Round-by-Round: Josh Warrington vs. Kid Galahad - 15 June 2019

[Boxerbeetle]

(Insert alan partridge shoulder shrug gif)

[Switch hitter]

I imagine someone told Ron beforehand that Galahad was going to win and he wrote the script accordingly.
Prob only Adam Smith reads a fight worse, and has the same inability to change his pre written script.
Woodhall was very quiet during the fight, maybe he was just allowing us to watch it, or didn't want to openly disagree with Ron.

Who do you think won Marc ?

[Coco]

Who do you think won Marc ?

It was difficult to score due to Warrington constantly missing and Galahad constantly holding, In the end I gave Warrington these close rounds for positivity. 8-4 to Warrington

[Pugilist-specialist]

It was difficult to score due to Warrington constantly missing and Galahad constantly holding, In the end I gave Warrington these close rounds for positivity. 8-4 to Warrington

8 to Warrington? What's that punches landed??
He didn't win 8 rounds.

[Coco]

8 to Warrington? What's that punches landed??
He didn't win 8 rounds.

While I get what you are saying, I've said how I scored it, otherwise I would have prob scored 10 rounds even. As I said in the close rounds his aggression were preferable to Galahads negativity.

[Ruthless-RKO]

[jimcook]

gave it to galahad clear.. warrington only won 3 rounds. galahad nulified warrington right up to the last two rounds. if galahad was called mayweather , they wouldve been raving about his defensive masterclass. galahad is by far the better boxer. warrington very strong ,fast ,and relentless tho, but most of the fight he was hitting fresh air.

[Switch hitter]

It was difficult to score due to Warrington constantly missing and Galahad constantly holding, In the end I gave Warrington these close rounds for positivity. 8-4 to Warrington

Didn't think Warrington was that positive either to be honest. Galahad had him on the back foot more than I thought he would. I just can't see how Josh won more than 3 or 4 rounds.

[Ezzard]

6-6. Thought the ref could have helped the fight by warning for holding earlier.

[Coco]

gave it to galahad clear.. warrington only won 3 rounds. galahad nulified warrington right up to the last two rounds. if galahad was called mayweather , they wouldve been raving about his defensive masterclass. galahad is by far the better boxer. warrington very strong ,fast ,and relentless tho, but most of the fight he was hitting fresh air.

If Galahad had nullified Warringtin, like PBF did against Hatton, and then did some real,offensive work I would say fair enough.
He incessantly held, waiting for an opportunity to arise on the outside which never came. He didn't try and create opportunity, he waited.
You can't be given titles for not doing anything.
I thought the post fight interviews were telling, Galahad knew how negative he had been and he didn't think he had won.
Their tactics were bad, nullifying Warrington was a good plan but he needed to throw more shots, and more damaging shots.

[Coco]

Didn't think Warrington was that positive either to be honest. Galahad had him on the back foot more than I thought he would. I just can't see how Josh won more than 3 or 4 rounds.

Essentially I gave Warrington everything down the home straight, other than one round I think.

[dr_devious]

Hard fight to score but Bari was controlling the pace and landing good shots throughout, he was unlucky not to get the nod

[TheLeprechaun]

I had it 7-5 Warrington but I was being generous to him and taking the crowd /home fighter into account. Galahad just doesn't put enough weight behind his punches. Tap tap tap.

[black panther]

If Galahad had nullified Warringtin, like PBF did against Hatton, and then did some real,offensive work I would say fair enough.
He incessantly held, waiting for an opportunity to arise on the outside which never came. He didn't try and create opportunity, he waited.
You can't be given titles for not doing anything.
I thought the post fight interviews were telling, Galahad knew how negative he had been and he didn't think he had won.
Their tactics were bad, nullifying Warrington was a good plan but he needed to throw more shots, and more damaging shots.

I think it was a good plan but as you say Galahad needed to throw more shots inbetween as opposed to just waiting and pot shotting. As well as the holding, he did make Warrington hit air an awful lot.

[blanca]

Lovely stuff. I have no idea how to insert gifs even after reading the guide

[JimJim2009]

I imagine someone told Ron beforehand that Galahad was going to win and he wrote the script accordingly.
Prob only Adam Smith reads a fight worse, and has the same inability to change his pre written script.
Woodhall was very quiet during the fight, maybe he was just allowing us to watch it, or didn't want to openly disagree with Ron.

[Ruthless-RKO]

According to stats released this week, that seems to be the case.

BoxStat.co had Galahad out-landing Warrington in nine of the twelve rounds. Also out-scoring Warrington in each third of the contest.

[Bigdogsnose]

I hope galahad gets straight back into good fights. Regardless of how boring he is too watch he's shown the level he can compete. Tweak his style a little and get back in the mix, don't just disappear cos he's lost one fight.

TBF - 12-18 Months ago if you had ranked Frampton, Selby, Quigg, Warrington and Galahad - these two would have probably been the bottom two. Galahads performance was at least on a par with Framptons and Selbys.

[bripez]

I hope galahad gets straight back into good fights.

When you say back into good fights, it has been a while.

Before this his best fights were against Jazza Dickens, Josh Wale and Jason Booth (all decent domestic boxers) but these were 7 years ago!

[Bigdogsnose]

When you say back into good fights, it has been a while.

Before this his best fights were against Jazza Dickens, Josh Wale and Jason Booth (all decent domestic boxers) but these were 7 years ago!

Yep, the plural was pushing it. Watched him since the channel 5 days and his career has been a waste. Now he has made the step up, I hope he doesn’t step straight back down.

[THEBUTCH]

Warrington won enough rounds for me, but a fairly close fight. Galahad should have had a point off for excessive holding IMO.

Also listened to the 5 live commentary and Andy Lee is a class act. Jamie Moore good too. They both had Warrington winning, but acknowledged a lot of the rounds were close.

[Ruthless-RKO]

[Ruthless-RKO]

Frnk nerraW said,

Unfortunately, this one was never likely to be pretty because it takes two to make a fight.

The approach of Galahad is not how you go about winning a world title. Throwing a single punch and then holding. That isn’t great defensive work, as some people have suggested, and the referee should have docked a point and stopped the negativity in its tracks.

It needed the referee to be strong and protect the fans and viewers from the tedium they were forced to endure.

I heard that Josh’s dad Sean said afterwards that he now knows why Ricky Hatton didn’t fight Junior Witter. Funnily enough, I was thinking much the same thing myself having tuned in over in Vegas.

I don’t want to bite the hand that feeds us and showcases our fighters so superbly, but I do have to say that, as far as I’m concerned, the commentary team didn’t read the fight well. The constant fawning over the occasional shot thrown by Galahad was a bit over the top and didn’t paint an accurate picture of the fight at all.

[handsofstone]

I agree with Warren slightly but as for the notion of how to win a world title, its the same as any other fight, win more rounds than your opponent, I hate this "you have to take the title from the champion" its bollocks or at least it should be, win at least 7 rounds and that should be enough, fvck all this champion/challenger, home fighter/away fighter, favourite/underdog, any competent judge worth their salt must see both boxers as equals and if they don't then their not fit for purpose

[jamamb]

ya, you just should need to do more then your opponent to win, even if your a nobody challenger and they are a mighty champ

the 'need to take it from the champ' just has relevance in that 1. you actually need to beat the champ to get the belt, whereas the champ keeps his belt with a draw etc. and 2. to the extent that fight judges agree with that flawed motto, it becomes a factor

that said, i also totally agree with warren about the commentary, laughably biased, they were balls deep in kid all night over every little thing