BoxRec

hitman09 wrote:Fvcking ridiculous decision. No fvcking way that scottish pudendum won that fight, never mind by those scores!!!
This is what I hate about boxing.

easy tiger! I had Burns winning by two. You cant blame Burns for Dave Gay Paris' sh1t scoring

sligobhoy67 wrote:

hitman09 wrote:Fvcking ridiculous decision. No fvcking way that scottish pudendum won that fight, never mind by those scores!!!
This is what I hate about boxing.

easy tiger! I had Burns winning by two. You cant blame Burns for Dave Gay Paris' sh1t scoring

hey are the bhoys not scottish? go easy!!

southpaw7 wrote:

sligobhoy67 wrote:

hitman09 wrote:Fvcking ridiculous decision. No fvcking way that scottish pudendum won that fight, never mind by those scores!!!
This is what I hate about boxing.

easy tiger! I had Burns winning by two. You cant blame Burns for Dave Gay Paris' sh1t scoring

hey are the bhoys not scottish? go easy!!

I heard they were Irish - but thats for another day!

That fight could have gone either way really and i was really hoping that O'Hara would get it but f*ck the 117-110 score, that was just mental!

I absolutely hate the way Burns fights, holding all the time from the 5th round on and getting told about it but not getting a point taken off for it. He made that fight horrible to watch and was looking for any way he could to try and get points taken off O'Hara and in the end was looking to just get through it!

Also why did the ref automatically take a point off O'Hara without a warning first?

Burns was leaning in with the head also but it never once got mentioned by the ref!

He needs to get back to the drawing board and learn how to fight going backwards instead of trying to smother his opponents to death!

He needs to stay away from Mitchell and Martinez cos he aint ready!

I thought Burns just got there, but you couldn't complain whatever he went because it was so close. The scoring was abysmal though.

Also lets forget any chances of Burns giving Kevin Mitchell a decent test

Im guessing he wasnt great from what im reading did he look ok or was he woeful?

alexpaterson wrote:Im guessing he wasnt great from what im reading did he look ok or was he woeful?

I had Burns by a round but he did not look good at all, some of that will be credit to O'Hara for keeping the pressure on and keep coming back with work when Burns was static but if Ricky seriously thinks he stands a cat in hells chance on that performance against Martinez or Mitchell, he is deluding himself.

Despite what he says I think he did take O'Hara lightly and we know there are skills there but I think he is what he is, a very decent domestic level operator who ocassionally can make people the level above look bad but that is as far as he goes for me.

He gets completely outworked and possibly stopped by Mitchell and Martinez would do a similar job on him to Johanneson I think.

Always thought there might be another gear there with Burns but having to admit it seems like I was wrong.

GLOBALBOX wrote:

alexpaterson wrote:Im guessing he wasnt great from what im reading did he look ok or was he woeful?

I had Burns by a round but he did not look good at all, some of that will be credit to O'Hara for keeping the pressure on and keep coming back with work when Burns was static but if Ricky seriously thinks he stands a cat in hells chance on that performance against Martinez or Mitchell, he is deluding himself.

Despite what he says I think he did take O'Hara lightly and we know there are skills there but I think he is what he is, a very decent domestic level operator who ocassionally can make people the level above look bad but that is as far as he goes for me.

He gets completely outworked and possibly stopped by Mitchell and Martinez would do a similar job on him to Johanneson I think.

Always thought there might be another gear there with Burns but begging to admit it seems like I was wrong.

Cheers i like Burns but i do think he's found his level Mitchell would beat him Martinez would beat him Cook would be closer though but i think he would still lose

Had Burns by three points, 115/112. I thought the Sky team were way off with their close scoring. I knew it would influence people watching at home. It was a tight fight, with MANY close rounds. Thought Burns deserved to win though.

I should have made a bet.

Before last night, I would've gone for Burns to beat Mitchell. After last night, I think Mitchell would stop him. He was very easy to hit and seems very vulnerable to the body. He complained about low-blows, but if truth be told, some caught him on the belt.

Rediculous scores. Burns wasnt that good but he did just win it . One round, two at the most and OHara was right to question the scoring. Yet another crap FFN with AAA against poor opposition.

cant believe Sky had this close , i was at the fight and Burns did not look in trouble until the later rounds by then he was well ahead IMO

Burns had no head movement last night and look vulnerable to the body. I think Mitchell would break him down and stop him.

Watch without Sky's commentary, and scorecard, and you see a different fight!

Burns looked comfortable early on, probably taking most of the first rounds. He most certainly took the last too, other rounds were close- but take into account the point deduction, and something like 116-112 seems about right.

Credit to Sky for showing more than one live fight, too!

Yep, Sky's card would've fooled a lot of people. It was a lot less closer than they had it.

whicker wrote:Watch without Sky's commentary, and scorecard, and you see a different fight!

Burns looked comfortable early on, probably taking most of the first rounds. He most certainly took the last too, other rounds were close- but take into account the point deduction, and something like 116-112 seems about right.

Credit to Sky for showing more than one live fight, too!

i did watch it with my mate in the pub without commentary and when mccrory's scorecard came up, we were shocked. burns wasnt great but we thought he was in control throughout the whole fight. FFS i could have avoided those big lefts of o'hara all night which wouldnt help him with the scoring. i agree 116-112 is acceptable. bearing in mind that there was a point deduction too

I thought the scoring was a bit wide IMO. Alex Arthurs opponent was a disgrace. Didnt even look like he wanted to be there. Terrible. Can always rely on Frank for making competitive fights

Rob Magic wrote:I thought the scoring was a bit wide IMO. Alex Arthurs opponent was a disgrace. Didnt even look like he wanted to be there. Terrible. Can always rely on Frank for making competitive fights

Ironically, SKY were doing the right thing, too, in showing a warm up bout live before the main event.

Burns won but he´s crap. If O´Hara had a punch he would have knocked him out, and so will every spoiler type fighter with some skills, a 20-5 record and a KO-percentage of above 60%. Kid can´t take heat and a real punch on the chin. Mitchell and Martinez would lay him the F out.

He still won that fight, 8-4/7-5 ish, not a draw, and certainly not a loss.

sharon1888 wrote:cant believe Sky had this close , i was at the fight and Burns did not look in trouble until the later rounds by then he was well ahead IMO

Yeah i was at the fight too and would agree with that.

I had Burns 3 up and thought Sky were doing their usual bullshit commentary where they try and make it sound really close and exciting. I think the 117-110 score was incredibly harsh thopugh, but Burns did won, in an albeit poor fashion. Mitchell would batter him.

Another week, another Dave Parris clanger.