Brodie would have won the fight but for the WBC's ludicrous rule that the perpetrator of a butt - accidental or otherwise - must have a point deducted. But the question is: if a head butt is accidental then how can there be a perpetrator? Both men reeled away hurt, and Brodie was badly cut whereas Chi was only grazed over his left eye. Would Michael have perpetrated his own injury?
Only the fact Chi made a bigger show of complaining about the headbutt when he turned his back and clutched the bridge of his nose seemed to cost Brodie the point in my opinion.
This same rule cost Lloyd Honeyghan his WBC welterweight title back in 1987 when Mexico's Jorge Vaca was badly cut in the seventh round from a head clash and it went to the scorecards. Vaca got the decision due to the one-point deduction from Honeyghan, otherwise Honeyghan would have hung on to his title with a draw.
But Brodie was the one who suffered the worse cut in this one and yet was still penalized a point. Crazy.
One last thought: are some WBC officials secretly embarrassed by this ruling? It's dawned on me that Daniel Van Der Wiele's almost reluctant signifying of the point deduction for Brodie may have stemmed out of such embarrassment.
Brodie would have won the fight...
Re: Brodie would have won the fight...
Posted something similar on the Results confirmed thread.bennie wrote:Brodie would have won the fight but for the WBC's ludicrous rule that the perpetrator of a butt - accidental or otherwise - must have a point deducted. But the question is: if a head butt is accidental then how can there be a perpetrator? Both men reeled away hurt, and Brodie was badly cut whereas Chi was only grazed over his left eye. Would Michael have perpetrated his own injury?
Only the fact Chi made a bigger show of complaining about the headbutt when he turned his back and clutched the bridge of his nose seemed to cost Brodie the point in my opinion.
This same rule cost Lloyd Honeyghan his WBC welterweight title back in 1987 when Mexico's Jorge Vaca was badly cut in the seventh round from a head clash and it went to the scorecards. Vaca got the decision due to the one-point deduction from Honeyghan, otherwise Honeyghan would have hung on to his title with a draw.
But Brodie was the one who suffered the worse cut in this one and yet was still penalized a point. Crazy.
One last thought: are some WBC officials secretly embarrassed by this ruling? It's dawned on me that Daniel Van Der Wiele's almost reluctant signifying of the point deduction for Brodie may have stemmed out of such embarrassment.
Yes, to be fair to the ref, he didn't give the body language that he was happy with the rulling in the interview.
Great fight, i had it 114-112 to Chi but the ineptness of the WBC tried to devalue the battle with it's show stealing idiocy at the end, like my colleague mentioned earlier, how hard can adding 9's and 10's be? The ref i thought had a decent match also ruined a good nights work by later claiming he had taken off a point from Brodie but had neglected to tell anyone, taking a point away was a total joke anyway as there was no malice from either man in the head clash. The first 6 rounds were probably the best i have ever witnessed live (i mean via TV, unfortuantely i was not there 
), Brodie showed guts and determination but Chi had world class stamina and it showed down the stretch. Both men were hurt early but i always got the feeling Brodie was hurt most, he proved he has world class ability and determination but i'm afraid his chin and more importantly punch resistance are not at that level and that is what will fail him.
I think Brodie should avoid a rematch though as i doubt he will be able to deal with Chi a second time, he should count his fortune and move on to other avenues. Jose Sulaiman and the WBC are buffoons and finally i have a question....after the fight Daniel Van Der Wiele the referee was asked about the head clash and he replied " I immediately went to the judges and stated there had been an accidental head clash, then under the WBC's rules i deducted a point from Michael Brodie...."
WHAT?! Did i hear that correctly? Well i was surprised the lads in the studio failed to pick up on this, what type of screwed up rules are these? Calling it an accidental clash and then deducting a fighter a point? Can anyone elaborate on this?
), Brodie showed guts and determination but Chi had world class stamina and it showed down the stretch. Both men were hurt early but i always got the feeling Brodie was hurt most, he proved he has world class ability and determination but i'm afraid his chin and more importantly punch resistance are not at that level and that is what will fail him.I think Brodie should avoid a rematch though as i doubt he will be able to deal with Chi a second time, he should count his fortune and move on to other avenues. Jose Sulaiman and the WBC are buffoons and finally i have a question....after the fight Daniel Van Der Wiele the referee was asked about the head clash and he replied " I immediately went to the judges and stated there had been an accidental head clash, then under the WBC's rules i deducted a point from Michael Brodie...."
WHAT?! Did i hear that correctly? Well i was surprised the lads in the studio failed to pick up on this, what type of screwed up rules are these? Calling it an accidental clash and then deducting a fighter a point? Can anyone elaborate on this?
Yes sorry Bennie i posted this on the current scene before leaping on over and adding the post to this section, i was mystified that no one picked up on Van De Wieles explanations of the headbutt. It was bizarre, how can you call it accidental and then deduct a point? It's ludicrous and it's no undertstatement to say that Sulaiman and cretins of his ilk are ruining Boxing with there meddling and poking.