BoxRec

Question - does the BBBoC select refs and judges, or does the promoter have any influence on who is selected?

Also, where do their 'expenses' come from? Directly from the promoter or from the BBBoC?

Corruption is a strong word, but influence is undoubtedly at work, even if it is subconscious.

brian13 wrote:

Tunney wrote:

TheCobra wrote:referee: Ian John-Lewis 78-76

He scored it 78-76, you just need to search for boxers records on this very site.

I re-watched the fight yesterday, and Zack Page clearly won AT LEAST fight rounds. Jim Watt and the other commentator thought so too.

That was a robbery, no matter how Lewis scored it.

And don't you think he should have stopped the Briggs-Klitschkos fight? Everybody from the ESPN commentators to the German media thought so, and Briggs was hospitalized for a week after the fight. His responsibility is to make sure the boxers do not get hurt.

That win did nothing to improve Dallas's career in fact it made it worse. He got blasted out of it by David Price a few weeks later. Had he lost to Page, I wonder would he have been offered the Price fight.

I was just thinking the same thing, he probably wouldn't of.

I don't think IJL is corrupt, but i do agree his judging needs to be looked at by the board, as he seems so wide of the mark in quite a few fights.

Cas wrote:Ian John Lewis. We all know what he's up to! Terrible, terrible judge.

Please explain Cas?

taffytoon wrote:

Cas wrote:Ian John Lewis. We all know what he's up to! Terrible, terrible judge.

Please explain Cas?

Er, no, please don't. 8)

IJL is a prat who needs sacking. How can only ONE man in the arena have it a draw? Jeez - this is beyong bad. Sack him, or ban him for 12 months. Or send him to the eye doctor.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

taffytoon wrote:

Cas wrote:Ian John Lewis. We all know what he's up to! Terrible, terrible judge.

Please explain Cas?

Er, no, please don't. 8)

He can't make a statement like the above without an explanation, I for one would be very interested in his explanation

Old bones Ian wrote:I don't think IJL is corrupt, but i do agree his judging needs to be looked at by the board, as he seems so wide of the mark in quite a few fights.

In my heart I don't believe you guys mean that. It's blatant, and it's very sad

I hope he's more reliable in his day job...

Dioufy wrote:IJL is a prat who needs sacking. How can only ONE man in the arena have it a draw? Jeez - this is beyong bad. Sack him, or ban him for 12 months. Or send him to the eye doctor.

Are they not even going to have one of their "investigations" into his incredibly poor scorecard from the Lynes vs Purdy fight?

Horse wrote:

Dioufy wrote:IJL is a prat who needs sacking. How can only ONE man in the arena have it a draw? Jeez - this is beyong bad. Sack him, or ban him for 12 months. Or send him to the eye doctor.

Are they not even going to have one of their "investigations" into his incredibly poor scorecard from the Lynes vs Purdy fight?

Maybe not. He was doing the Fury/Pajkic fight.

Deserter wrote:

J wrote:but that just makes it it subjective rather than the allegaitons of corrupt.

What do you feel about his performances as a judge and what would be your explanation for his scorecards being consistently dramatically at odds with neutral observers and always playing out in favour of the home fighter? As I've previously stated, it defies all normal laws of logic, which would dictate his 'subjective' cards play in favour of the 'away' fighter on occasion.

i heare yamate but all three judges of pac vs marquez also on the take then?

J wrote:

Deserter wrote:

J wrote:but that just makes it it subjective rather than the allegaitons of corrupt.

What do you feel about his performances as a judge and what would be your explanation for his scorecards being consistently dramatically at odds with neutral observers and always playing out in favour of the home fighter? As I've previously stated, it defies all normal laws of logic, which would dictate his 'subjective' cards play in favour of the 'away' fighter on occasion.

i heare yamate but all three judges of pac vs marquez also on the take then?

As I've said earlier, I don't think anyone is consciously on the take, but there will be sub-conscious and/or self-imposed pressures to deliver the right outcome for your paymasters. The scorecard IJL turned in for Lynes was motivated by self-preservation in my opinion, rather than outright corruption, but no objective observer could have scored the fight in the fashion he did.

As someone said earlier, it's silly to say IJL is "on the take", or taking "backhanders" etc.

Reality is though, IJL, like many judges and referee's know who is serving the bread and which side it is buttered. They know who to keep happy and sweet.

The more they favour 'certain' boxers, the the more bouts they will get in the future with the said boxers/promoters.

It's always been that way.

Germany and the UK are both Notorious for this. You always get the same judges involved with certain boxer's and promoters

observer1 wrote:As someone said earlier, it's silly to say IJL is "on the take", or taking "backhanders" etc.

Reality is though, IJL, like many judges and referee's know who is serving the bread and which side it is buttered. They know who to keep happy and sweet.

The more they favour 'certain' boxers, the the more bouts they will get in the future with the said boxers/promoters.

It's always been that way.

Germany and the UK are both Notorious for this. You always get the same judges involved with certain boxer's and promoters

Lynes Purdy both Matchroom promoted

Observer1 is incorrect to asume that referee's/Judges will get more work from certain promotors if they favour certain boxers.
All officials are chosen on a rota basis by the Board and it is pure coincidence if they get a particular fighter more than once.
Also officials expenses are paid to them by the promotor the board do not get themselves involved with that.

peter1948 wrote:Observer1 is incorrect to asume that referee's/Judges will get more work from certain promotors if they favour certain boxers.
All officials are chosen on a rota basis by the Board and it is pure coincidence if they get a particular fighter more than once.
Also officials expenses are paid to them by the promotor the board do not get themselves involved with that.

you have no idea if anything is going on behind the scenes

why on earth he didn't stop vitali-briggs i'll never know.

that was a sick beating.

hitman_hatton1 wrote:why on earth he didn't stop vitali-briggs i'll never know.

that was a sick beating.

You would then get the usual idiots shouting it was another early stoppage
Damned if he does damned if he don't.