Dave Paris Too Slow & too old.

SIMPSONS · Post by **SIMPSONS** » 08 Dec 2006, 19:53

Paris the ref is too slow, he called break from too far without moving and only got his hand in to hold down Samuels guard.

Give the man his zimerframe.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 08 Dec 2006, 19:55

well I don't know about that, but he definately bottled the decision. No way should it have been a Barker win.

I hope team Samuels make a protest - it should have been a NC or a win by DQ for Samuels.

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 08 Dec 2006, 20:05

it was poor...very poor...

his left hand was on samuels chest at the barker hook landed, not barkers fault of course, boxing is about instinct, it should definately have been declared a no contest, im sure the BBB of C will change it to this, o they should do !!

lvlarc · Post by **lvlarc** » 08 Dec 2006, 20:15

Sad way to lose. Nice punch though, reminded me of Jackson's KO over Graham. Pretty brutal.

E · Post by E » 08 Dec 2006, 20:20

Yes should have been a DQ or no contest... but still Knockout of the year....

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 08 Dec 2006, 20:21

It was an error from the ref; he was too slow moving in and and controlled only one of the fighters. A no contest would seem fairest.

nicnut · Post by **nicnut** » 08 Dec 2006, 23:53

Defend yourself at all times. Still a blunder by the ref, should be a n/c

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 09 Dec 2006, 08:59

Barker doesn't deserve to lose due to a referees blunder.

ABA Boxing · Post by **ABA Boxing** » 09 Dec 2006, 09:08

I would have to agree the Barker wouldn't have deserved a DQ, a NC would have been the fairest result for all boxers. Then A quick rematch in a few weeks to put the result right.

The ref however made a blunder but so do they all, in Amateur Boxing Barker would have been DQ!

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 09 Dec 2006, 09:11

ABA Boxing wrote:I would have to agree the Barker wouldn't have deserved a DQ, a NC would have been the fairest result for all boxers. Then A quick rematch in a few weeks to put the result right.

The ref however made a blunder but so do they all, in Amateur Boxing Barker would have been DQ!

Samuels will need more than a few week to recover from that KO - it was a nasty one and will mean he is under medical suspension.

I agree though that a NC is the fairest result and a rematch would be welcome in my eyes

ABA Boxing · Post by **ABA Boxing** » 09 Dec 2006, 09:14

TerribleTerry wrote:
ABA Boxing wrote:I would have to agree the Barker wouldn't have deserved a DQ, a NC would have been the fairest result for all boxers. Then A quick rematch in a few weeks to put the result right.

The ref however made a blunder but so do they all, in Amateur Boxing Barker would have been DQ!
Samuels will need more than a few week to recover from that KO - it was a nasty one and will mean he is under medical suspension.

I agree though that a NC is the fairest result and a rematch would be welcome in my eyes

Ok not a few weeks but you no what i ment!

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Dec 2006, 10:21

It looked like it was going to be an interesting fight. I think NC is the only result as it looked impossible to call a winner at that stage. Samuels was looking sharp considering the layoff.

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 09 Dec 2006, 10:37

samuels scored a knockdown with that right hand.

barker touched down and the referee said stop boxing cos barker touched down.

then samuels gets clocked and parris lets it go.

change that fornicating result immediately bbbofc.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 09 Dec 2006, 15:25

What exactly happened? Missed the fight & I've always liked Samuels - you can be sure you'll see a KO when he's in there...one way or the other.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Dec 2006, 16:17

MightyWarrior wrote:What exactly happened? Missed the fight & I've always liked Samuels - you can be sure you'll see a KO when he's in there...one way or the other.

Samuels floored Barker, Barker not badly hurt at all sort of stumbled a bit and hands touched the floor (no doubt about this).

Ref clearly said "stop boxing"..... Barker clocked Samuels with a beauty, Samuels out for probably a minute on the canvas - went down almost like Tak vs Alexander.

The two main issues of debate are is 1) Did Samuels hear the "stop boxing" his hands were dropped but he wasn't heading back to the neutral corner (far from it) when he got clocked. Second issue is whether Barker had started to throw the punch when the ref said stop boxing (cause Barker claimed he heard it). I think the punch STARTED its journey AFTER the instruction, but its hard to tell.

The fact is though that instruction stop boxing was given and the fighters didn't and because of this Samuels has an L to his record. He shouldn't.

Remember Parris got out of the Tyson vs Saverese debarcle by saying "he'd already said stop boxing and declared the fight was over AFTER Tyson did the DQ' able actions". Therefore he couldn't reverse the decision. Shouldn't the same apply hear.... he said stop boxing to administer a count, the count never happend.... therefore the KO defeat shouldn't have happend.

Its got to be a NC.... Simply has to be.

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 09 Dec 2006, 16:23

stujones wrote:Remember Parris got out of the Tyson vs Saverese debarcle by saying "he'd already said stop boxing and declared the fight was over AFTER Tyson did the DQ' able actions". Therefore he couldn't reverse the decision. Shouldn't the same apply hear.... he said stop boxing to administer a count, the count never happend.... therefore the KO defeat shouldn't have happend.

Its got to be a NC.... Simply has to be.

john coyle reffed tyson-savarese.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 09 Dec 2006, 16:26

hitman_hatton1 wrote:
stujones wrote:Remember Parris got out of the Tyson vs Saverese debarcle by saying "he'd already said stop boxing and declared the fight was over AFTER Tyson did the DQ' able actions". Therefore he couldn't reverse the decision. Shouldn't the same apply hear.... he said stop boxing to administer a count, the count never happend.... therefore the KO defeat shouldn't have happend.

Its got to be a NC.... Simply has to be.
john coyle reffed tyson-savarese.

Oops, I get them two mixed up!

Anyway, whoever it was - surely the same decision should apply!

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 09 Dec 2006, 17:47

stujones wrote:
MightyWarrior wrote:What exactly happened? Missed the fight & I've always liked Samuels - you can be sure you'll see a KO when he's in there...one way or the other.
Samuels floored Barker, Barker not badly hurt at all sort of stumbled a bit and hands touched the floor (no doubt about this).

Ref clearly said "stop boxing"..... Barker clocked Samuels with a beauty, Samuels out for probably a minute on the canvas - went down almost like Tak vs Alexander.

Thanks Stu

Sounds a bad 'un. Even a NC isn't going to be much consolation for getting sparked like that. Shame, as Samuels has always been one of the more exciting bangers on the brit scene: you never know what's going to happen when he's in the ring.

johnswan1 · Post by **johnswan1** » 09 Dec 2006, 19:06

stujones wrote:
MightyWarrior wrote:What exactly happened? Missed the fight & I've always liked Samuels - you can be sure you'll see a KO when he's in there...one way or the other.
Samuels floored Barker, Barker not badly hurt at all sort of stumbled a bit and hands touched the floor (no doubt about this).

Ref clearly said "stop boxing"..... Barker clocked Samuels with a beauty, Samuels out for probably a minute on the canvas - went down almost like Tak vs Alexander.

The two main issues of debate are is 1) Did Samuels hear the "stop boxing" his hands were dropped but he wasn't heading back to the neutral corner (far from it) when he got clocked. Second issue is whether Barker had started to throw the punch when the ref said stop boxing (cause Barker claimed he heard it). I think the punch STARTED its journey AFTER the instruction, but its hard to tell.

The fact is though that instruction stop boxing was given and the fighters didn't and because of this Samuels has an L to his record. He shouldn't.

Remember Parris got out of the Tyson vs Saverese debarcle by saying "he'd already said stop boxing and declared the fight was over AFTER Tyson did the DQ' able actions". Therefore he couldn't reverse the decision. Shouldn't the same apply hear.... he said stop boxing to administer a count, the count never happend.... therefore the KO defeat shouldn't have happend.

Its got to be a NC.... Simply has to be.

When the ref shouting stop boxing, Samuels was the one still throwing a punch and Barker acted on instinct. I thought Samuels hands dropped just as Barker threw the punch and not before that.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 13 Dec 2006, 21:55

Just doing a bit of surfing and I stumbled across the BBBoC official website (never knew they had one).

Just wandering if anyone is tempted to phone/email them to see if they are going to do anything about the result of this fight.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 14 Dec 2006, 06:32

I think we all should write in.

The result was a travesty.

Not Barker' fault and the poor lad has enough on his plate, but Samuels dropped his hands, Paris is slow and only obstructs Sameuls - as he regards Barker as vulnerable and knocked down and then Barker decks him instinctively.

A NC is the only permissable result.

No way Samuels should have a KO loss. Parris made a very poor error of judgement.

jonny · Post by **jonny** » 14 Dec 2006, 13:30

But both boxers are told if one of you go down the other should go straight to a neutral corner, Barker in effect was put down and Samuels tried to follow up with another couple of shots instead of following the rules.
Not saying I agreed with the outcome but another veiw of the situation.

jab-seltz · Post by **jab-seltz** » 14 Dec 2006, 19:58

Leave the judging and administraion of the sport to the ruling bodies. decisions are made in fight situations with split second judgement, action replays are not afforded to the officials on duty at the time.
The meddling of few boxing anoraks will not aid or further clarify the situation.
I am sure the BBBofC will in due course seek to review the fight and either NC or let the result stand.
As previously stated Darren Barker and his family have enough on their minds at the moment.

SIMPSONS · Post by **SIMPSONS** » 15 Dec 2006, 05:00

jab-seltz wrote:Leave the judging and administraion of the sport to the ruling bodies. decisions are made in fight situations with split second judgement, action replays are not afforded to the officials on duty at the time.
The meddling of few boxing anoraks will not aid or further clarify the situation.
I am sure the BBBofC will in due course seek to review the fight and either NC or let the result stand.
As previously stated Darren Barker and his family have enough on their minds at the moment.

The only valid point you have is that Barker has other, more important things to deal with.

kevin · Post by **kevin** » 15 Dec 2006, 06:57

I totally agree with jab-seltz, there are far more important things on Darren's mind at the moment.

It's very unlikely the result will be changed as in Britain we have 'The referee's decision is final' concept, the same as we have no rules for accidental butts ending contests, a win is a win as far as the board go.

So I can't see this result being changed. The only one likely to face any action is the ref who will probably have to explain his decision to the board.

Dave Paris Too Slow & too old.

Dave Paris Too Slow & too old.

Dave paris too old too slow

Re: Dave paris too old too slow