Page 6 of 6
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 10:26
by expe
ScottDetonator wrote:Should be ruled a NC, I thought TD at least. I'm still expecting a case to be lodged, instant rematch if Zepeda is fit.
It was hard watching the corner try and put that shoulder back in, put me off my spare ribs supper(for about 30 seconds).
They might be able to get a rematch out of it but they won't get the result overturned, there's no case for doing so.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 10:41
by ScottDetonator
expe wrote:ScottDetonator wrote:Should be ruled a NC, I thought TD at least. I'm still expecting a case to be lodged, instant rematch if Zepeda is fit.
It was hard watching the corner try and put that shoulder back in, put me off my spare ribs supper(for about 30 seconds).
They might be able to get a rematch out of it but they won't get the result overturned,
there's no case for doing so.
It's certainly a grey area but looking at the fight from an honest perspective, Flannigan didn't win and neither did Zepeda. Zepeda got injured before 4 rounds were completed, IMO an awkward and accidental clash. The fight should be declared a NC or TD and a rematch installed, if Zepeda is not fit, a replacement.
Was a shame as the fight was just warming up.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 10:45
by expe
ScottDetonator wrote:expe wrote:ScottDetonator wrote:Should be ruled a NC, I thought TD at least. I'm still expecting a case to be lodged, instant rematch if Zepeda is fit.
It was hard watching the corner try and put that shoulder back in, put me off my spare ribs supper(for about 30 seconds).
They might be able to get a rematch out of it but they won't get the result overturned,
there's no case for doing so.
It's certainly a grey area but looking at the fight from an honest perspective, Flannigan didn't win and neither did Zepeda. Zepeda got injured before 4 rounds were completed, IMO an awkward and accidental clash. The fight should be declared a NC or TD and a rematch installed, if Zepeda is not fit, a replacement.
Was a shame as the fight was just warming up.
Rules say it should be a TKO. The 4 round rule is only for cuts caused by an accidental clash of heads. Whether Flanagan truly beat Zepeda or not, a wins a win. If a fighter gets injured and can't continue and it hasn't been caused by a foul by their opponent, then they've lost, tough luck but it's the same rule for everyone. Change it and you'll get fighters faking injuries while on top or before 4 rounds so they can get a draw or go to the cards when they know they're ahead.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 10:49
by thepocketrocket
I don't see how a clash of heads is different to a clash of arms.....really don't
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 10:56
by ScottDetonator
expe wrote:Rules say it should be a TKO. The 4 round rule is only for cuts caused by an accidental clash of heads. Whether Flanagan truly beat Zepeda or not, a wins a win. If a fighter gets injured and can't continue and it hasn't been caused by a foul by their opponent, then they've lost, tough luck but it's the same rule for everyone. Change it and you'll get fighters faking injuries while on top or before 4 rounds so they can get a draw or go to the cards when they know they're ahead.
I'm saying from an honest perspective, they can shove the rules up their arse! The fight should be reviewed as fairly as possible - as an individual case. Zepeda's injury was caused by an accidental clash.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 11:24
by reggaereggae
thepocketrocket wrote:I don't see how a clash of heads is different to a clash of arms.....really don't
Good point, BUT if arm clashes were outlawed in boxing there would be no infighting.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 11:46
by GlobalBox
I am chuffed to bits for Terry and as much so for Steve Wood, however purely as a neutral, if there is a clash of heads accident and a cut after more than 4 rounds they are going to the scorecards no matter whose fault it was, now throwing a punch and both arms locking and the shoulder going out after less than 6 minutes boxing, I cannot see how that is not a no contest for the life of me.
Pleased for Terry and Steve, feel for Estrada from a neutral point of view and wish him a speedy recovery, although that ain't happening, the kid wont be back in a ring for a year at least and may never be the same.
Just can't see how that's a just decision, if the fight was in the states or Mexico and that decision was ruled the majority of us would be screaming blue murder, just a view but again well done Turbo, defend and earn mate you deserve it as does everyone who steps within the four ropes.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 14:59
by PredatorHayds
Absolute shocking that the fight wasn't called a technical drawer. I can see the WBO Turning it into a no contest. Really felt for Zepeda.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 15:02
by expe
PredatorHayds wrote:Absolute shocking that the fight wasn't called a technical drawer. I can see the WBO Turning it into a no contest. Really felt for Zepeda.
Have you not read any of this thread, or anything else online? WBO rules make it a Flanagan TKO win, they don't have the authority to call it a no contest anyway.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 15:05
by PredatorHayds
Personally it should be classed as accidental.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 15:43
by expe
PredatorHayds wrote:Personally it should be classed as accidental.
It was accidental, Zepeda didn't deliberately injure himself. But unless the rulebook is thrown out of the window, Flanagan won the fight. Whether it was accidental or not only applies if the injury was caused by a foul, which it wasn't.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 15:52
by Horse
expe wrote:It was accidental, Zepeda didn't deliberately injure himself. But unless the rulebook is thrown out of the window, Flanagan won the fight. Whether it was accidental or not only applies if the injury was caused by a foul, which it wasn't.
But it isn't right etc.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 16:22
by PredatorHayds
expe wrote:PredatorHayds wrote:Personally it should be classed as accidental.
It was accidental, Zepeda didn't deliberately injure himself. But unless the rulebook is thrown out of the window, Flanagan won the fight. Whether it was accidental or not only applies if the injury was caused by a foul, which it wasn't.
I agree with what you said before. The rule has to stay to stop people feigning injurys.
A system should be in place were the WBO can go back and review a result regardless of the rule.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 17:09
by expe
PredatorHayds wrote:expe wrote:PredatorHayds wrote:Personally it should be classed as accidental.
It was accidental, Zepeda didn't deliberately injure himself. But unless the rulebook is thrown out of the window, Flanagan won the fight. Whether it was accidental or not only applies if the injury was caused by a foul, which it wasn't.
I agree with what you said before. The rule has to stay to stop people feigning injurys.
A system should be in place were the WBO can go back and review a result regardless of the rule.
The WBO can't change the result, they can order a rematch or declare the title vacant, but for the result to change it's down to the local commission. In this case there's absolutely no chance of the board declaring it a no contest or a draw. Realistically the WBO won't do anything either, Zepeda will be out for a long time, especially after the idiots in his corner made a mess of resetting it, they might as well just leave Flanagan with the title, then look at the situation when/if Zepeda returns.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 17:57
by PredatorHayds
His corner were abysmal. Especially considering the experience they've got.
Would of been a great fight aswell.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 18:05
by handsofstone
PredatorHayds wrote:His corner were abysmal. Especially considering the experience they've got.
Would of been a great fight aswell.
I have visions of Zepeda and his corner still in the dressing room now trying to force Jose's arm in,Zepeda in tears begging to be taking to the hospital with his trainer saying "sit still Jose I've nearly got it"
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 18:32
by Boxerbeetle
I remember exactly the same thing happening when Bugner fought Bonecrusher Smith when they had a combined age of around 110.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 18:37
by stujones
MightyWarrior wrote:Bit odd, clearly he didn't injure himself.... so don't know why that's not the same as an early round accidental clash of heads: technical draw.
I guess it might be a case of were to you draw the line. What if a fighter breaks his hand in the opening round landing a punch.... technical draw? Maybe, then I guess the argument then could be would a fighter claim a broken hand to get away with a TD?
Although I think when the injury is a clear as this, as it would be a cut - then it is surely fine..... and yes, thinking about it what is stopping a fighter with a cut saying "no, I cannot see a thing" when he can see fine.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 13 Jul 2015, 04:06
by forcefraser
The rules are the rules, but this is a shallow victory.
Freak accident. Happy for Flannigan, but that is not the best way to win a title.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 13 Jul 2015, 04:21
by stujones
The phrasing of it was harsh
"Injured himself".
"Zepeda in no position to continue, the winner by TKO victory".
No mention of it being due to a serious injury in the official verdict - no mention of it being on the advice of the doctor. You can see clearly it was the DOCTOR who waved it off. The corner were still trying for it to continue when the Doctor waved it off.
And Injured himself? Nigel Benn injured himself against Collins 1 when he stumbled on nothing, Bonecrusher Smith (as mentioned) injured himself as his shoulder popped on a missed shot - although both entirely accidently - so I would even have an issue calling these injured himself.... surely injured himself is when a fighter headbutts the corner and causes a cut - that is truly injuring yourself.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 13 Jul 2015, 08:28
by palooka
stujones wrote:The phrasing of it was harsh
"Injured himself".
"Zepeda in no position to continue, the winner by TKO victory".
No mention of it being due to a serious injury in the official verdict - no mention of it being on the advice of the doctor. You can see clearly it was the DOCTOR who waved it off. The corner were still trying for it to continue when the Doctor waved it off.
And Injured himself? Nigel Benn injured himself against Collins 1 when he stumbled on nothing, Bonecrusher Smith (as mentioned) injured himself as his shoulder popped on a missed shot - although both entirely accidently - so I would even have an issue calling these injured himself.... surely injured himself is when a fighter headbutts the corner and causes a cut - that is truly injuring yourself.
Or when Kermit Cintron hopped out of the ring.
Re: flannigan vs zepeda
Posted: 13 Jul 2015, 09:07
by THEBUTCH
I'm pleased for Flannigan. In the short time it lasted Terry looked like he was ready to deliver a world class performance.
I just hope they get Terry out again very soon and Zepeda get's another shot in due course.