Should refs have to publicly explain their decisions?

[Controversial]

I'm in two minds about this. There have been many controversial decisions made by refs over the years and we never really hear their side of their thought process, why they stopped a fight (or didn't) so this often leaves fans debating it, accusing them of taking back handers etc.. But on the flip side I can't think of any other sport where refs have to explain themselves. Also if they were expected to publicly explain their decision making it might make them second guess what they think is actually the right call at the time. Should they be more accountable or you happy with how it is?

[Jimmy2025]

No, definitely not. You'd end up with not enough refs and those few that did come into the game would have bigger egos than the fighters.

[Controversial]

No, definitely not. You'd end up with not enough refs and those few that did come into the game would have bigger egos than the fighters.

What about if they only had to explain themselves in fights where there is public controversy and back lash from ex-fighters?

[Coco]

I don't think so, to the board yes.

[Jimmy2025]

No, definitely not. You'd end up with not enough refs and those few that did come into the game would have bigger egos than the fighters.

What about if they only had to explain themselves in fights where there is public controversy and back lash from ex-fighters?

Think about the politicians we end up with. They are the type of people (generally) who enjoy being centre of attention with a camera under their noses even when they are screwing things up. Massive egos. Think they are above the public. The few good ones end up topping themselves or walking away to get a job where they aren't exposed to the mob.

[Controversial]

No, definitely not. You'd end up with not enough refs and those few that did come into the game would have bigger egos than the fighters.

What about if they only had to explain themselves in fights where there is public controversy and back lash from ex-fighters?

Think about the politicians we end up with. They are the type of people (generally) who enjoy being centre of attention with a camera under their noses even when they are screwing things up. Massive egos. Think they are above the public. The few good ones end up topping themselves or walking away to get a job where they aren't exposed to the mob.

I don't disagree with you, just interested in peoples thoughts. I know a few years ago IJL was put under the spotlight and demoted (albeit it was his scorecard as a judge that hit the headlines) and he's been on podcasts talking about it. I have no idea what the board do in instances like Whittaker and Cameron, would they make the ref explain his decision?

[Noxy]

No, definitely not.

[Ruthless-RKO]

I don't think so, to the board yes.

Board can be just as corrupt.

[Coco]

I don't think so, to the board yes.

Board can be just as corrupt.

That's another thing, but it's the boards, not the public's job to hold refs accountable

[JamesPhilips]

The media should have every right to ask them to provide an explanation for their actions. Whether the ref decided to answer is up to them, ultimately.

[Controversial]

Playing devils advocate it can’t be easy being a ref. They are in the thick of the fight and don’t have the luxury of instant replays so have to make split second decisions based on what they see close up. Very easy for us fans to criticise with the benefit of hindsight, slow mo etc. They are only human and will make mistakes like we all can. Foster has been a ref in over 1500 fights so the law of averages will mean the odd controversial result will happen.

[Coco]

Playing devils advocate it can’t be easy being a ref. They are in the thick of the fight and don’t have the luxury of instant replays so have to make split second decisions based on what they see close up. Very easy for us fans to criticise with the benefit of hindsight, slow mo etc. They are only human and will make mistakes like we all can. Foster has been a ref in over 1500 fights so the law of averages will mean the odd controversial result will happen.

I 100% agree it's a tough job

However mistakes don't get made against the home fighter!

[Controversial]

Playing devils advocate it can’t be easy being a ref. They are in the thick of the fight and don’t have the luxury of instant replays so have to make split second decisions based on what they see close up. Very easy for us fans to criticise with the benefit of hindsight, slow mo etc. They are only human and will make mistakes like we all can. Foster has been a ref in over 1500 fights so the law of averages will mean the odd controversial result will happen.

I 100% agree it's a tough job

However mistakes don't get made against the home fighter!

Yeah of course, it happens a lot. There will always be bias, whether that’s conscious or unconscious bias. Or in some cases just corrupt

[handsofstone]

I sympathize with the ref in the Clarke/Tetteh fight, the moment he went to stop it, Tetteh took some big shots on the ropes that were jerking his head back, the type of shots that should stop fights but there was a second or 2 the ref had prize them apart, not his fault, they're huge lumps but in that couple of seconds it took between him jumping in and getting between, Tetteh was alright and probably fit to fight

[jameswilson]

I sympathize with the ref in the Clarke/Tetteh fight, the moment he went to stop it, Tetteh took some big shots on the ropes that were jerking his head back, the type of shots that should stop fights but there was a second or 2 the ref had prize them apart, not his fault, they're huge lumps but in that couple of seconds it took between him jumping in and getting between, Tetteh was alright and probably fit to fight

Yeah that one he got put over and then within a few seconds was shipping huge shots that were rocking his head back and suddenly somehow looked fine.