Page 3 of 4
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 08:40
by dondada
silkov wrote:I think it was about the 3rd round when he started blinking... that should really have been a warning sign for people who are supposed to know as rapid blinking/eye movement is a dead give away to some sort of brain trauma. I'm sure that had the fight been stopped even at around the 5th or 6th rounds Gerald would be in a much better place today.
Those rabbit blows wouldn't have done him any good at all... which is why they are supposed to be illegal!.
Why was such a fucked up referee used?.... was he the cheapest one available?.... some of the responsibility must lay with the promoter.
I haven't got my article to hand but I think it was the second round - as early as that.
As for the fight being stopped in the middle rounds - there was simply no apparent reason at the time to do so, but I completely take your point.
The ref was poor.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 08:46
by jamesmcdonnell
Yes, people forget that prior to being stopped, he had Benn on the deck again and looked close to stopping him, and hurt him several times besides.
I wonder whether the corner ever asked him what was going on with his eyes.
This does make you think. I reckon that cornermen should be medically trained to look for the signs of brain trauma, would make sense.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 09:49
by silkov
I'd like to think that if I was in a corner with a fighter and they started blinking like that I would suss out that something wasn't right.
I have never watched the fight since and don't want to but seem to remember that Gerald seemed in distress in about the 6th round or something, blinking ever more and looking like he had trouble breathing... I remember when I watched it thinking he looked wrong.
Then he floored benn again in 8th I think but that was just about his final fling.
This and the second Watson vs Eubank fight very nearly put me off boxing for life.
Anyone who can say that what happened to Gerald is devine retribution should see a doctor imo.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 09:53
by silkov
Wasn't there a doctor in Geralds corner overseeing things during the fight... I would have thought he should have noticed things were not right.
I think all fighters corners should have doctors in, and not just to deal with cuts.
re
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 10:04
by barry
Silk,
Like you, I have only watched the fight once. The night that it took place I went out to a party and recorded the bout. When I got home I just knew that McClellan had scored another impressive knockout. As I was rewinding the tape I stopped it to check where it was in the fight and Benn was stepping in post holes trying to climb back in the ring, so I knew then that I had been right in my assumption, but I went ahead and rewinded to the beginning of the telecast. After Benn miraculously made it out of the first round I figured that it was just a short amount of time before it would end, but I noticed a lot of fouling on Benn's part! I don't know about thins, but it would seem to me that dread-locks should probably be banned just as a beard is sometimes as I would guess that dreads would be rather hard on a person who suffered a headbutt.
It was a hell of a fight and Benn showed a lot of heart to continue, but when I watched McClellan slump down in his corner I just got a sick feeling like I never had before in watching a boxing match. I am going to re-watch the bout to see if I can see when he really started blinking, which is something that both his corner and the referee should have noticed after a couple of rounds. One round it could just be something in a fighters eyes, but continued blinking is certainly a sign that something is wrong!
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 10:13
by jamesmcdonnell
Dreads are not going to make the impact any worse.
One thing which should be banned IMO are braids. Braids are rough and abrasive and hard, and are going to aggravate cuts, plus surely they will increase risk of infection?
Lennox Lewis' braided dreads must have been like wire wool when fighters were in clinches with him.
re
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 10:15
by barry
Braids are what I meant James, thanks for the correction. Didn't Benn wear braids in the McClellan bout?
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 10:22
by jamesmcdonnell
No he had his locks by that point.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 10:29
by silkov
I think Benn had Dreadlocks. The worse thing I remember was the rabbit punching but to be fair to Benn he was fighting for his life and I don't really blame him for the fouls... it was up to the ref to do something about them... which he didn't.
Also a thing I remember about Gerald in that fight is that he took Benns shots flush... while Benn was trying to duck and roll and weave Gerald seemed to have almost no defence what ever.
I remember Reg Gutteridge and Jim Watt commenting on the blinking round about Mid fight when it had got very pronounced.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 11:19
by dondada
Actually it was the second in which he started pushing his gumshield out. Not sure about the blinking.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 11:22
by jamesmcdonnell
There was some weird theory from Steward that someone had done something nefarious to Gerald before the fight, I've been trying to find it but to no avail.
It's hard to see anything which causes him to start pushing the gumshield out. It's obvious he is having breathing problems, but he hadn't taken any punishment in the 2nd round.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 11:33
by Slapsie Maxie
While a lot of people ( me in the past ) think of this as a classic, there is no getting away from the fact that this was a nasty, nasty fight.
The preamble was shameful, the fight itself vicious and badly handled and the postscript dreadful.
I bayed for blood along with the rest of them and am ashamed that my most base, primal instincts came out in that fight like no other
I saw the fight again the other day. In truth, it was not a great fight ( even if my memory tells me it was ) and the outcome makes it even more horrific
slapsie
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 11:44
by jamesmcdonnell
The only thing about the fight which is great is Benn's comeback. The fact there was a tragedy also makes it even more epic historically. I don't like rewatching the fight.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 12:53
by dondada
It was the greatest sporting event I've ever witnessed, whatever the horrific postscript.
Perhaps I would think differently if I wasn't actually there.
And what it says about me as a person, I don't know. But I'm not going to lie about it.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 12:55
by jamesmcdonnell
Speak as you find, that#s the northern way....
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 14:39
by dondada
Some very good points there jimbob.
By the way, the fight is apparently available for viewing at Sports Network's own site:
http://www.allegedly.tv/fw4/index.php
allegedly himself says it's the best fight he's seen in the UK.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 14:56
by silkov
I can think of quite a few fights which were far better. At the time I thought it was a great fight but after the dreadful aftermath I've never watched it since... same with Eubank vs Watson 2.
I'd put Mcauley vs Bassa 1 up there with just about the best fights I've ever seen and can watch it over and over without getting bored... amazing fight!.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 15:40
by MightyWarrior
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Some very good points there jimbob.
By the way, the fight is apparently available for viewing at Sports Network's own site:
http://www.allegedly.tv/fw4/index.php
allegedly allegedly himself says it's the best fight he's seen in the UK.
Well let's hope Allegedly Warren is sending some money Gerald's way as a result.
Of course he would, wouldn't he?
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 15:44
by silkov
I've heard that Joe Frazier has visited him a few times.
Don King hasn't given anything as far as I know.
He seems to be largely forgotten in America... I think more people talk about him over here than they do over there!.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 15:53
by KOJOE90
Just thinking out loud here but....
Lets say the referee had handled the fight differently and Benn was stopped in the first or second round and Gerald McClellen became the new WBC Super-Middleweight Champion.
What would have happened the next time the G-Man was in a brutal fight and was taking lots of heavy shots to the head? Would the injuries have happened then? Did he just have a 'genetic' weakness in this area?
Like I say, I'm just thinking out loud here, but it's a possibility.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 16:44
by jamesmcdonnell
jimbob wrote:I kinda get fed up with people saying the ref was biased in this fight. I don't think he was biased at all... he was just plain bad, in every way imaginable.
There are plenty of things that make the ref seem just as "unfair" towards Benn. You're supposed to keep your head up for your own saftey.... the fact he was allowing Benn to duck low could equally be argued as the ref giving McClellan a chance to injure Benn. ( And then blame Benn's infringments as the cause)
The first knockdown seemed very dubious to me as well. Benn was up against the ropes, ducking about (too low) looking for a way out... and by the time the shots that floored him had landed... Benn was actually sitting on the second rope. The rules state if a fighter is supporting his weight with the ropes, and not his feet, it counts as him being downed. Technically speaking, Benn was already down when the shots came in. Personally I think him jumping between the two, stopping McClellan finishing it, is only fair considering he allowed Benn to get hit when he shouldn't have been. Benn wouldn't have been so groggy if the ref had started the count when he should have done.
Again, people argue about the very long 9 count. Sure, it WAS a very long 9 count... but what a lot of boxing fans fail to realise, is that an opponent knocked out of the ring is entitled to a 20 second count. Judging by the ref's body language... he was clearly unaware of this rule, and would have stopped at 10, but felt Benn deserved a little longer, as he was clearly still game, and got a little tangled in the ropes. It would have been a moot point if the ref knew what he was doing, and counted to 13 or 14 at the proper speed.
Yes, you're right about the 20 second rule, and you make some valid points
I've never thought the referee was biased. If he was going to be biased then if anything it would have been in favour of McClellan who was the big favourite and the new poster boy of the division who was going to go on to fight Jones Jr.
However, I think the ref gave Benn every possible opportunity to survive for the sake of the fight itself. I agree that Benn as much fell out of the ring as anything else, but he was definetly fucked and groggy as hell.
The way the referee constantly stepped between the two for no reason cannot be ignored too, as it occurred when Benn was hurt and McClellan had him at his mercy.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 17:23
by KOJOE90
jimbob wrote:I've always had similar thoughts about Michael Watson, Because his injuries looked to be caused by a single blow, I've always wondered... everybody must have their own threshold, on how bad a blow their brain can take... and nobody knows what their limit is..
It would certainly make sence we all have various physical limits and thresholds. I am not a medical person but your point sounds reasonable to me.
jimbob wrote:I've wondered if there's some way doctors could scan fighters, to check the strength of the brain, and see if they were succeptable to being injured or not. If somebody knew they had a relatively low limit compared to average, they may choose not to box, or could even be prevented, by the authorities. ..
That would of course be a valuable tool. I know the fighter that died after fighting a young Barry McGuigan, Young Ali was diagnosed after his dead with the condition known as an 'egg shell' skull. Todays MRI & CAT scan can of course detect this condition I believe. I also seem to recall that after his death Johnny Owen was also discovered to have a very thin skull.
jimbob wrote:Watching boxers go to war has always brought out strange mixed feeling in me. I much prefer to watch an all out slugfest than two technician's in a chess match, but the enjoyment I get from it sort of feels "dirty." Even when the fighters don't get injured in a dramatic fashion, you know the damage may well take it's toll when they're old men.
Ah, the guilty pleasure if watching Boxing, if you have not already try and pick up a copy of McIlvanney On Boxing by Hugh McIlvanney, he talks about this very subject, plus it's a great book anyway.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 18:00
by silkov
I think some fighters are more definately vulnerble to damage than others... I mean on one hand you have Jake Lamotta still relatively lucid at around 80 years old while someone like Wilfred Benitez was in a shocking state by the time he was 30.
I remember reading on the Jerry Quarry foundation website that there is actually a gene that has been identified which shows whether a person is likely to get dementia if they box and probably even if they don't.
Watson had a very bad ko defeat against Mccallum, he also seemed to take a lot of punches around the back of the head and neck in his fight with Benn I seem to remember... don't know if this is relevant but some doctors feel that Ali's problems stem from when he used to rope-a-dope and block punches to his face yet take a lot of shots to the back of his head and neck. Watson did a simular rope-a-dope against Benn.
I was very near ringside for the Eubank vs Watson fight and Watson hit the back of his head against the ropes when he fell... it was this rather than the punch itself which did the damage.... Davey Moore the Feather champ suffered a simular injury against Sugar Ramos in their fights in the early 60s.
re
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 18:14
by barry
Personally, I think that the fights with McCallum and Benn were more to blame because they were both within a year and then just a little over a year that he fought the first Eubank fight and a couple months later the second. When you are in some of those types of fights it takes a long time to get over it and sometimes you just don't don't. When Carnera killed Ernie Schaaf it was more due to the beating that Max Baer gave Schaaf as opposed to the taps from Carnera.
Posted: 24 Feb 2005, 18:58
by silkov
And yet some fighters seem to thrive on wars... look at Arturo Gatti... I love watching him yet sometimes do so with a bittersweet feeling as I'd hate for him to end up like Chacon... yet he seems sound and is actaully boxing better than he was 5 years ago. One tough son of a gun.