BoxRec

MachoMan09 wrote:To be fair, all those watching on television had exactly the same view of the action. The fight may have looked very different from IJL's vantage point...

Very true, only those on his side of the ring will have seen what he saw - or not

He scored the fight that Jamie Cox won by 2 rounds in Jamie's favour too.

Ultimately I don't share people's "hatred" of the man, but I will say this:

His poor judging impacts on a hard-working boxer's career. And that is absolutely unforgivable when it's as clear cut as it was.

I remember he had Martin Power (sorry Londonirish ) winning the fight against Munyai at the time of the stoppage

always respected ian john lewis that went right out the window last night fxck me a draw i gave purdy a share of 2 rounds thats it for me i had 40 on purdy to stop lines hagler it was a tip from the goods

Made a threat about this guy after the Hopkins-Pascal bout.

Nothing will happen though. He is the definition of Boxing.

(Edited by Mod), Incompetent, Careless - bout after bout. Pretty much the reason why i've all but lost interest in Boxing.

Do referees get their eyes tested for their licence???? I think John-Lewis is either corrupt (an unfounded accusation) or needs Specsavers

He's also got a squeeky voice that gets on my nerves. Just saying.

Any ref with a catchphrase is a crank in my opinion...

DONT LIKE THESE WITCH HUNT THREADS

i thought he reffed the hopkins pascal fight well, hopkins is never easy to referee as we know.

I dont think Ian is corrupt and ther are pletny of other officials who are more deserving of the bile shown in this thread.

Whever I have met Ian he has come accorss as a gentle unassuming humble man who probably would be most upsetyto read some of the unfounded allegations in here.

Sometimes we make mistakes and sometimes we make lots of mistakes together for a period.

Judge him when his reffing career is over, he isnt as bad as some.

Joe cortez for one a supposed top ref has turned into a complete liablity over the past few years and is guilty of far worse misdemanours than Ian is.

Give the bloke a break he may have had a rough patch but who hasnt in their careers? To label him corrupt is unfair and libellous and in my opinion over the top.

and if anyone starts on Richie davis they need a fackin good hiding. He is the best in britain in my opinion.

J wrote:DONT LIKE THESE WITCH HUNT THREADS

i thought he reffed the hopkins pascal fight well, hopkins is never easy to referee as we know.

I dont think Ian is corrupt and ther are pletny of other officials who are more deserving of the bile shown in this thread.

Whever I have met Ian he has come accorss as a gentle unassuming humble man who probably would be most upsetyto read some of the unfounded allegations in here.

Sometimes we make mistakes and sometimes we make lots of mistakes together for a period.

Judge him when his reffing career is over, he isnt as bad as some.

Joe cortez for one a supposed top ref has turned into a complete liablity over the past few years and is guilty of far worse misdemanours than Ian is.

Give the bloke a break he may have had a rough patch but who hasnt in their careers? To label him corrupt is unfair and libellous and in my opinion over the top.

and if anyone starts on Richie davis they need a fackin good hiding. He is the best in britain in my opinion.

Some good points, I don't see the big deal with his ref performance in Pascal vs Hopkins 2 - other than he didn't wipe down Hopkins' gloves after the Press ups.

As I said, I used to consider IJL a top top ref (I still think he is very good, Klitchsko vs Briggs aside) and an top judge - but I think it is correct that we do call him up if he makes bad calls. Although I think it is completely uncalled for to call him more than just having a few bad (no terrble) days at the office.

Joe Cortez has been fornicating up a fair amount recently, but nobody can deny - 10-15 years ago he was among the very best. I'm sure age is playing a factor in Cortez' recent performances.

I don't see the problem with criticising him, or anybody else.

It's pretty obvious to anybody with half a clue that the standard of officiating (and in particular judging) has slipped significantly. I'm sure in the old days there were BS decisions or stoppages, and because there were no video cameras or no internet it would be swept under the carpet or forgotten.

It's alright saying that ''ours are better than Germany/Italy/wherever'' and that's probably true, but why should we aim to be just ''better than everybody else'', when everybody else is absolute gash, on the continent you have next to no chance as an away fighter and in the States you get rewarded more for flurrying and missing than you do landing several hard, accurate shots in any given round.

Why can't we reach for the highest possible standards, in the way that we have with fighter safety before, during and after contests?

yes but the allegations here arent about IJL refereeing are they more about his scoring as a judge.

as said cortezs is much worse yet reveered. His ineptness in the last PBF for example could have meant Ortiz was seriously hurt...not diffuclt ot use the words Box on..or no boxing .....standard fair..yet we havent got hang draw and quarter joe cortez threads going on here.

To accuse smoeone of being corrupt is probably the worst accusation in sport, based on what? a couple of fights you dont agree with his scoring? Some of the criticism of IJL on here is fackin way over the top and unfounded.

not funny ..must do better.

please face the wall and repeat "i must not be flippant to J's posts" x10. do three hot knives of red leb, then return and try again.

J wrote:not funny ..must do better.

please face the wall and repeat "i must not be flippant to J's posts" x10. do three hot knives of red leb, then return and try again.

respect you and your posts mate but all MOST have said here is that his scorecard was wank, end of

And it was. A terrible terrible scorecard.

I say the same thing when the ref has a shit game at sheff utd every week. and i mean that too,

Thats all i personally said. Its not a witch hunt i'm just stating the obvious

standing8 wrote:114-114 Eh?
Thats means if Lynes hadn't of knocked Purdy down,Purdy would have won???????
What were you watching sir?

that is exactly what i was thinking, when i heard he had it as a draw, i spat out my moet and nearly tipped my sturgeon caviar onto the drawingroom carpet!

stujones wrote:

J wrote:DONT LIKE THESE WITCH HUNT THREADS

i thought he reffed the hopkins pascal fight well, hopkins is never easy to referee as we know.

I dont think Ian is corrupt and ther are pletny of other officials who are more deserving of the bile shown in this thread.

Whever I have met Ian he has come accorss as a gentle unassuming humble man who probably would be most upsetyto read some of the unfounded allegations in here.

Sometimes we make mistakes and sometimes we make lots of mistakes together for a period.

Judge him when his reffing career is over, he isnt as bad as some.

Joe cortez for one a supposed top ref has turned into a complete liablity over the past few years and is guilty of far worse misdemanours than Ian is.

Give the bloke a break he may have had a rough patch but who hasnt in their careers? To label him corrupt is unfair and libellous and in my opinion over the top.

and if anyone starts on Richie davis they need a fackin good hiding. He is the best in britain in my opinion.

Some good points, I don't see the big deal with his ref performance in Pascal vs Hopkins 2 - other than he didn't wipe down Hopkins' gloves after the Press ups.

As I said, I used to consider IJL a top top ref (I still think he is very good, Klitchsko vs Briggs aside) and an top judge - but I think it is correct that we do call him up if he makes bad calls. Although I think it is completely uncalled for to call him more than just having a few bad (no terrble) days at the office.

Joe Cortez has been effing up a fair amount recently, but nobody can deny - 10-15 years ago he was among the very best. I'm sure age is playing a factor in Cortez' recent performances.

Firstly, IJL continuously allowed Pascal to rabbit punch throughout the bout, and even criticized Hopkins for it. (i know it makes no sense).

Pascal's gloves touched the canvas three times after some lead-right hands by Hopkins knocked him off balance. To quote Kellerman, "Once is a coincidence, three times is pattern".

When it was all said in done, it's a good thing Hopkins won, and it was simply dismissed as a bad day.

Secondly, the Briggs - Vitali bout was a farce. Im sorry, but you have to be virtually incompetent or deliberately encouraging what happened that night to not stop it.

It's not like the Mayweather-Ortiz debacle where the referee had to make an impulse decision. The Briggs- was a 12 round 1 sided beatdown that should have been stopped after the 8th round.

Im sure there was another incident just before last night's scorecard also.

It's only a witch hunt when you stereotype someone, don't give the benefit of the doubt and make a mountain out of a mole hill.

This clown has made too many potentially fatal mistakes.

Reality is, it would be better if he was infact corrupt. At-least then we know that he knows he is doing wrong. If he is in fact sincere, then sorry, but incompetency is the only word to describe this "referee/judge"

J wrote:To accuse smoeone of being corrupt is probably the worst accusation in sport, based on what? a couple of fights you dont agree with his scoring? Some of the criticism of IJL on here is fackin way over the top and unfounded.

Or based on someone systematically scoring in favour of the 'home' fighter despite all evidence pointing to the contrary.

Here's the key point J. If it was simply poor scoring, mathematical probability would dictate that the 'away' fighter would benefit from this as regularly as the 'home' fighter. The fact that the cards he has been turning in of late ALWAYS favour the home fighter defies those very clear laws of logic and so you shouldn't be remotely surprised it leads to these types of accusations.

Someone needs to hand Ian John Lewis gun with one round in the chamber

MachoMan09 wrote:I think you should edit that post, mate. It's out of order.

you actually took me serious/Literally ??

I think people need to see the late stoppage IJL made when Matt Skelton ko'd Gifford Shillingford.

I think British Rail would have been on time more than him, and he wouldn't have been able to use any of Reggie Perrins' excuses for being late.

MachoMan09 wrote:For what it's worth (from me not much), I don't think for one minute that IJL is corrupt in the 'bag of cash under the table' sense. I do, though, get the impression that he may sub-consciously favour the house fighter and, if that is the case, he is far from being a unique specimen - perhaps just the most well known domestic example.

I have a slightly different interpretation - in these recessionary times, many people are feeling vulnerable and clinging to their jobs tighter than to a liferaft on the Titanic. That concern over job stability can motivate people in different ways, but one that tends to be consistent is a very strong desire to keep your boss/bosses happy. If your life has always revolved boxing and if a significant part of your livelihood depends on continuing to be employed within the profession, the self-imposed pressure to deliver the 'results' that will ensure job security can clearly be considerable...

The fear of unemployment and/or being alienated from the sport/profession that has been a bedrock for you for years on end etc, can intimidate the proudest of men....

Any Englishmen who now critisizes any other country's scoring (Germany, Russia, whatever) is now a hypocrit. I am sure we are just as bad, IF NOT worse. At least it makes percieved and ACTUAL one-sided beat downs a touch exciting. The anticipation of waiting for a dodgy card makes up for the shite fight.

I hate boxing sometimes.

Dioufy wrote:Any Englishmen who now critisizes any other country's scoring (Germany, Russia, whatever) is now a hypocrit. I am sure we are just as bad, IF NOT worse. At least it makes percieved and ACTUAL one-sided beat downs a touch exciting. The anticipation of waiting for a dodgy card makes up for the shite fight.

I hate boxing sometimes.

I know what you mean. When I think about it a lot of my posts are moans and rants. I'm not really like that day to day but boxing throws up a lot of shite these days. I still love the well matched fights but the business and politics side is abysmal.

It must be very hard being a pro boxer especially if your not a big ticket seller or well touted amateur.

Deserter wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:For what it's worth (from me not much), I don't think for one minute that IJL is corrupt in the 'bag of cash under the table' sense. I do, though, get the impression that he may sub-consciously favour the house fighter and, if that is the case, he is far from being a unique specimen - perhaps just the most well known domestic example.

I have a slightly different interpretation - in these recessionary times, many people are feeling vulnerable and clinging to their jobs tighter than to a liferaft on the Titanic. That concern over job stability can motivate people in different ways, but one that tends to be consistent is a very strong desire to keep your boss/bosses happy. If your life has always revolved boxing and if a significant part of your livelihood depends on continuing to be employed within the profession, the self-imposed pressure to deliver the 'results' that will ensure job security can clearly be considerable...

The fear of unemployment and/or being alienated from the sport/profession that has been a bedrock for you for years on end etc, can intimidate the proudest of men....

Very good post.

DaveBoyMorrison wrote:

Dioufy wrote:Any Englishmen who now critisizes any other country's scoring (Germany, Russia, whatever) is now a hypocrit. I am sure we are just as bad, IF NOT worse. At least it makes percieved and ACTUAL one-sided beat downs a touch exciting. The anticipation of waiting for a dodgy card makes up for the shite fight.

I hate boxing sometimes.

I know what you mean. When I think about it a lot of my posts are moans and rants. I'm not really like that day to day but boxing throws up a lot of shite these days. I still love the well matched fights but the business and politics side is abysmal.

It must be very hard being a pro boxer especially if your not a big ticket seller or well touted amateur.

You should see me, then. I am the Bruce Forsyth of Milton Keynes. Then whenever boxing comes up, I tend to turn into a drunken, smacked-off-his-tits version of Phil Mitchell.