Controversial wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025, 20:56
I initially thought it looked a poor stoppage but I only saw a clip of the last 15 seconds or so. However he was being battered for about 30 seconds before that but the viral clip leaves a lot of that out. So on reflection maybe not as bad as I thought.
Watch the entire fight for the best context. It was ebbing and flowing, especially in the latter rounds with both guys landing hurtful shots but combination of tiredness + the opponent having a great chin meant neither was too effective in following up on the hurtful punches. Parker was fine, he was taking a breather on the ropes and Wardley was failing to land & totally exhausted. The stoppage was garbage.
Controversial wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025, 20:56
I initially thought it looked a poor stoppage but I only saw a clip of the last 15 seconds or so. However he was being battered for about 30 seconds before that but the viral clip leaves a lot of that out. So on reflection maybe not as bad as I thought.
Watch the entire fight for the best context. It was ebbing and flowing, especially in the latter rounds with both guys landing hurtful shots but combination of tiredness + the opponent having a great chin meant neither was too effective in following up on the hurtful punches. Parker was fine, he was taking a breather on the ropes and Wardley was failing to land & totally exhausted. The stoppage was garbage.
Good point. In isolation it looked like a good stoppage. In the context of the fight it could have been allowed to continue....
But, Parkers given Howard Foster the chance to stop it. They should have known the risk, and lying on the ropes letting 15 or so punches unanswered is the chance he needed.
foggyneedham wrote: ↑25 Oct 2025, 19:25
Parker slumped on the ropes, don't see a problem with the stoppage...... Guessing people lost some betting money
I make you right. Parker was saved at the right time imo
Foster would've stopped Ali Foreman in r2. Slumped on those ropes.
That was a different time.we know far more about the effects of prolonged head trauma now. Parker was on the verge of dropping. His hands were dropping. It is very easy for us to sit and judge from the outside
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 04:12
by smiling assassin
The stoppage was early but you’re always giving the ref the option if you slump against the ropes. I can see both sides of the coin so no real controversy for me
I make you right. Parker was saved at the right time imo
Foster would've stopped Ali Foreman in r2. Slumped on those ropes.
That was a different time.we know far more about the effects of prolonged head trauma now. Parker was on the verge of dropping. His hands were dropping. It is very easy for us to sit and judge from the outside
His hands weren't dropping, he blocked 3 punches when Foster jumped in. The only reason he was even on the ropes was because seconds earlier he threw some hard shots off the ropes. Think about that, between Parker throwing shots of his own, and the fight being stopped, he wasn't hit with any punches.
Foster would've stopped Ali Foreman in r2. Slumped on those ropes.
That was a different time.we know far more about the effects of prolonged head trauma now. Parker was on the verge of dropping. His hands were dropping. It is very easy for us to sit and judge from the outside
His hands weren't dropping, he blocked 3 punches when Foster jumped in. The only reason he was even on the ropes was because seconds earlier he threw some hard shots off the ropes. Think about that, between Parker throwing shots of his own, and the fight being stopped, he wasn't hit with any punches.
For once we agree, he wasn't slumped at all.
Crappy stoppage. Parker had been hurt, but had his wits about him still, and had not long fired back.
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 06:01
by Ruthless-RKO
Put it this way there has been plenty of fighters that have been in the same position as Parker was in the other night and the fights were not stopped and those fights even had less that stake..
Controversial wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025, 20:56
I initially thought it looked a poor stoppage but I only saw a clip of the last 15 seconds or so. However he was being battered for about 30 seconds before that but the viral clip leaves a lot of that out. So on reflection maybe not as bad as I thought.
Watch the entire fight for the best context. It was ebbing and flowing, especially in the latter rounds with both guys landing hurtful shots but combination of tiredness + the opponent having a great chin meant neither was too effective in following up on the hurtful punches. Parker was fine, he was taking a breather on the ropes and Wardley was failing to land & totally exhausted. The stoppage was garbage.
Yeah I have. I can see it from both sides but Wardley landed a big punch with 1m 45s to go and unloaded for 40s before it was stopped. There was still over a minute to go too. I wouldn’t want to be a ref, it’s easy for us as we have the benefit of instant replays, slow mo, different angles etc, the ref has a split second to call it, they are only human and can make mistakes at times. Parker didn’t really complain either. Yes maybe the ref should’ve allowed it to go on but I can also see why he stopped it.
Controversial wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025, 20:56
I initially thought it looked a poor stoppage but I only saw a clip of the last 15 seconds or so. However he was being battered for about 30 seconds before that but the viral clip leaves a lot of that out. So on reflection maybe not as bad as I thought.
Watch the entire fight for the best context. It was ebbing and flowing, especially in the latter rounds with both guys landing hurtful shots but combination of tiredness + the opponent having a great chin meant neither was too effective in following up on the hurtful punches. Parker was fine, he was taking a breather on the ropes and Wardley was failing to land & totally exhausted. The stoppage was garbage.
Yeah I have. I can see it from both sides but Wardley landed a big punch with 1m 45s to go and unloaded for 40s before it was stopped. There was still over a minute to go too. I wouldn’t want to be a ref, it’s easy for us as we have the benefit of instant replays, slow mo, different angles etc, the ref has a split second to call it, they are only human and can make mistakes at times. Parker didn’t really complain either. Yes maybe the ref should’ve allowed it to go on but I can also see why he stopped it.
Foster would never have done that to the A Side
Look at Warrington v Lara
Watch the entire fight for the best context. It was ebbing and flowing, especially in the latter rounds with both guys landing hurtful shots but combination of tiredness + the opponent having a great chin meant neither was too effective in following up on the hurtful punches. Parker was fine, he was taking a breather on the ropes and Wardley was failing to land & totally exhausted. The stoppage was garbage.
Yeah I have. I can see it from both sides but Wardley landed a big punch with 1m 45s to go and unloaded for 40s before it was stopped. There was still over a minute to go too. I wouldn’t want to be a ref, it’s easy for us as we have the benefit of instant replays, slow mo, different angles etc, the ref has a split second to call it, they are only human and can make mistakes at times. Parker didn’t really complain either. Yes maybe the ref should’ve allowed it to go on but I can also see why he stopped it.
Foster would never have done that to the A Side
Look at Warrington v Lara
Yeah I get it, Foster has made some howlers over the years. I’m kind of on the fence with this one though, I can see it from both sides.
Yeah I have. I can see it from both sides but Wardley landed a big punch with 1m 45s to go and unloaded for 40s before it was stopped. There was still over a minute to go too. I wouldn’t want to be a ref, it’s easy for us as we have the benefit of instant replays, slow mo, different angles etc, the ref has a split second to call it, they are only human and can make mistakes at times. Parker didn’t really complain either. Yes maybe the ref should’ve allowed it to go on but I can also see why he stopped it.
Foster would never have done that to the A Side
Look at Warrington v Lara
Yeah I get it, Foster has made some howlers over the years. I’m kind of on the fence with this one though, I can see it from both sides.
But that’s the exact crux of the issue - if Foster consistently waved off fights under those circumstances, it might still be frustrating for people who felt it could continue but no-one could have any doubt that Foster was making a judgement call based on what he was seeing.
But we all know that’s just not true, there’s loads of examples where he gives loads more leeway to the home / ‘A’ side fighter. So there’s no point trying to “see it from both sides” because that’s exactly what isn’t happening when it comes from boxing officials. I’d never go so far as to say it’s corruption, but it’s 100% biased and unfair.
Foster would never have done that to the A Side
Look at Warrington v Lara
Yeah I get it, Foster has made some howlers over the years. I’m kind of on the fence with this one though, I can see it from both sides.
But that’s the exact crux of the issue - if Foster consistently waved off fights under those circumstances, it might still be frustrating for people who felt it could continue but no-one could have any doubt that Foster was making a judgement call based on what he was seeing.
But we all know that’s just not true, there’s loads of examples where he gives loads more leeway to the home / ‘A’ side fighter. So there’s no point trying to “see it from both sides” because that’s exactly what isn’t happening when it comes from boxing officials. I’d never go so far as to say it’s corruption, but it’s 100% biased and unfair.
The “A” side is normally favoured though, not just by British refs but worldwide. Not saying that’s right but it happens all the time, not only by refs but with judges too. I get what you’re saying but it wasn’t as bad others I’ve seen. I still think it’s hard to be a ref, he is watching it from a few feet away and has to react on what he feels at that exact second, no replay to watch. There will always be controversial ones, he’s reffed 1540 fights over 28 years so by the law of averages he will have some stinkers, the issue for him is they are normally in front of millions of people so when he screws up it gets worldwide attention. The sport is so subjective at the best of times, you only have to look on here to see some think it was a good stoppage and others don’t.
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 08:29
by forcefraser
There is little room for aegument here. He stopped the fight after three punches missed whilst he was on the ropes.
Parker was well ahead and had every chance of seeing the final bell.
Foster robbed Joe of a chance at undisputed glory and after the shift he'd put in he didnt deserve that
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 10:21
by rhino222
Im a bit confused with the 'parker was way ahead' comments.
if i remember correctly, and with 2 rounds to go...
judge A had parker +4
judge B had parker +2
judge C had it even.
lets assume Wardley won the 11th (almost definitely) and then won the 12th (probably), then..
Judge A = Parker +2
Judge B = Even
Judge C = Wardley +2
therefore it would have been a draw. But if Wardley had got a 10-8 for the 11th (if parker had taken a count) then ..
Judge A = Parker +1
Judge B = Wardley +1
Judge C = Wardley +3
Therefore Wardley would have won on a split.
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 11:22
by Coco
rhino222 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025, 10:21
Im a bit confused with the 'parker was way ahead' comments.
if i remember correctly, and with 2 rounds to go...
judge A had parker +4
judge B had parker +2
judge C had it even.
lets assume Wardley won the 11th (almost definitely) and then won the 12th (probably), then..
Judge A = Parker +2
Judge B = Even
Judge C = Wardley +2
therefore it would have been a draw. But if Wardley had got a 10-8 for the 11th (if parker had taken a count) then ..
Judge A = Parker +1
Judge B = Wardley +1
Judge C = Wardley +3
Therefore Wardley would have won on a split.
Surely those are reasons for the fight to continue, unless you feel Parker was in no position to defend himself.
Wardley needed a knockdown and a winning round, the fight was very much in the melting pot
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 11:33
by gilgamesh
rhino222 wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025, 10:21
Im a bit confused with the 'parker was way ahead' comments.
if i remember correctly, and with 2 rounds to go...
judge A had parker +4
judge B had parker +2
judge C had it even.
lets assume Wardley won the 11th (almost definitely) and then won the 12th (probably), then..
Judge A = Parker +2
Judge B = Even
Judge C = Wardley +2
therefore it would have been a draw. But if Wardley had got a 10-8 for the 11th (if parker had taken a count) then ..
Judge A = Parker +1
Judge B = Wardley +1
Judge C = Wardley +3
Therefore Wardley would have won on a split.
I don't know if he would've been able to win the 12th if he wasn't able to get the finish in the 11th round. He was throwing everything he had there in the 11th.
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 12:22
by Kilburn
We didn’t get the conclusive finish before our eyes for sure. But for me, saying with any confidence that Wardley was about to render himself incapable of throwing any more meaningful punches over the remainder of the fight, is considerably more daft than saying with confidence that Parker was on the verge of folding completely.
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 12:40
by gilgamesh
Kilburn wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025, 12:22
We didn’t get the conclusive finish before our eyes for sure. But for me, saying with any confidence that Wardley was about to render himself incapable of throwing any more meaningful punches over the remainder of the fight, is considerably more daft than saying with confidence that Parker was on the verge of folding completely.
I ain't saying he was going to completely punch himself out. I'm sure he had another assault or 2 in him, but he'd surely have to take a breather if nothing else. He couldn't just go like that for 3 minutes nonstop in the 12th, and I doubt he could've gone for too much more right then and there either.
3 opinions from my household are mostly of the "It wasn't a bad stoppage variety" though one person added. "Considering what was at stake, and how the momentum kept switching they should've let it go a bit more"
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 13:04
by Controversial
This is a better clip as shows it from when Wardley landed the first big blow, not just the last 15 seconds or so. I think it was the accumulation coupled with the punch that had Parker falling back into the ropes that probably sealed it
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 13:34
by forcefraser
I simply cannot see Foster stopping Wardley had he been in similar trouble.
Josh Warrington being a clear example of letting a home fighter take a total shellacking and not stopping it.
It's dirty and it stinks
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 13:42
by THEBUTCH
It was a Foster special
Buncey called it wrong IMO on Radio 5 Live. He was caught up in all the excitement that he said you can't argue with the stoppage (or similar).
I'd say you could contest that stoppage all day long.
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 15:35
by geronimo
It's crazy... After Groves, this senseless stoppage
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 27 Oct 2025, 16:45
by Ruthless-RKO
geronimo wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025, 15:35
It's crazy... After Groves, this senseless stoppage
Was over 10 years ago. He probably thought people forgot.
Yeah I get it, Foster has made some howlers over the years. I’m kind of on the fence with this one though, I can see it from both sides.
But that’s the exact crux of the issue - if Foster consistently waved off fights under those circumstances, it might still be frustrating for people who felt it could continue but no-one could have any doubt that Foster was making a judgement call based on what he was seeing.
But we all know that’s just not true, there’s loads of examples where he gives loads more leeway to the home / ‘A’ side fighter. So there’s no point trying to “see it from both sides” because that’s exactly what isn’t happening when it comes from boxing officials. I’d never go so far as to say it’s corruption, but it’s 100% biased and unfair.
The “A” side is normally favoured though, not just by British refs but worldwide. Not saying that’s right but it happens all the time, not only by refs but with judges too. I get what you’re saying but it wasn’t as bad others I’ve seen. I still think it’s hard to be a ref, he is watching it from a few feet away and has to react on what he feels at that exact second, no replay to watch. There will always be controversial ones, he’s reffed 1540 fights over 28 years so by the law of averages he will have some stinkers, the issue for him is they are normally in front of millions of people so when he screws up it gets worldwide attention. The sport is so subjective at the best of times, you only have to look on here to see some think it was a good stoppage and others don’t.
Yeah I take the point, and I said similar in an earlier post on the thread, boxing is by no means the only sport where this sort of thing happens regularly. Just look at the decisions which always go the way of the big clubs in the Premier League. It’s a legitimate problem across most sports really, but boxing is one of the worst since it is so subjective and the officials play such a massive part in the outcome, the ref can call it off in a split-second and that’s the end of it, no VAR to overturn the decision
Re: Howard Foster
Posted: 29 Oct 2025, 09:46
by Ruthless-RKO
He also reff'ed Liam Cameron and Ben Whittaker rematch.
