BoxRec

fasteddie wrote:

Bomber 1 wrote:

fasteddie wrote: degale walks away with an estimated 100 G's in only only his 9th fight,my mate challenged for the british but only got 18 G's were is the justice in that fair enough if degale wins the title in style then warren can pay him 100 G's but not to challenge for it

Whats money got to do with anything?? is your mate an Olympic Gold Medalist to??? ???

Both were paid well and the crowd got a good fight lets just be happy boxing is in the media spotlight for the right reasons eh mate...

money has everything to do with it,someone in their 9th fight getting 100G's is too much and if money has nothing to with to do it fight your next fight for free then,im not having a go but i think "ye he won the gold medal probably got a huge signing on fee from warren so to he should get pay days like everyone else who is a challenger until he wins the title" then call the shots on wages just my opinion, you dont have to agree with me. and no my mate wasn't a gold medalist at the olympic's but he would give any medalist a run 4 their money in the pro rank's

Mate you have to understand by going the Olympics and winning gold he's entitled to large sums!! He is in there fighting and he's fought a good fighter in paul and don't be fooled mate last night could have been hi last payday had it gone wrong for him, Im in the same boat as ya mate probably but you can't begrude anyone getting good money in a boxing ring as it is BRUTAL!! Anyone who gets paid well, I say good on ya!!

Bomber 1 wrote:

fasteddie wrote:

Bomber 1 wrote:
Whats money got to do with anything?? is your mate an Olympic Gold Medalist to??? ???

Both were paid well and the crowd got a good fight lets just be happy boxing is in the media spotlight for the right reasons eh mate...

money has everything to do with it,someone in their 9th fight getting 100G's is too much and if money has nothing to with to do it fight your next fight for free then,im not having a go but i think "ye he won the gold medal probably got a huge signing on fee from warren so to he should get pay days like everyone else who is a challenger until he wins the title" then call the shots on wages just my opinion, you dont have to agree with me. and no my mate wasn't a gold medalist at the olympic's but he would give any medalist a run 4 their money in the pro rank's

Mate you have to understand by going the Olympics and winning gold he's entitled to large sums!! He is in there fighting and he's fought a good fighter in paul and don't be fooled mate last night could have been hi last payday had it gone wrong for him, Im in the same boat as ya mate probably but you can't begrude anyone getting good money in a boxing ring as it is BRUTAL!! Anyone who gets paid well, I say good on ya!!

got to say hat's of to you tony cause everytime you fight you get critisicised on here and you come on never lose your cool and give an honest opinion of what went wrong and what went right,from your interview's on tv you'd think you would be snapping at people who say bad stuff but like an honest pro you give your view and take all the sh1t on the chin well done,i have critisised you in both your last fight's but reading your comment's your an honest fella,have a good relaxing crimbo tony and good luck for 2011

Good luck Tony, but damn fella, just tighten up a little

You got time, maybe a move to CW? Might work out better?

However on the note about referee's, I cant really say what I want as my post had been deleted, but read between the lines, paymaster - happy - more work in future.

sorry wrong thread.

i could of slapped dave parris last night :!: i actually hate him now as his interfearance allway's seem's distressed & hasty :!: crap ref sorry :!:

Thanks fasteddie you too, like I say mate give and take and if people can't stand the heat get outta the kitchen.. Have a good one pal..

hurlock wrote:i could of slapped dave parris last night :!: i actually hate him now as his interfearance allway's seem's distressed & hasty :!: crap ref sorry :!:

Made up when I found out Parris was retiring. Far too 'dodgy' for my liking.

errible stoppage last night, my previous comments would appear to have been deleted, funny that!

No way should the ref have stopped Tony but also no way should he have stopped Ovill either. When you see Enzo Macc being able to carry on at the magnificent 7 show just before he was brutally KO'd, where he was in a far worse condition to continue than any fighter last night, i wonder if that has any influence on the ref's stoppages being slightly premature on a similar allegedly show?
It's a fine balance and a difficult decision for the ref but i would suggest the right time would be somewhere in the middle.

The Bomber stoppage is in the Manfredo / Calzaghe class of horrible stoppages.

brian13 wrote:The Bomber stoppage is in the Manfredo / Calzaghe class of horrible stoppages.

The Manfredo was stopped in 'anticipation' of what might happened to him had the fight gone on as i remember it, no serious damge was done at all.

Final round wrote:

brian13 wrote:The Bomber stoppage is in the Manfredo / Calzaghe class of horrible stoppages.

The Manfredo was stopped in 'anticipation' of what might happened to him had the fight gone on as i remember it, no serious damge was done at all.

That's slightly different.

The board official that sanctioned the bout should have resigned, or been sacked immediately.

It was a disgrace, Manfredo is a domestic level light middle/middle..... would you have put Wayne Alexander in with Tommy Hearns or Marvin Hagler?

If McKenzie had carried on he would have had his head caved in IMO

Counter-puncher wrote:If McKenzie had carried on he would have had his head caved in IMO

i think ovil was very vunerable, but very dangerous comes alongside that

that fight was going to end spectacular & the ref robbed us.

i basically agree with Tony's take on it, he was getting to Ovill with the right hands to the body.

and Ovill didn't react well to the ref's questioning. the questions are there for a reason. for the fighter's protection. if he doesn't answer them properly what can the ref do?

Thinking back to Gatti Ward 1 and 'Frank Cappuccino's' style of refereeing somewhere in the middle would be fine.

Counter-puncher wrote:i basically agree with Tony's take on it, he was getting to Ovill with the right hands to the body.

and Ovill didn't react well to the ref's questioning. the questions are there for a reason. for the fighter's protection. if he doesn't answer them properly what can the ref do?

Call the fight over straight away thats what, if he reasoning was because Ovill did not answer his questions then he would have waved the fight off. So because he didn't you have to ask why did he stop it so soon after letting him continue? I would love to hear the explanation.

Bomber 1 wrote:Thanks fasteddie you too, like I say mate give and take and if people can't stand the heat get outta the kitchen.. Have a good one pal..

Out of interest, what happened with the 2nd knockdown? As I said in another thread, that knockdown looked really heavy compared to how you reacted to it getting up...were you off balance then, or is your head made of rubber?

Good fight by the way, thanks for the entertainment!

The stoppage of McKenzie ruined a really exciting fight. McKenzie was strong on his feet, he was good to fight on - no problem and the ref was a disgrace in stopping McKenzie without giving him the same opportunity afforded to Bellew when he got dropped heavily in the second. These type of crappy stoppages raises the impression that an 'opponent' culture pervades referees as much as the 'opponent' of a home fighter.

I am wondering if some of the posters in this thread actually saw the fight or are just professional moaners and / or conspiracy theorists.

The ref DID allow McKenzie to continue, albeit not for long.

To me it then looked like Bellew landed a solid right hand and Edwards saw something in McKenzie's demeanour that THEN made him stop it.

It may have been the wrong decision. But I think it was made with the best intentions.

Anyway, a rematch seems like in order. Both men have something to prove.

Counter-puncher wrote:iand Ovill didn't react well to the ref's questioning. the questions are there for a reason. for the fighter's protection. if he doesn't answer them properly what can the ref do?

Call if off Taylor-wise.

Darling wrote:I am wondering if some of the posters in this thread actually saw the fight or are just professional moaners and / or conspiracy theorists.

The ref DID allow McKenzie to continue, albeit not for long.

To me it then looked like Bellew landed a solid right hand and Edwards saw something in McKenzie's demeanour that THEN made him stop it.

It may have been the wrong decision. But I think it was made with the best intentions.

Anyway, a rematch seems like in order. Both men have something to prove.

I think people in general are just becoming a little sick of the soft stoppages we are seeing generally in British fights.

Obviously the safety of the fighters is paramount but some of these stoppages are like what you see in the amateurs..... not even giving someone a chance to recover or fight back before jumping in.

Given that plenty of pros post on here it would be interesting to know if a referee actually did, and find out their take on what is being said, both on here and on ESB - seemingly every week.

Notice there's very few mentions of soft stoppages from fans relating to Euro and US fights - because their refs seem to know when to step in.

ejruane wrote:Boxing is the world's hardest 'sport' and I personally hate to think of any fighter working and training for weeks, only to be cheated by officials. However I think Bomber makes a good point. The fact is what makes it boxing and not just two fellers knocking the shlte out of each other, IS the rules. If there is/was not the right response to the questions, the ref MUST stop it. Simple as that.

That's it. Tony's explanation was very sound, but if that IS the explanation, then the ref should have stopped it at that moment, not later, when Ovill was apparently no worse off than he was a few seconds ago.

The knockdown was a good one but not as bad as Tony's second one, which looked like a piano had dropped on his head. Yes, he got up and recovered quickly and was winning the fight anyway, but there did seem to be some inconsistency.

Finally, Tony, nobody is criticising you, and you seem to realise that. You get all the respect for turning it around. It's the reffing being called into question.

oliverfennell wrote:The knockdown was a good one but not as bad as Tony's second one, which looked like a piano had dropped on his head. Yes, he got up and recovered quickly and was winning the fight anyway, but there did seem to be some inconsistency.

Was he winning the fight? As I recall the second KD came in the second with the first in the first, therefore giving Ovill a 10-8 lead. Therefore, he wasn't winning the fight. Too hard KD's, but one got treated very differentely from the other. I would also buy Bomber's explanation, but surely the ref should've waved it off straight away. I wouldn't have had a problem with that if Ovill was indeed non-responsive.

Dioufy wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:The knockdown was a good one but not as bad as Tony's second one, which looked like a piano had dropped on his head. Yes, he got up and recovered quickly and was winning the fight anyway, but there did seem to be some inconsistency.

Was he winning the fight? As I recall the second KD came in the second with the first in the first, therefore giving Ovill a 10-8 lead. Therefore, he wasn't winning the fight. Too hard KD's, but one got treated very differentely from the other. I would also buy Bomber's explanation, but surely the ref should've waved it off straight away. I wouldn't have had a problem with that if Ovill was indeed non-responsive.

OK, I didn't score the fight, so to rephrase: he seemed to be in the ascendancy.

He probably would have won, and probably in the same round (it was a heavy knockdown), but that's not the point. Beforehand, you would have said he probably wouldn't have had such a scare.