BoxRec

Coconut wrote:Fair play, Stu, I think I take a harsher line than you and DQ if there's a headbutt full stop.

It's against the rules. If there's no blood I think it's an irrelevance. That doesn't mean there's no damage. And what other sport is there where headbutting is not allowed by the rules but where you can get away with it?

Boxing's a tough old sport but we shouldn't get at all tied up in the fact that because boxers are tough then they can hack a headbutt. It's illegal, and should be treated as on a par with illegal handwraps or kicking.

Granted there is a distinction to be made and it takes a braver ref than some to make it. But I'm not talking about the Holyfield burrowing forehead (which should get a warning anyway) I'm talking about things like the Dominic Negus head-first assault which in no way could be construed as an accidental consequence of infighting.

Thats ridiculous, then the ref has make a call on the spot whether a headbutt is intentional or unintentional? That would ruin boxing.

Coconut wrote:Fair play, Stu, I think I take a harsher line than you and DQ if there's a headbutt full stop.

It's against the rules. If there's no blood I think it's an irrelevance. That doesn't mean there's no damage. And what other sport is there where headbutting is not allowed by the rules but where you can get away with it?

Boxing's a tough old sport but we shouldn't get at all tied up in the fact that because boxers are tough then they can hack a headbutt. It's illegal, and should be treated as on a par with illegal handwraps or kicking.

Granted there is a distinction to be made and it takes a braver ref than some to make it. But I'm not talking about the Holyfield burrowing forehead (which should get a warning anyway) I'm talking about things like the Dominic Negus head-first assault which in no way could be construed as an accidental consequence of infighting.

I'm not saying your wrong, Cocunut, but Nick's reply is the same problem I have with an instant DQ.

Also, will the same then apply to punches below the belt? That to is illegal.

nickd wrote:Thats ridiculous, then the ref has make a call on the spot whether a headbutt is intentional or unintentional? That would ruin boxing.

No it wouldn't, it would cut back a lot of headbutts. Ther emight be a few dodgy calls here and there but that's not as dodgy as the tactics employed by Power. And realistically it wouldn't happen in the majority of cases it's the ones like Saturday that I'm thinking of, where the guy just charges in with the head. Refs aren't going to have the balls to do it in any other circumstance.

Coconut wrote:

nickd wrote:Thats ridiculous, then the ref has make a call on the spot whether a headbutt is intentional or unintentional? That would ruin boxing.

No it wouldn't, it would cut back a lot of headbutts. Ther emight be a few dodgy calls here and there but that's not as dodgy as the tactics employed by Power. And realistically it wouldn't happen in the majority of cases it's the ones like Saturday that I'm thinking of, where the guy just charges in with the head. Refs aren't going to have the balls to do it in any other circumstance.

A straight up DQ for a headbutt is just not feasible, as even an unintentional headbutt could look deliberate if a fighter's punching momentum drives his head forward - seen that countless times.

I really dont see how that can work.

Thomas obviously didnt see Saturday's headbutt so there'd have been no DQ anyway, he didnt even warn him about use of the head after it.

The board of control have no balls if they let the incedent go unpunished.
What punishment is debatable but what other sport would allow such an obvious headbut go unpunished.

stujones wrote:

Coconut wrote:Fair play, Stu, I think I take a harsher line than you and DQ if there's a headbutt full stop.

It's against the rules. If there's no blood I think it's an irrelevance. That doesn't mean there's no damage. And what other sport is there where headbutting is not allowed by the rules but where you can get away with it?

Boxing's a tough old sport but we shouldn't get at all tied up in the fact that because boxers are tough then they can hack a headbutt. It's illegal, and should be treated as on a par with illegal handwraps or kicking.

Granted there is a distinction to be made and it takes a braver ref than some to make it. But I'm not talking about the Holyfield burrowing forehead (which should get a warning anyway) I'm talking about things like the Dominic Negus head-first assault which in no way could be construed as an accidental consequence of infighting.

I'm not saying your wrong, Cocunut, but Nick's reply is the same problem I have with an instant DQ.

Also, will the same then apply to punches below the belt? That to is illegal.

I understand there are issues but the thing with headbutts is that when they are as blatant as the one at the weekend then it's obvious. Shots to the crackers are also illegal and you only have to think back to Golota Bowe to see that they can also get you pinged. But just as with headbutts the majority of low blows fall in a grey area between deliberate and potentially accidental, and obviously you can't make the call to DQ on that. But on things such as Trinidad against vargas or even earlier in the Bowe - Golota match I wouldn't have had an issue with a DQ.

Think about Moore-Jones as well. There was an accidental (IMO) illegality there but Jones said he couldn't carry on and got the win. The difference could be that Jones saw a way to get a quick win and took it, Dale wasn't given the opportunity but even if he had I don't know if he'd have taken it. Is it right that the injured party has to make that decision? No, that's what you have a referee for. He enforces the rules. Not some of the rules. His job is to protect boxers from themsleves.

I see the problems you guys do with an instant DQ and yes there will be controversy. But what do we have now? I'd prefer a controversy over a bad call and the opportunity of a review and an overturning than the controversy over a match won by cheating and a new terrestrial audience getting the impression that headbutts are de rigeur in boxing and little Johnny ain't going down the gym.

nickd wrote:
Who's to say Power wouldn't have won without the cut?

Me.

Dale was outboxing him before the cut. It effects your concentration - especially a "will it, won't it" be stopped cut like that one.

It was a huge difference to Robinson's performance, it also made Power fight with more confidence and authority. It was almost like he believed it was his power punches that caused the cut.

Anyway, I don't think Power won regardless of the result. I had the fight a draw without the knockdown. With the knockdown, Dale won the fight.

Defective wrote:The board of control have no balls if they let the incedent go unpunished.
What punishment is debatable but what other sport would allow such an obvious headbut go unpunished.

You're not being realistic. There is no way on earth he will be stripped.

They'll mandate a rematch if Robinson's camp complain thats about it.

stujones wrote:

nickd wrote:
Who's to say Power wouldn't have won without the cut?

Me.

Dale was outboxing him before the cut. It effects your concentration - especially a "will it, won't it" be stopped cut like that one.

It was a huge difference to Robinson's performance, it also made Power fight with more confidence and authority. It was almost like he believed it was his power punches that caused the cut.

Anyway, I don't think Power won regardless of the result. I had the fight a draw without the knockdown. With the knockdown, Dale won the fight.

Come on Stu, Robinson was on top at the time but Power was stronger later in the fight. If does effect you but specualting on ifs and buts doesnt work as there are so many variables. There's no way you can say Robinson would definitely have won thats not realistic.

The Robinson camp should go to the board and they'll get a rematch, I'd like to see them fight again it was domestic fight of the year so far for me.

But Nick, I think (like Jim Watt did) that Robinson won anyway. Like Watt, I have no real complaints if you saw it for Power - but for me Robinson won.

I think there could be little doubt that Robinson would have been a little better (at the very least) had he not sustained the cut, I think that little bit would have gone to a close win (on my card) to a clear win on my card and hopefully a close win on most peoples card.

nickd wrote:

Defective wrote:The board of control have no balls if they let the incedent go unpunished.
What punishment is debatable but what other sport would allow such an obvious headbut go unpunished.

You're not being realistic. There is no way on earth he will be stripped.

They'll mandate a rematch if Robinson's camp complain thats about it.

I never said he should be stripped. But why shouldnt he? He blatantly cheated and it helped him win the fight. what is not in dispute is that it was a blatant headbut. I think a fair punishment would be to order a rematch and withhold his purse. Then it would be a clear message that cheats dont prosper. But that just might be my old fashiond values.

I think we are being watched guys!!!

I can only echo the feelings of most of the posts on this thread. Power's moment of madness was appalling. IF the referee had seen it then it should have been an instant disqualification.

Those who believe in the term "what comes around, goes around" may be right in as much as Martin could become a marked man by future referee's and for that he'll only have himself to blame. He certainly wouldn't get any sympathy from me.

Assuming referee Paul Thomas didn't spot the head butt, the decision seemed perfectly fair to me.

It's a real shame Power blotted his copybook because he showed real grit and will-power to force the pace in the closing rounds.

stujones wrote:But Nick, I think (like Jim Watt did) that Robinson won anyway. Like Watt, I have no real complaints if you saw it for Power - but for me Robinson won.

I think there could be little doubt that Robinson would have been a little better (at the very least) had he not sustained the cut, I think that little bit would have gone to a close win (on my card) to a clear win on my card and hopefully a close win on most peoples card.

I don't buy into that. As you say it was a totally different fight without the cut who's to say if Robinson had fought differently without a cut that Power wouldn't have KO'd him later on? You can't be sure of any outcome.

Let's have a rematch.

nickd wrote:

stujones wrote:But Nick, I think (like Jim Watt did) that Robinson won anyway. Like Watt, I have no real complaints if you saw it for Power - but for me Robinson won.

I think there could be little doubt that Robinson would have been a little better (at the very least) had he not sustained the cut, I think that little bit would have gone to a close win (on my card) to a clear win on my card and hopefully a close win on most peoples card.

I don't buy into that. As you say it was a totally different fight without the cut who's to say if Robinson had fought differently without a cut that Power wouldn't have KO'd him later on? You can't be sure of any outcome.

Let's have a rematch.

Why, because I don't think Power had the Power to KO him, it never looked likely. Although, I do agree it is hard to second guess the outcome of the fight. Having said that, its hard to think how Dale could have made what already seemed to be a winning performance to a losing one without the cut problem.

I actually DO NOT want to see a rematch, looking at the fight again and on Dale (he might have a go if/when he posts here). I really think Dale can and would be alot better off if he fought at Fly/Super Flyweight.

I'm not calling him an Ian Napa or anything, but I think there was one or two pounds that could have been shed. Chris Aston did make some implications (perhaps I read that wrong) in the introductions to the programme - the Ed Robinson segment - that Dale is only an average stength Bantam and very strong Flyweight, which suggests making the weight is a possibility.

He's definitely not a bantam it seems, Power was a lot stronger in the second half of the fight. I think super fly would be good for him but there's obviously no British title at the weight. I'm sure Dale has posted on here that he can't make flyweight anymore.

Hes off back down to flyweight!!!

When ever bad cut occurs, by intentional or unitentional headbutts, thje ref always stops the action to check the cut. Why did he not stop the action to check the cut? For 1 reason only he knew it was deliberate and had only 1 choice wich was to throw Power out! Paul Thomas bottled it!

tea wrote:Hes off back down to flyweight!!!

Is this fact Tea ??

tea wrote:When ever bad cut occurs, by intentional or unitentional headbutts, thje ref always stops the action to check the cut. Why did he not stop the action to check the cut? For 1 reason only he knew it was deliberate and had only 1 choice wich was to throw Power out! Paul Thomas bottled it!

Sorry but thats rubbish, I've seen the action continue in fights many times and the ref has then had a look between rounds which I believe Thomas did. Criticise him for missing the butt by all means but I think he handled the cut well, he didn't keep checking it every 2 minutes which would have made Robinson even more worried about it.

Suggesting a referee like Thomas would see the butt but ignore it is ridiculous.

Course he saw it,everyone saw it.The blood absolutely poured instantly and he ignored it.Thomas bottled it everyone knows.