BoxRec

Dioufy wrote:Why do some of the pro fighters on here say "only a few have been in the ring". It's effing patronising. If you believe that the opions of non-boxers isn't valid, then pop along and create a new forum were Paul Smith can be a moderator.

Jeez.

Who said that bud?

Second viewing it was definately early. I'm a little bemused as to why Edwards allowed the guy to continue after the 2nd KD and then stop it when he did. Tyson didn't land anything clean between the 2nd KD and the stoppage and there Pijekic was throwing leather. Still not the worst stoppage in history, and I wouldn't call it terrible - but I do find it a tad bemusing to end like that.

Still aint convinced the first KD was legal and maybe Pijekic should have been given some recovery time.

Jeff Thomas wrote:

Dioufy wrote:Why do some of the pro fighters on here say "only a few have been in the ring". It's effing patronising. If you believe that the opions of non-boxers isn't valid, then pop along and create a new forum were Paul Smith can be a moderator.

Jeez.

Who said that bud?

Michael Hunter, but at least he admitted he's on a wind-up.

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

stujones wrote:Second viewing it was definately early. I'm a little bemused as to why Edwards allowed the guy to continue after the 2nd KD and then stop it when he did. Tyson didn't land anything clean between the 2nd KD and the stoppage and there Pijekic was throwing leather. Still not the worst stoppage in history, and I wouldn't call it terrible - but I do find it a tad bemusing to end like that.

Still aint convinced the first KD was legal and maybe Pijekic should have been given some recovery time.

Did he not land a big upper cut just before the ref stopped it? Not seen it again but sure I saw that last night?

He landed a punch behind the head and a glancing uppercut that didn''t shake up Pajkic anymore than he already was.

Techno89 wrote:But It was stoped way to early well Pajkicat thought so

Actually mate, I disagree. The refs number one priority is to protect the welfare of both the fighters. Pajkic had been floored twice before the stoppage and in all honesty, he never showed any signs of recovering.

Even if Pajkic had've survived to the end of the round, I believe the writing was on the wall. Fury was (again) too big, too heavy & too powerful for his opponent. I commend Pajkic for knocking the big man down, but Fury recovered well and got stuck in.

Was the fight stopped too early? I can see where the argument comes from. But in all honesty, we know he was wobbled, he was dazed and he was hurt. And frankly, the ref stopped Pajkic suffering even more punishment.

Crease wrote:

Techno89 wrote:But It was stoped way to early well Pajkicat thought so

Actually mate, I disagree. The refs number one priority is to protect the welfare of both the fighters. Pajkic had been floored twice before the stoppage and in all honesty, he never showed any signs of recovering.

Even if Pajkic had've survived to the end of the round, I believe the writing was on the wall. Fury was (again) too big, too heavy & too powerful for his opponent. I commend Pajkic for knocking the big man down, but Fury recovered well and got stuck in.

Was the fight stopped too early? I can see where the argument comes from. But in all honesty, we know he was wobbled, he was dazed and he was hurt. And frankly, the ref stopped Pajkic suffering even more punishment.

I understand your reasoning But I still think that the ref could have let the fight go on a little longer. But I do understand were your comeing from.

Techno89 wrote:

Crease wrote:

Techno89 wrote:But It was stoped way to early well Pajkicat thought so

Actually mate, I disagree. The refs number one priority is to protect the welfare of both the fighters. Pajkic had been floored twice before the stoppage and in all honesty, he never showed any signs of recovering.

Even if Pajkic had've survived to the end of the round, I believe the writing was on the wall. Fury was (again) too big, too heavy & too powerful for his opponent. I commend Pajkic for knocking the big man down, but Fury recovered well and got stuck in.

Was the fight stopped too early? I can see where the argument comes from. But in all honesty, we know he was wobbled, he was dazed and he was hurt. And frankly, the ref stopped Pajkic suffering even more punishment.

I understand your reasoning But I still think that the ref could have let the fight go on a little longer. But I do understand were your comeing from.

I understand why people might say the ref was within his rights to stop it but I felt a bit bad for Pajkic to be honest. The ref let him carry on after the second knockdown and Fury didn't land anything significant between then and the stoppage. Add to that there were only 15 seconds left in the round, nobody can say for sure that Pajkic couldn't have recovered between rounds and come out and hurt fury again in round 4.

crusader wrote:

exittored wrote:

Final round wrote:ffs friggin torches and pitchforks around here the stoppage was a bit too safety first but it wasn't AWFUL!

Agreed, i would have liked it to go on for one more KD but at the same time Nevin looked done to me. Fury had a off night and still came back from a heavy KD to beat his man in the next round and you can't ask for more then that.

At what point does it become more than just an off night? Fury has had some sort of trouble with every decent opponent he has faced: Chisora had him unsteady, Firtha had him majorly unsteady, and Pajkic had him down.

All guys with single-digit KO totals too...

Techno89 wrote:I understand your reasoning But I still think that the ref could have let the fight go on a little longer. But I do understand were your comeing from.

I think if the fight had've went on any longer someone could've suffered serious damage. No-one was actually protecting themselves very well.

Crease wrote:

Techno89 wrote:I understand your reasoning But I still think that the ref could have let the fight go on a little longer. But I do understand were your comeing from.

I think if the fight had've went on any longer someone could've suffered serious damage. No-one was actually protecting themselves very well.

I think thats because both fighters are crap at protecting themselves

The comparison between this stoppage and howard fosters the other night is a bit silly really. This was an exciting, competitive fight between two guys both seemingly close to victory. Brooks was a one sided beat down.

The argument that the fighter was saved from further punishment and would have been knocked out anyway in more conclusive fashion is also a no go - as surely as a paying customer we have paid for a conclusion other then preventative action of what might have happened?

Imagine if it was one of these mammoth big name promoter shows we've become accustomed too- you could have a team of referee's jumping in as the entrance music starts- that would save a lot of the fighters selected from suffering any unessacary punishment.... soon as the 'Twighlight Zone' comes on the ref could step in.

In all seriousness though i'm sure that chap would have rather got stopped properly then recused like that. I know I would of- my close losses hurt a lot more then when i've been beaten by the better man in conclusive fashion.

I have no problem with the stoppage. Looked just about right to me.

I for one don't want to go back to those days like you see on some of those early Joe Louis fights where the ref allows the opponents to be battered to a pulp long after it is obvious they are well beaten men.

Jeff Thomas wrote:It was a shocking stoppage. Its boxing not dominoes- the 8 count is there to give you an opportunity to recover- it seems that as soon as the favourite scores a knockdown officials are desperate to end preceedings. That was a decent shoot out last night- and we were robbed of a conclusive ending. I'd say Tyson was in far more trouble then the aussie at any stage.

If I was stopped under those circumstances i'd be absolutely fuming. Give boxers every opportunity I say- injuries don't come from late stoppages unless your poor beau jack.

Rushton, Ingle, Oliver, McClellon, etc etc were not in a position to be stopped at any stage other then at the conclusion of their bout. I can't think of one occasion in modern boxing where a late stoppage resulted in injury. I'm not saying I want to see guys getting pole axed left, right and centre but some of these stoppages border on farcicle. As a fighter- I want to give it my best shot and go out on my shield- not be rescued and spend the rest of my life wondering what if.

michael watson v eubank was a late stoppage, watson should never have been allowed to box on after the uppercut, fighter can only be saved by the bell in the last round. it should have been stopped there and then...im not saying it would have helped watson.....but i cant say for sure that it wouldnt have!!

J-C wrote:

Techno89 wrote:

Crease wrote: Actually mate, I disagree. The refs number one priority is to protect the welfare of both the fighters. Pajkic had been floored twice before the stoppage and in all honesty, he never showed any signs of recovering.

Even if Pajkic had've survived to the end of the round, I believe the writing was on the wall. Fury was (again) too big, too heavy & too powerful for his opponent. I commend Pajkic for knocking the big man down, but Fury recovered well and got stuck in.

Was the fight stopped too early? I can see where the argument comes from. But in all honesty, we know he was wobbled, he was dazed and he was hurt. And frankly, the ref stopped Pajkic suffering even more punishment.

I understand your reasoning But I still think that the ref could have let the fight go on a little longer. But I do understand were your comeing from.

I understand why people might say the ref was within his rights to stop it but I felt a bit bad for Pajkic to be honest. The ref let him carry on after the second knockdown and Fury didn't land anything significant between then and the stoppage. Add to that there were only 15 seconds left in the round, nobody can say for sure that Pajkic couldn't have recovered between rounds and come out and hurt fury again in round 4.

the ref does not know there are 15 secs left!!

rhino222 wrote:

J-C wrote:

Techno89 wrote: I understand your reasoning But I still think that the ref could have let the fight go on a little longer. But I do understand were your comeing from.

I understand why people might say the ref was within his rights to stop it but I felt a bit bad for Pajkic to be honest. The ref let him carry on after the second knockdown and Fury didn't land anything significant between then and the stoppage. Add to that there were only 15 seconds left in the round, nobody can say for sure that Pajkic couldn't have recovered between rounds and come out and hurt fury again in round 4.

the ref does not know there are 15 secs left!!

I know, I was just saying that's part of the reason I felt a bit bad for Pajkic. The reason I didn't think the ref should have necessarily stopped it when he did was that if you watch it again Fury does actually land on hiM again prior to the stoppage. I think the ref was on the blind side and though the punches were landing