BoxRec

Asterix wrote:

Horse wrote:

Coco wrote:If you dock a point it must be shown at the time, surely??
Even then they would still be 10-10 rounds as McDeromott was winning them, and 98-92 shows a clear 8 rounds to 2 in scoring

McDermott wasn't winning the last two rounds. If he was deducted points in those rounds then they would be 10-8 rounds for Fury.

Fury was exhausted and throwing punches with absolutely no pop behind them.

yeah but don't just talk about round 3.

Asterix wrote:Fury was exhausted and throwing punches with absolutely no pop behind them.

Then why did McDermott turn his back multiple times?

Did Fury use an illegal move to spin McDermott or something?

Horse wrote:

Asterix wrote:Fury was exhausted and throwing punches with absolutely no pop behind them.

Then why did McDermott turn his back multiple times?

Did Fury use an illegal move to spin McDermott or something?

I don't know. I don't have the fight to hand.

Asterix wrote:I don't know. I don't have the fight to hand.

Neither do I.

i think northeast is getting so worked up about it because he had a good bet on big john,and,quite rightly,believes the money has been stolen from him

Regardless of how worked up NEBF is getting, he is right! This is surely a huge injustice.

Coco wrote:If you dock a point it must be shown at the time, surely??
Even then they would still be 10-10 rounds as McDeromott was winning them, and 98-92 shows a clear 8 rounds to 2 in scoring

I don't believe you do if its just the ref scoring the fight.... unless the rule changed at the time of when it was 3 judges for a British title fight. Something the BBBoC should consider.

mickey1975 wrote:i think northeast is getting so worked up about it because he had a good bet on big john,and,quite rightly,believes the money has been stolen from him

if Mcdermott had lost on points, UNcontroversially, I'd have just still enjoyed the contest...to be honest when I tuned in in the middle of round 3, i was just relieved McD hadn't been bombed out by that point, let's be honest, it was a possibility.

I'm disappointed, but I'm over the fact I lost some money. I don't bet very often and I don't bet what I can't afford to lose. I'll keep my slips just in case the Board anul the contest and I can claim my stake back.

Here's what I had for info:

25 quid on Mcdermott KO..........at 8 to 1.

I also had 6 quid on each of the last 3 rounds for Mcdermott KO.............at 66 to 1

that would have been my real money maker

In addition I had 25 quid on Mcdermott to win the contest on points, .......at 12 to 1 .

I might not have bothered but I just thought the bookies had got well excited over a wholly untested prospect against a guy that's done 24 rounds with Williams.

Sure, I'm quids out...but I'm really more annoyed that any rematch with Fury entering the ring as champ and no further action taken over O'Connor's scoring would just be like glossing on one big stinking pile of sh*t.

I wouldn't wallpaper over sh*t in my front rom, so I don't want it done with this sport.

ironically i placed 4 pounds change on Fury on points at 4 to 1 and had totally forgotten about it, i shall not be refusing to pick up that one as a protest lol.

I had it 97-95 to Fury. I was suprised at O'Conner's scorecard only giving McDermott two rounds, BUT the right man won the fight.

The Sky team were a disgrace in their bias IMO. Any opportunity to push McDermott's case and they took it with two slimey hands.

Butch you always seem to praise Hennessy fighters more than other promoters fighters. There no way Fury won that fight imo

Rounds 9 and 10....if memory serves, I don't carry my scorecard around with me!

So what? If I do, it's becuase they tend to tread a path I respect, it's got F-all to do with my scoring though. Are you biased against Hennessy or something ?

I thought Fury got the better of the first 5 round and McDermott did better in the second half.

fatman wrote:I had it Fury 96-94 McDermott, I don't know what all the fuss is about.

I have to say, though I suspect that I am in the minority here, that I had it very close on the night - I don't tend to score per se, so much as note where I think rounds might have gone, and I came up with four clear rounds each and two that could have been reasonably given either way. Had it not been for the Sky commentary, which once again (to my mind) painted a very one sided picture of the fight, I think I would have expected a draw or for Fury to nick the decision.

The Americans say that it depends what you like - McDermott had a much better accuracy figure, but Fury threw *way* more shots, and unlikely Big John, they were for the most part serious shots that would have caused a less durable opponent serious problems. McDermott had a couple of flurries, but often threw arm punches into gaps left by a naive opponent, rarely looking to hurt him.

My conclusion? McDermott was clearly NOT robbed, any more so than he was against Danny Williams. Of course, the scandal is not just the winner but the margain; even if we allow the possibility that Fury did win, he sure as hell didn't win by six clear rounds! It is not unreasonable to ask Mr O'Connor to account for what has to be the most lop sided scoring I have witnessed in a British ring!

I completely neutral no associations with any promotional outfit!

Finch wrote:how about someone else starts another thread about it.

Fury did well to last the diustsance, but he had no composure at all, he was like one of those teenagers who are really big but you can kick his arse because he is 'sloppy' and has no idea how to keep things together.


Shameful decision.

First real puncher he faces takes his head clean off.


DD

I agree fisrt big puncher he will be knocked out. He been rushed to quickly. I think Chisora would beat him!

leforge wrote:I agree fisrt big puncher he will be knocked out. He been rushed to quickly. I think Chisora would beat him!

lets have that fight then

I agree lets have the fight, but first surely he have to fight Mcdermott again!

Just watched it. It's a pretty close fight, that's for sure. I'd as easily give it to 1 boxer as the other, but just about edged to McDermott.

At the end of the 7th McD's corner were telling him he was throwing it away and saying no point in crying when at home, at the end of the 9th Fury's were saying to go for the KO.

8-2 no chance, Fury win I could just about stomach, McDermott win it should have been, or a draw was probably the best result.

Both were pretty woeful, McD turned his back a cpl of times too.

Tykemania wrote:I have to say, though I suspect that I am in the minority here, that I had it very close on the night - I don't tend to score per se, so much as note where I think rounds might have gone, and I came up with four clear rounds each and two that could have been reasonably given either way. Had it not been for the Sky commentary, which once again (to my mind) painted a very one sided picture of the fight, I think I would have expected a draw or for Fury to nick the decision.

The Americans say that it depends what you like - McDermott had a much better accuracy figure, but Fury threw *way* more shots, and unlikely Big John, they were for the most part serious shots that would have caused a less durable opponent serious problems. McDermott had a couple of flurries, but often threw arm punches into gaps left by a naive opponent, rarely looking to hurt him.

My conclusion? McDermott was clearly NOT robbed, any more so than he was against Danny Williams. Of course, the scandal is not just the winner but the margain; even if we allow the possibility that Fury did win, he sure as hell didn't win by six clear rounds! It is not unreasonable to ask Mr O'Connor to account for what has to be the most lop sided scoring I have witnessed in a British ring!

The vast majority of the crowd booed the verdict. They didn't have access to the commentary, and the booing was louder than any cheering for either boxer (when they entered the ring or otherwise).

McDermott lives 10 miles up the road. They are hardly going to be impartial.

THEBUTCH wrote:McDermott lives 10 miles up the road. They are hardly going to be impartial.

Yeah, read my post again.