBC's costs, fees, expenses are subsequently charged to the promotion/ promoter, i.e. there is no direct interaction between promoter and officials? If that isn't how it is then it damn well ought to be.
So if the promoter is going to secure some insurance by crossing the palms of the judges with silver, then he or his proxy must make an illicit approach to presumably at least one judge, maybe more? Some might be receptive but they won't all be crooks. What happens when a judge with integrity reports the illegal approach to the BBBC? What happens when there have been several reports of attempted bribery on behalf of the same promoter over a period of years?.
Not only that but taking AJ as an example, the guy has knocked out all but one of his opponents, in fact it could be Parker was only the exception because AJ wanted the experience of going the full twelve rounds (or maybe not)
Knowing what you know of Eddie Hearn, do you think he is likely to spend money on the services of the judges who history has shown are unlikely to be called upon anyway, even if doing so were not illegal and extremely risky?
Now there's a great deal I don't know about, but it seems to me that we on here (me included) are quick to make casual allegations of corruption without necessarily giving a lot of thought to the practicalities of how that might be made to work
