Result confirmed!

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 18 Oct 2003, 19:19

Check out fightnews. :( :( :(

Have to say Barry Hearn handle himself brilliantly tonight. I'm sure a lot of promoters would have lost their rag, to get Sulliman to witheld the result (even temporarily) and also say on TV that an immediate rematch will happen (although its probably unlikely) was good stuff.

Good show, shame the arena appeared half full, it deserved more.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 18 Oct 2003, 19:46

Fightnews have update - this thread is wrong. :) :) :) :)

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 18 Oct 2003, 19:48

stujones wrote:Fightnews have update - this thread is wrong. :) :) :) :)

Yes, they stuck in the update after you posted. A draw is a good result for British boxing. Brodie gets a rematch and we get to see another war.

gensu3k1 · Post by **gensu3k1** » 18 Oct 2003, 20:17

I hope the rematch is on neutral ground. I think this is a fix though. How hard is it to add up scorecards? I highly doubt we'll be seeing a photo of the scorecards on Fightnews.

Southpaw Stylist · Post by **Southpaw Stylist** » 18 Oct 2003, 20:53

A fix on who's part? I think Injin Chi won it by one point, I was there and I could see that he won it.

Tyson KTFO 3 Times · Post by **Tyson KTFO 3 Times** » 19 Oct 2003, 06:18

The only person who can feel hard done by the decision is chi.

Brodie can count him self lucky.

Hope we see a rematch.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 19 Oct 2003, 08:53

gensu3k1 wrote:I hope the rematch is on neutral ground. I think this is a fix though. How hard is it to add up scorecards? I highly doubt we'll be seeing a photo of the scorecards on Fightnews.

It does look dodgy when you consider it was in Brodie's hometown, but when the decision was announced, the crowd and the fighter himself accepted it in good grace. So the blame lies entirely with the WBC and the referee in my opinion. The one point deduction for Brodie caused confusion afterwards because - clearly - the judges were unaware that the referee had taken a point away. This is my bone of contention with the referee. His failure to make the point deduction clear is the root cause of the post-fight chaos in my opinion. It's now emerged that Brodie had two points taken away from him mistakenly, which is why the fight has now been amended to a draw. Again, this leads me to believe (and this is all assumption) that the judges did actually deduct a point in the first round, and when the referee checked with them at the end of the fight, they either forgot due to the subsequent eleven rounds of fantastic action, or, and this is what I believe happened, tried to recall the referee signifying the point deduction in the ring (as we all did) and failed to, given the referee barely did so.
Just one man's opinion.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 19 Oct 2003, 09:50

bennie wrote:
gensu3k1 wrote:I hope the rematch is on neutral ground. I think this is a fix though. How hard is it to add up scorecards? I highly doubt we'll be seeing a photo of the scorecards on Fightnews.
It does look dodgy when you consider it was in Brodie's hometown, but when the decision was announced, the crowd and the fighter himself accepted it in good grace. So the blame lies entirely with the WBC and the referee in my opinion. The one point deduction for Brodie caused confusion afterwards because - clearly - the judges were unaware that the referee had taken a point away. This is my bone of contention with the referee. His failure to make the point deduction clear is the root cause of the post-fight chaos in my opinion. It's now emerged that Brodie had two points taken away from him mistakenly, which is why the fight has now been amended to a draw. Again, this leads me to believe (and this is all assumption) that the judges did actually deduct a point in the first round, and when the referee checked with them at the end of the fight, they either forgot due to the subsequent eleven rounds of fantastic action, or, and this is what I believe happened, tried to recall the referee signifying the point deduction in the ring (as we all did) and failed to, given the referee barely did so.
Just one man's opinion.

From what I have read, Jose Sulliman has taken full (personal) blame, by saying he docked an extra point of one of the cards, thinking that the judge hadn't already done so.

Fair enough, however, if this silly law wasn't in effect, then Brodie would have won the fight on the cards.

I'm glad that didn't happen, but its food for thought.

However, I'm really not sure what's going on - cause Sulliaman said it was the card that initially gave it to Chi by 1 that was dodgy. However, now appararently one of the judges scored it 114-112, which is not what it looked like on sky. I read, and was announced as, 113-111.

However, if it wasn't for that ruling, Brodie would have WON on a split decision.