Wilfred Benitez vs Roberto Duran: 35 Years Later

[Ambling Alp II]

Against the rules was on of them. A punch that lands illegally is against the rules. It is a foul. Same as punch bleow the belt, even if it was accident. Bumping your opponent is against the rules. Yes the referee missed it. (Shocking that Richard Steele would miss a call.) I never said that Hearns did it deliberately. Never said it was an easy call to see in live time. I have just been saying that it was not a legal knockdown.

[Kalan]

It's not an excuse. It is a crticism of Leonard. He lost the fight to Duran fair and square.
Duran lost to Leonard fair and square in the second fight. He also lost to Benitez fair and square. And to DeJesus for that matter.

Winning or losing fair and square is one thing...Duran didn't get robbed---he just wasn't ready to fight... He didn't train worth a damn for some fights.

[Ambling Alp II]

Against the rules was on of them. A punch that lands illegally is against the rules. It is a foul. Same as punch bleow the belt, even if it was accident. Bumping your opponent is against the rules. Yes the referee missed it. (Shocking that Richard Steele would miss a call.) I never said that Hearns did it deliberately. Never said it was an easy call to see in live time. I have just been saying that it was not a legal knockdown.

You simply don't get it do you? A foul is only a foul if the official / s in charge deem it to be so. The opinions of other observers are worth less than nothing. Steele had a simple call to make. Did Hearns just hit Leonard behind the ear DELIBERATELY or did Leonard try to turn away from a punch aimed at his face, thus exposing the back of his head. Steele has no knowledge or indeed interest in camera angles, suffice to say he is closer to the action than anyone else.

Answer NO FOUL.

You simply don't get it.
Of course the referee didn't call it a foul, so officially it's not a foul. No frikkin kidding. Yeah, I kinda get that.
I have been saying that it should have been called a foul.
Didn't say that Steele had access to camera angles that showed that it should have been called a foul. He had one cnance to see and call it in real time.
Sometimes a fighter gets away with a foul because the referee didn't see it.
Steele was a horrible referee but should be given the benefit of the doubt that it was an honest oversight. However, it was an oversight nevertheless.

And no it's doesn't matter if it was deliberate or not. That isn't the referee's job to decide. If he saw the punch hit Leonard on the back of the head, then he should call it a foul, whether he thought it was on purpose or not.
If it's a low blow, the referee doesn't take into consideration whether it was on purpose or not.
Intent is irrelevant.

Same thing with the bump. Doesn't matter if it was intentional or not. If the referee sees that one fighter was knocked down after being bumped, he shouldn't call it a knockdown. Notice that you keep ignoring the bump. Yes it happened. The referee didn't call that either.

[Ambling Alp II]

If Duran would have somehow went down from that, then no I don't think it should have been counted as a knockdown.

Steele missed the call. Maybe most people would have. Steele was a horrible ref so who knows. A referee might only be a few away but it doesn't mean he has a good angle. This happens in boxing and other sports. In some angles Hearns back blocks out most of what happened.

Same with Hearns punch. It doesn't matter if you think Leonard turned his back on him. It also doesn't matter if Hearns bumped him by accident or not. It's supposed to be a knockdown. If your opponent accidentally bumps you, you were not knocked down and your opponent should not credited with a knockdown.

Can't believe that you think intent is so crucial.
If a fighter is hit low and falls down, does it count as a knockdown if the referee thinks that the punch was unintentional? Of course not.

If a fighter accidentally trips his opponent, does the referee stop and consider whether the trip was accidental or not before ruling whether it was a knockdown or not? Of course not. He doesn't rule it a knockdown.

[Ambling Alp II]

No idea what you are seeing when you when you are watching these fights.

A fighter should not credit for a knockdown if the punch land illegally. If the referee catches that, he won't count it and won't consider whether it was on purpose or not. Can't believe you don't get this.

Protect yourself at all times is not a rule. It is advice. No one gets penalized for ot protecting themselves.
Not a stretch at all to say Steele missed it. It happened fast; a good referee may have missed it and Steele was not a good referee.

Of course it doesn't really matter what us fans think as far as a ruling. Obviously that isn't going to be reveresed. I kind get that for Chriissakes.
Just as it doesn't matter that what the fans think of the judges decision. It isn't going to be changed because of what fans might think. Doesn't mean that people can't express their opinion of what they think should have happened.

[Ambling Alp II]

Nice. You are quite a friendly person.

As I have said over and over, obviously I realize the referee counted the knockdown. I have been saying that he shouldn't I realize that my or anyone's else interpretation is not going to change anything. Just like it it's not going to change anything if someone disagrees with the decision in this fight (or any other fight for that matter). Doesn't mean that someone can't voice their opinion on these matters. Get that through your skull.

Steele was not an awful ref? He was a joke.
Watch the first Tyson-Ruddock fight. He misses Tyson tripping Ruddock and counts the first knockdown. Then later, he stops the fight fight without even looking at Ruddock to see how badly he was hurt.
In Taylor-Chavez, he got distracted by the shouting of Taylor's trainer when he should have concentrating on Taylor.
In Tate-Olajide, he should have stopped a completely one-sided beating before the 10th round. Instead he let it go the entire 15 rounds.

Your "arguments" are based to suit your anti-Leonard agenda.

[Ambling Alp II]

1. Watch the film. If you think it should have stopped, I guess that's your opinion. I certainly would not have stopped it. What is more troubling is that Steele doesn't actually look at Ruddock.
2. He looked away from Taylor and at Duva who was screaming in the corner. That is bad officiating. (I don't care how much time there was left either)
3. There many times where Tate hurt Olajide with more than five straight punches. Steele let it go on and on. Olajide could have been seriously hurt. He acted the total opposite of when he officiated other fights.

Sorry if I don't have confidence in boxing commissions and governing bodies. They all have their own agendas. Might be news to you, but boxing is a corrupt sport. Ratings (as you yourself said on another thread) and title shots can be bought. If they will do that, they will hire referees who are not competent; perhaps someone who will help the fighter they want to win. Officiating in boxing is much worse than major sports.
Yes I have an "agenda" against Steele. He was a horrible referee.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

That quick stoppage from Steele pales in comparison to letting Tyson golota ruddock's balls in the rematch.

[Ambling Alp II]

It is pure fantasy to claim Steele didn't see the punches that put Ruddock on queer street. He didn't need to look at him when he grabbed Tyson to stop him going after the guy. It might come as a surprise to you but that is what good officiating is.

It matters not a jot if Steele was looking at a girl in the 3rd row, when he was counting to 8. All he has to do is arrive at that number, THEN look into the fighters ( Taylor's ) eyes and ask him a question. Which surprise, surprise again he DID, and got NO answer.

The only saving grace to your post is you admit to having an agenda against Steele, so we can dismiss your complaints about his decision making on that very basis.

The referee didn't need to look at Ruddock? Wow. I mean wow. He has to look at him to determine if he should continue. That is his job. Yes it matters if Steele was not paying attention to the fighter when he was hurt. That is his job. For all Steele knew, Taylor indicated that he was OK while Steele was looking at Duva. Taylor was distracted by Duva himself.

Don't really care if you want to dismiss my complaints or not. Don't really care what you think. I don't think you know much about boxing and less about boxing history. More importantly, I don't like you.

You can come back with yet another ridiculous rsponse. I don't care. I am moving on.