BoxRec

540649 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 02:36

CaptainSpacerod wrote: ↑27 Feb 2022, 19:06 Can someone explain to me how it works.

So if a pro boxer needs a license to box is it only the BBBC who can give it him ? And does the promoter of any show need a license from the board before he can put on that show ? And who bestows on the BBBC the power to grant these licences ?

And what’s to stop some genuine boxing people setting up for example the UKBBC and licensing fighters and promoters under their auspices

There is nothing to stop anyone starting up a boxing commission. All these high profile boxing people that voiced concern at the weekend could just hand their licences back and either form or use another commission. The problem is the broadcasters and building a new infrastructure. It would take a dedicated team and a lot of money to form a new board. Referees, inspectors,stewards,etc. All those boxing people that voiced their disapproval at the weekend,should hand their licences in and keep condemning the board. But they won't imo because they make half decent money in a sport that treats them so badly

One of the many arguments on scoring fights is that the judges can be influenced/swayed by those close to ringside like the fighters corners and those supporting the fighters inner ringside and the tv commentators.

A suggestion of judges wearing headphones may help i have seen some judges abroad do this.

With regards Robert Smith and his position as the Secretary of the BBBofC it is very difficult to see him being removed.

With regards the Catterall/Taylor scoring … absolutely nothing will be done about it as it seems some at the BBBofC are beyond reproach.

With that said there are some BBBofC officials who are outstanding at what they do. Sadly there is too few of them.

CaptainSpacerod wrote: ↑27 Feb 2022, 19:43

Coco wrote: ↑27 Feb 2022, 19:21

CaptainSpacerod wrote: ↑27 Feb 2022, 19:06 Can someone explain to me how it works.

So if a pro boxer needs a license to box is it only the BBBC who can give it him ? And does the promoter of any show need a license from the board before he can put on that show ? And who bestows on the BBBC the power to grant these licences ?

And what’s to stop some genuine boxing people setting up for example the UKBBC and licensing fighters and promoters under their auspices

Anyone can licence a boxer with their own bodies but it is only the BBBoC which is recognised by the relevant bodies.
Therefore other licences are worthless

Who are the “relevant bodies” ?

The EBU, WBC, WBA, WBO and the IBF as well as the different national bodies around the world like the New York State athletic commission.

Smith has done an interview with the Telegraph. Frustratingly he went straight on the defensive (a close scrappy fight, lots of close rounds, he had Catterall pipping it).

This doesn’t help his cause as no one else thought it was a close fight. Catterall wasn’t dominating but he was winning rounds fairly clearly.

too predictable unfortunetly

Coco wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 07:11 The EBU, WBC, WBA, WBO and the IBF as well as the different national bodies around the world like the New York State athletic commission.

Right Ok i get it now cheers

Wouldn't this be a good time for the promoters to get together and draw a line in the sand and set up a new board ? Surely Eddie and Frank have enough contacts at some of those bodies to make a decent case for them to recognise the new board. And while they're at it they could start a cull of all the alphabet organisations and fail to recognise the WBA or the IBO or whoever.

Frank started one... A few have tried. It may not be a government body, but The BBBOC are very much the establishment.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 08:22 Frank started one... A few have tried. It may not be a government body, but The BBBOC are very much the establishment.

Maybe new start ups have previously failed because they were done unilaterally ?

If the main guys put something concrete together it would surely stand a better chance - it's in all of their interests to do something to change things

He's an awful, arrogant man who is seemingly as oblivious as to how he is complicit in killing boxing as he is on how to read a fight. Don't like him one bit.

jimmystone wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 09:00 He's an awful, arrogant man who is seemingly as oblivious as to how he is complicit in killing boxing as he is on how to read a fight. Don't like him one bit.

He can read a fight. He chooses not to when his members are involved.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 09:02

jimmystone wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 09:00 He's an awful, arrogant man who is seemingly as oblivious as to how he is complicit in killing boxing as he is on how to read a fight. Don't like him one bit.

He can read a fight. He chooses not to when his members are involved.

He's a liar then which is a greater sin,

Yes, he was a half decent pro and comes from a strong boxing family.

Is Robert Smith or any high profile ref/official on Twitter? Might be a rule they are not allowed.
Easier to sweep things under the carpet when they avoid the social media storm.

CaptainSpacerod wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 08:54

mickey1975 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 08:22 Frank started one... A few have tried. It may not be a government body, but The BBBOC are very much the establishment.

Maybe new start ups have previously failed because they were done unilaterally ?

If the main guys put something concrete together it would surely stand a better chance - it's in all of their interests to do something to change things

The main guys do have the power if they worked well together(extremely unlikely) and at the end of the day could you trust promoters, who have invested a lot of money in their fighters, to be neutral?
An obvious conflict of interests!
Things essentially work well for the promoters so why rock the boat? As things stand they can distance themselves from bad decisions when it suits.
And would I trust a politician to do it?

Fightnight Scores wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 09:32 Is Robert Smith or any high profile ref/official on Twitter? Might be a rule they are not allowed.
Easier to sweep things under the carpet when they avoid the social media storm.

Most referees are on facebook. A few people left some messages on IJL wall.

In this day and age of hysterical lunatics Robert Smith is doing a good job.

He was a solid pro and understands the game.

The one thing that Simon Block and John Morris didn't have to deal with was social media...and the toxic & poisonous scum who think they know better

THEBUTCH wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 21:27 In this day and age of hysterical lunatics Robert Smith is doing a good job.

He was a solid pro and understands the game.

The one thing that Simon Block and John Morris didn't have to deal with was social media...and the toxic & poisonous scum who think they know better

we should give a fair play to robert smith for defending his judges no matter what, am i right?

I've been lucky enough to go behind the scenes (admittedly only on small hall shows) but although I was surprised by some things, the shows overall are run well.

The BBBofC is probably the best controlling board in the world. Us British fans and licensed boxers would be a lot worse off without them.

Without the BBBofC the landscape would descend into a free for all with no proud history that we have to reflect on.

Other than Japan, please point towards the many boxing boards that run an exemplary outfit that garner universal respect ???

is there universal respect for the officiating in the uk?

As opposed to where in the world where they've nailed it ?

Honestly speaking, Brtiain and Japan are the only places in the world that I think you get the fairest shake. That's not bad, when you consider all the countries on offer. Just my opinion.

you're making the UK to be some leading world standard in fair officiating, what exactly separates us? when i watch fights from other countries i never get the impression that 'wow, this just isnt up to our level of honesty'

I'm going to throw it back to you...who are all of these other countries who provide the gold standard in boxing officiating and fair decisions ?

i think nearly every country where boxing regularly takes place at least matches the UK for fair officiating, at least from the fights ive seen and read about. we really dont do anything that puts us on another level from the rest of the world for reffing and judging. and having a guy at the helm who absolutely refuses to hold anyone account isnt some gold standard mate

in fact, i'd say as a major boxing country, with bigger money on the line and more influential promoters, we are more prone to it than many places where less is at stake. we are like the usa in that regard.

what is it that makes you rank our officiating so highly, that simply isnt in the rest of the world (except japan)?

Firstly I don't tend to blow up when a decision is announced and it doesn't tally spot on with my card.

Secondly,I've attended one or two shows over the years that generally return reasonable verdicts....with some exceptions.

The whole conspiracy theory is, IMO, lame and clutching at straws. There are some bad decisions IMO but in a very subjective sport that is going to happen. Britain is putting on a hell of a lot of shows so the ratio of unpopular decisions is going to increase.

Boxing is subjective, so if decisions varried a bit thats fine... But i'd say 99% of questionable decisions go to the A side, its not a variation, its a bias...

Imagine if in the olympic 100 meters they use to give bolt a 5 meter head start because he is popular.... thats what they are doing in boxing and its a joke.