Page 3 of 4
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 18 Mar 2010, 23:35
by 'Frilla
8)
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 00:07
by AntonS
N2 Shape wrote:A point deduction would have at least meant the fight carried on a little longer, perhaps sparking Cameron into action or even Hoppa,after the point deduction if Hoppa had carried on as he was then yes I could see grounds for a DQ. But as a PPV and the paying punters who turned up on the night the ref has a duty to keep the fight alive for as long as possible so long as fighter safety etc is taken into consideration.
NZ Sky should've replayed 1st round 5 times, topped it up with 2nd & none of ya would've been the wiser

Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 00:25
by iron rhino
Heavyweight brain explosion!ref wins fight!what a joke did he know it was a 12 rnd fight,that kind of wrestling could have went on for at least another 2 rnds it was obvious shane wanted to get hoppa into the later rnds,and,was gunshy after his tua loss.He tried to outbox tua early and got destroyed for it,so his plan looked to be hold, hold, hold,and frustrate hoppa.hoppa was willing to ablige the holding,two things were going to eventuate.1hoppa gets tired and gets KO'd in later rnds
2hoppa gets dq'd
Ugly fight to say the least,goodluck to camrons next apponent!lol
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 00:41
by AntonS
Yeah, in a 12 round contest, refs should allow at least 5 rounds of bullshit before the guys get down to business

Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 01:24
by N2 Shape
I did say after 5 or 6 rounds I'd be pulling the pin on them but after 1 and a half rounds..........sometimes a little common sense has to come into play, its a damn fight its a contact sport let them push and shove each other around for a few rounds they'll quickly tire of that if not then start getting harsh on them dont blow it up the moment you as the ref gets sick of it
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 01:46
by iron rhino
AntonS wrote:Yeah, in a 12 round contest, refs should allow at least 5 rounds of bullshit before the guys get down to business

In that particular fight ,yes!
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 03:23
by bigred83
have to agree with N2 shape and iron rhino, there is always wrestling in the HWs, its not ideal, but it is what it is unfortunately, cant change it now. let it go for a lil while, at least give THE FANS a chance to see wat they PAID FOR, and that is a fight. and once again yes wat they were doing wasnt wat should happen, but at least try and do sumfin to get it going, not just call it off first sign of trouble.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 03:50
by foxdog1923
Seems to me that Hopoate tried to do what Garth Wood did to Kariz in the Australian Contender final. Getting inside by clinching and then unleashing when about to be seperated. It just looked all wrong the way Hopoate went about it, Hopoate didnt want anyone to see any real boxing he just wanted to get in close to Shane and start bombing away. As soon as that seemed to be failing he was disqualified and left the ring in a flash and left his corner protesting for him and begging the reff to continue the fight while Hopoate was in the shower thinking about what to spend his money on.
Those commentators thought that Cameron was holding on...haha. Aussie commentators are a crack up.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 04:20
by buster007
cameron was holding too yes.
i don't blame hoppa for heading for the dressing room, nothing could change the refs stupid call, and besides hoppa was pissed and probably would only have hit the ref. having a minute or two alone probably saved his career.
there is no defence for what the ref did. he was wrong and even he knows it.
u know it was a bad call when camerons corner thought it was a joke. they were in shock too.
then he had the hide to let holliday get the shit beat out of him but failed to put a stop to that fight. his own corner pulled the pin after 11 rounds of torture. the ref would have been in his rights to stop the fight at round 5/6.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 04:30
by dberry
In yesterday's Age newspaper, Hoppa said he was going to bash Cameron's manager after his fight with Cameron. The question is did he?
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 05:21
by Rogue
This fight should have never ever happened in the first bloody place. It's a sad indictment to where heavy weight boxing is in this part of the world. Hoppa cam for the hug (literally) and it's time once and for all to put a stop to donkeys of the likes entering the ring. Really thought the door was shut after he got wasted by Col Wilson..... oh well......
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 05:32
by AntonS
1. Hoppa takes the fight
2. Hoppa withdraws from the fight
3. Hoppa has second thoughts = $$$$$$
4. Hoppa takes the fight again
5. Hoppa looks for a way out
6. Hoppa gets his wish
7. Hoppa puts on an act to cover his arse
8. Hoppa gets his $$$$$
9. Everyone is pissed off
10. THE END
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 06:57
by buster007
tbh, the hating on hoppa is pointless.
the ref is the only one who should be copping it. no point having a sook about hopoate.
people bag the guy and say he is hopeless, blah, blah, blah, but the same guy dominated mirovic twice when he was practically our no.1 heavyweight. but once again what do u whingers want, mirovic vs wilson IX ffs. u have leapai, de mori etc. etc. but i don't see any of them stepping up and taking a risk. if hoppa is that pathetic why is leapai fighting hoppa's left-overs.
and what's it to u whether he pulls out and then changes his mind. unless u were camerons management why the fornicate could u care less.
i agree hoppa has few skills, and is a bit of a novelty, but i'd prefer to watch his fights rather then pay $50 to watch mundine fight cab driver no.15.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 07:09
by Rogue
buster007 wrote:tbh, the hating on hoppa is pointless.
the ref is the only one who should be copping it. no point having a sook about hopoate.
people bag the guy and say he is hopeless, blah, blah, blah, but the same guy dominated mirovic twice when he was practically our no.1 heavyweight. but once again what do u whingers want, mirovic vs wilson IX ffs. u have leapai, de mori etc. etc. but i don't see any of them stepping up and taking a risk. if hoppa is that pathetic why is leapai fighting hoppa's left-overs.
and what's it to u whether he pulls out and then changes his mind. unless u were camerons management why the eff could u care less.
i agree hoppa has few skills, and is a bit of a novelty, but i'd prefer to watch his fights rather then pay $50 to watch mundine fight cab driver no.15.
all the more reason why Oz need to up the game in the heavy ranks. Just because there are poop heavies doesn't mean the fee paying public and fans need to be shafted. Furthermore the Cameron camp have to look at better quality fights and not do the sport an injustice by fighting donkeys at the Flemington race course.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 17:49
by toppity
Rogue wrote:buster007 wrote:tbh, the hating on hoppa is pointless.
the ref is the only one who should be copping it. no point having a sook about hopoate.
people bag the guy and say he is hopeless, blah, blah, blah, but the same guy dominated mirovic twice when he was practically our no.1 heavyweight. but once again what do u whingers want, mirovic vs wilson IX ffs. u have leapai, de mori etc. etc. but i don't see any of them stepping up and taking a risk. if hoppa is that pathetic why is leapai fighting hoppa's left-overs.
and what's it to u whether he pulls out and then changes his mind. unless u were camerons management why the eff could u care less.
i agree hoppa has few skills, and is a bit of a novelty, but i'd prefer to watch his fights rather then pay $50 to watch mundine fight cab driver no.15.
all the more reason why Oz need to up the game in the heavy ranks. Just because there are poop heavies doesn't mean the fee paying public and fans need to be shafted. Furthermore the Cameron camp have to look at better quality fights and not do the sport an injustice by fighting
donkeys at the Flemington race course.
LOL...i get it...that's funny.
Only joking. I agree with you completely. In the end it's prize fighting. That prize get procured from somewhere. Let's guess where that is. Yep...you got it right. It's comes from sponsors and promoters. These parties get their money from the public. Bingo...you and me. Now, there is always the argument that the promoter has to do what he/she has to do to make a living from boxing. But that is as short sighted as it can possibly be.
Here is the secret (IMO), and I'll give it for free. Boxing is declining. The qualities of the shows are declining and the purses are declining (except at the extreme elite level). To improve these thing more money needs to be attracted to the sport. This of course means more of the public and more sponsors need to be involved. How do you do this? Sports fans, especially Australians, will patronise any sport where the quality competitions is regularly high. How do we get better competitions? Pay more money to the contestants, and offer more incentive to achieve. Fighters love more money (so do I). But pay the money in slightly more innovative ways (like the UFC, sorry to mention their name). Pay bonuses for the best KO, best fight of the night, gutsiest performance etc’. Not only does this create incentive via the money, it drives the ego of the fighters to ‘win’ such things. This will make for more willing contests.
In business, sometimes you have to take short term pain for long term gain. It happens everyday. It is the difference between running a business to make a wage or make a profit. I’m not telling anyone here anything new. I just think the promoters need to show more flair (for want of a better term) to really make an impact in the sport. It would take a lot of work and financial risk, but the benefits to the long term bottom line of the sport, as well as the well being of the sport, would be great. If something is not done, then all the active participants will one day stop and look at each other and wonder "where did everyione go?"
Sorry for the rant.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 19 Mar 2010, 20:23
by buster007
at the end of the day, hopoate was chosen as an opponent because he creates interest. he is a bit of a loose canon but the guy can throw bombs that can literally knock anybody out. that is what people want to see from the heavys, they want them trading bombs. they know he has limited skills but they know he pretty much always has a chance of landing a ripper.
a bit of contraversy always helps when u r trying to promote bouts that don't contain kostya tszyu or jeff fenech. it is tough to promote boxing these days, hence the reason barry michael was extremely pissed off.
i mean even after mike tyson bit evanders ear off, the ref still let the fight continue and it wasn't untill he tried to take another chunk before the fight was stopped. there was too much money and effort to get the fight to happen to pull the plug when the ref should have. correct me if i'm wrong.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 01:20
by Rogue
Mate comparing Tyson to Hoppa is ridiculous. Hoppa at best is a low level brawler. Now I am being very diplomatic and charitable others would call him a total shit head as far as his boxing is concerned.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 02:29
by AntonS
Hoppa ain't a boxer & is too old to ever become one.
I appreciate he's got 8 kids to feed, but that's his problem & not OZ pro boxing industry's
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 03:40
by Rogue
spot on.... his hot dog business might be a better way to feed them....literally.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 04:45
by Hounddawg
Disgusting decision, one of the worst i've ever seen, slightly worse than the Bahram/Costello decision.
What a disgusting display of refereeing,if thats Australian standards, there will be a huge problem in bringing international fighters here.
Hoppa might not be much of a boxer, but you can't cheat a man out of the sport, rules are rules and they apply to everyone....one point,two points then the DQ.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 05:10
by AntonS
Hounddawg wrote:Disgusting decision, one of the worst i've ever seen, slightly worse than the Bahram/Costello decision.
What a disgusting display of refereeing,if thats Australian standards, there will be a huge problem in bringing international fighters here.
Hoppa might not be much of a boxer, but you can't cheat a man out of the sport, rules are rules and they apply to everyone....one point,two points then the DQ.
He should've taken warnings as point deductions. There's no rule that says point(s) deduction must be applied before DQ. :P
I was dying for a piss anyway........ not to mention another pint

Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 07:18
by isabella
AntonS wrote:1. Hoppa takes the fight
2. Hoppa withdraws from the fight
3. Hoppa has second thoughts = $$$$$$
4. Hoppa takes the fight again
5. Hoppa looks for a way out
6. Hoppa gets his wish
7. Hoppa puts on an act to cover his arse
8. Hoppa gets his $$$$$
9. Everyone is pissed off
10. THE END

:P
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 19:40
by Marlin
buster007 wrote:tbh, the hating on hoppa is pointless.
the ref is the only one who should be copping it. no point having a sook about hopoate.
people bag the guy and say he is hopeless, blah, blah, blah, but the same guy dominated mirovic twice when he was practically our no.1 heavyweight. but once again what do u whingers want, mirovic vs wilson IX ffs. u have leapai, de mori etc. etc. but i don't see any of them stepping up and taking a risk. if hoppa is that pathetic why is leapai fighting hoppa's left-overs.
and what's it to u whether he pulls out and then changes his mind. unless u were camerons management why the eff could u care less.
i agree hoppa has few skills, and is a bit of a novelty, but i'd prefer to watch his fights rather then pay $50 to watch mundine fight cab driver no.15.
Very, very well said mate. I agree completely.
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 19:46
by Marlin
Rogue wrote:Mate comparing Tyson to Hoppa is ridiculous. Hoppa at best is a low level brawler. Now I am being very diplomatic and charitable others would call him a total poop head as far as his boxing is concerned.
It seems you're taking this entirely the wrong way, but I think you know what he means yet just taking the chance to disagree anyway...
Re: Cameron v Hopoate
Posted: 20 Mar 2010, 19:49
by 'Frilla
G n F :>