BoxRec

Horse wrote:

stujones wrote:I think they needed a bit more than a bit of a talking too after the 1st round - there should have been some point deductions, that was horrible.

I think had there been another ref in there then Whyte would have got DQ'd - I'm glad we had a conclusive finish in this one and not Joshua vs Whyte 2 - unfinished business.... although part of me still thinks the DQ would have been the right call. There were people calling for the Tyson vs Savarese fight to be reversed after Tyson continued the fight after it being stopped - what Whyte in retaliation wasn't good for the sport, but thankfully we ended up with a good fight so that will largely be forgotten.

I am sure Froch vs Groves 1 was in Foster's thoughts when he decided to act as he did. He didn't want to get the terrible treatment in his most high profile outing since Froch vs Groves 1.

Joshua should have been disqualified if someone had to be disqualified.

How many times is he going to get away with hitting his opponent after the bell?

In the interview afterwards he said it was the ref's job to stop him punching after the bell, not his. The guy is a bloody loon.

handsofstone wrote:

charliebox324 wrote:Geronimo You Are A Troll.Who Hides Behind Your User Name.I Watched A Fight Between 2 Boxers Who Where Fuelled Full Of Tension Anger Amosity And Real Dislike Towards One Another.In Front Of A Huge Crowd.Howard Foster Should Be Applaud And Praised For The Way He Handled The Fight. This Forum Does Have Some Good Posters With Good Input And Interesting Discussions.However On A Sunday Evening Reading Some Womble On Here Talking Utter poo.Gets My Back Up.So Geronimo Get On The Phone To The Doctor In The Morning As Your One And Only Brain Cell Is On The Blink.

Fvck me Chazz how the hell do you manage to type like that

JamieM wrote:Worst referee in the game, a blatant cheat, home fighters are given blind eye all time, it's consistent

taffytoon wrote:

JamieM wrote:Worst referee in the game, a blatant cheat, home fighters are given blind eye all time, it's consistent

You sir are an absolute idiot

stujones wrote:
Even if you think both were equally as guilty for the first round fracas then both should have been docked points.

stujones wrote:

taffytoon wrote:

stujones wrote:
So you don't feel Whyte deserved a point deduction for nearly punching the ref to get to Joshua about 10 seconds after the bell had clearly gone?

Could not deduct one without the other so why bother? He read them the riot act prior to round 2 starting = spot on refereeing

Even if you think both were equally as guilty for the first round fracas then both should have been docked points. You cannot act like that with just a warning..... you should have warnings, then points docked and then DQ'd - that was close to a DQ as you get if you ask me.

I think Whyte's retaliation was worst than Joshua being fractionally (IMO) late. I thought Joshua deserved a point deduction for his second late infringement though. Let alone the in ring infringement - I always thought that means an instant DQ? I was fully expecting it to be declared a No Contest after the first round..... yes, glad it wasn't - but I thought there was clear rules and outsiders coming into the ring.

So I disagree, I think Whyte's intentional attack deserved at least 1 point deduction.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

stujones wrote:

taffytoon wrote: Could not deduct one without the other so why bother? He read them the riot act prior to round 2 starting = spot on refereeing

Even if you think both were equally as guilty for the first round fracas then both should have been docked points. You cannot act like that with just a warning..... you should have warnings, then points docked and then DQ'd - that was close to a DQ as you get if you ask me.

I think Whyte's retaliation was worst than Joshua being fractionally (IMO) late. I thought Joshua deserved a point deduction for his second late infringement though. Let alone the in ring infringement - I always thought that means an instant DQ? I was fully expecting it to be declared a No Contest after the first round..... yes, glad it wasn't - but I thought there was clear rules and outsiders coming into the ring.

So I disagree, I think Whyte's intentional attack deserved at least 1 point deduction.

I disagree, a stern warning at the end of the 1st, and a warning that if anything similar happened it would be a point off is enough.

Entering the ring DURING a round I thought was immediate DQ, not in between rounds.

JamieM wrote:Nothing to do with ronnie my opinion of him, I find him a blatant cheat, Ronnie fight with maxi he won, his fight with James was tight but didn't do enough and his fight with cacace he had no impact, not bitter I find him blatant and more so than the rest, I have spoke with people who know he's a cheat!! Most you guys are boxing fans and don't actually see the inside of what goes down. Boxing is a bit like wwe.

JamieM wrote:Nothing to do with ronnie my opinion of him, I find him a blatant cheat, Ronnie fight with maxi he won, his fight with James was tight but didn't do enough and his fight with cacace he had no impact, not bitter I find him blatant and more so than the rest, I have spoke with people who know he's a cheat!! Most you guys are boxing fans and don't actually see the inside of what goes down. Boxing is a bit like wwe.