Why are so many bad refs ex pros?

[Coco]

Michael Alexander is a good ref
Marcus McDonnel never boxed and is pretty awful

[skanksta]

The refs are bad because they’re bad, not because they’re ex-pros.

There’s no competition, no accountability and non penalties for being rubbish - that’s why they’re bad.

[coneye]

The refs are bad because they’re bad, not because they’re ex-pros.

There’s no competition, no accountability and non penalties for being rubbish - that’s why they’re bad.

Think there probably on equal terms , non boxing refs , will try hard to get it right because its in the back of there mind , theve not done it , and want to perform well ,,, Ex boxers will probably be more relaxed , but thats only to start with , Think the reason you get so many getting it wrong is simply the ex boxers are more deaply entrenched in the old boys club and get the gigs regardless off how good they are

[gilgamesh]

Maybe they're a little punchy.

[gilgamesh]

Maybe they're a little punchy.

I think they also may be a bit bitter too.... like they’re all ex journeyman who never did much in boxing so now tryna make a name for themselves..

Also you have to accunt for there promotional bias

Interestingly Scott LeDoux was a referee in the AWA. The Old Wrestling Promotion. Makes sense I reckon since he was from Minnesota, and it was a Minnesota based Promotion.

[jameswilson]

They aren’t bad to be fair.

If you go back and watch all these bad scorecards you can see loads of the punches are landing on arms and gloves......

[margaret thatcher]

because getting the right result is their priority, not good reffing

[Flump]

Michael Alexander is a good ref
Marcus McDonnel never boxed and is pretty awful

I'd disagree with you there, I think it's the other way round.

[THEBUTCH]

I think a lot of the time the British referees are ok, with some exceptions.

They could have 9 reasonable performances and drop a clanger in their 10th, and it's that 10th performance that they will tend to be judged on. It's a difficult job to be fair.

I'd also like to mention that compared to some of the referees who operate on the continent, our refs are much better. Some of the continental refs appear utterly clueless.

[Nightmare Roy]

Maybe they're a little punchy.

Also you have to accunt for there promotional bias

This is the issue, week in week out

[margaret thatcher]

fact is that pretty much anywhere in the world there is bias towards the home fighter, it's noticable in the uk for sure, but we often lose perspective and think we are worse than we are compared to most other countries

japan is the fairest ive seen though, they have some type of samurai honour thing going on i guess

russians get a bad rap for the drug side, but their officiating is a lot more fair than they get credit for. it was in russia where there was one of the very few cases of a shafted non-house fighter actually getting named winner and having decison reversed on review

[skanksta]

They aren’t bad to be fair.

If you go back and watch all these bad scorecards you can see loads of the punches are landing on arms and gloves......

Yeah they aren’t really - I didn’t read properly and was ranting about judges.
Refs are mostly good most of the time.

[margaret thatcher]

No accountability as mentioned is a big one, these guys literally could poop on their hand, wipe it in the b-side boxers face, and then dq him for smelling too foul, and theyd be back with another big assignment next week, with rob smithing saying we know nothing about boxing or poop

theres really very little reason for them worry about being biased, really needs to be a whole overhaul cuz it's an old bois club with the same long time circle of guys reused over and over, with the guy at the top defending it

[bigjack]

Richard Steele was good