BoxRec

Dioufy wrote:

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.

Are you Steve Bunce?

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....

Good post Deserter, they don't want to upset the applecart. For example I don't think for one minute Robert Williams was paid to keep George Michael Carman's undefeated record intact by scoring the Bowen fight a draw, but thoughts of their use on future shows must come into play.

You kinda accept close rounds being scored to the home fighter (not that we should) but in a fight like Lynes v Purdy the rounds just weren't close. For the integrity of the sport his scorecard has to be held under scrutiny. No one wants a witch hunt J, but that doesn't mean we should just put our heads in the sand.

The standard of officiating in this country isn't good enough and that isn't all down to IJL

Lenny wrote:

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....

Good post Deserter, they don't want to upset the applecart. For example I don't think for one minute Robert Williams was paid to keep George Michael Carman's undefeated record intact by scoring the Bowen fight a draw, but thoughts of their use on future shows must come into play.

You kinda accept close rounds being scored to the home fighter (not that we should) but in a fight like Lynes v Purdy the rounds just weren't close. For the integrity of the sport his scorecard has to be held under scrutiny. No one wants a witch hunt J, but that doesn't mean we should just put our heads in the sand.

The standard of officiating in this country isn't good enough and that isn't all down to IJL

@Deserter and Lenny, excellent posts from you both. respect.

Crazyboy wrote:

Lenny wrote:

Deserter wrote: 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....

Good post Deserter, they don't want to upset the applecart. For example I don't think for one minute Robert Williams was paid to keep George Michael Carman's undefeated record intact by scoring the Bowen fight a draw, but thoughts of their use on future shows must come into play.

You kinda accept close rounds being scored to the home fighter (not that we should) but in a fight like Lynes v Purdy the rounds just weren't close. For the integrity of the sport his scorecard has to be held under scrutiny. No one wants a witch hunt J, but that doesn't mean we should just put our heads in the sand.

The standard of officiating in this country isn't good enough and that isn't all down to IJL

@Deserter and Lenny, excellent posts from you both. respect.

Yep x2

FFS I've had to have a little tidy of this again.

Accuse people of being sh1t by all means but be careful with other accusations please

stevek3lly wrote:His 114-114 card tonight was an absolute disgrace. I am usually against blasting the officials, but I had the fight 119-110 myself and no one else seemed to have Purdy winning more than 3. I am just glad his card didn't cost Lynes the fight tonight as the result was well deserved.

You sometimes get a fight when nearly every round is difficult to score but that certainly didn't apply in this fight.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:FFS I've had to have a little tidy of this again.

Accuse people of being sh1t by all means but be careful with other accusations please

Agreed.

Can we not just declare that Ian John Lewis is a really nice bloke, who had an absolutely stinker and really must pull his socks up.

Then close the thread

G0mez wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:FFS I've had to have a little tidy of this again.

Accuse people of being sh1t by all means but be careful with other accusations please

Agreed.

Can we not just declare that Ian John Lewis is a really nice bloke, who had an absolutely stinker and really must pull his socks up.

Then close the thread

I think its more accurate to say he's had a shed load of stinkers. I imagine that's fuelling most of the posts, rather than it being an isolated incident.

G0mez wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:FFS I've had to have a little tidy of this again.

Accuse people of being sh1t by all means but be careful with other accusations please

Agreed.

Can we not just declare that Ian John Lewis is a really nice bloke, who had an absolutely stinker and really must pull his socks up.

Then close the thread

F**k you

In my opinion, Ian John Lewis should have his license suspended.

I remember in the first Fragomeni-Wlodarczyk fight in Italy, he did all he could to help Fragomeni, repeatedly chastizing Wlodarczyk for no good reason, and deducting points without justification.

Then, he endangered the health of Shannon Briggs by refusing to stop the non-competitive fight despite the terrible beating Shannon was taking. Briggs collapsed and was hospitalized after the fight.

And Lewis robbed Zack Page of a deserved win over Tom Dallas - I think he scored every round for Dallas, despite Zack clearly winning at least five rounds.

G0mez wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:FFS I've had to have a little tidy of this again.

Accuse people of being sh1t by all means but be careful with other accusations please

Agreed.

Can we not just declare that Ian John Lewis is a really nice bloke, who had an absolutely stinker and really must pull his socks up.

Then close the thread

thanks for props Crazy!

and gomez spot on. it wass the more outlandish claims i have issue with.

I do agree Ian was a top ref and needs to improve but I am sure he is aware of this himself.

Tunney wrote: And Lewis robbed Zack Page of a deserved win over Tom Dallas - I think he scored every round for Dallas, despite Zack clearly winning at least five rounds.

referee: Ian John-Lewis 78-76

He scored it 78-76, you just need to search for boxers records on this very site.

G0mez wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:FFS I've had to have a little tidy of this again.

Accuse people of being sh1t by all means but be careful with other accusations please

Agreed.

Can we not just declare that Ian John Lewis is a really nice bloke, who had an absolutely stinker and really must pull his socks up.

Then close the thread

Maybe this is the problem and he just needs to purchase a quality pair of suspenders to keep his socks up so that he's not bobbing up and down throughout a fight

Dident matter where you sat at york hall the result would be the same a lynes win, no way can a judge blame his seating position for obscuring his view over twelve rounds.(if that is his excuse) lynes fans, purdy fans, commentators, even purdy himself said lynes won not even a close call, so unfortunately Mr Lewis has to take the flack, be nice if some kind of statement were made to diffuse the situation.

TheCobra wrote:

Tunney wrote: And Lewis robbed Zack Page of a deserved win over Tom Dallas - I think he scored every round for Dallas, despite Zack clearly winning at least five rounds.

referee: Ian John-Lewis 78-76

He scored it 78-76, you just need to search for boxers records on this very site.

CLASSIC. so now he is being blamed for ones he got right!

case in point.

He is also responisble for world poverty, global warming and death of several cuddly lovely polar bears!

J wrote:CLASSIC. so now he is being blamed for ones he got right!

case in point.

I think you've misunderstood J. He didn't get it right, he still controversially awarded the fight to Dallas, just by not as wide a margin as the original poster thought.

[
Good post Deserter, they don't want to upset the applecart. For example I don't think for one minute Robert Williams was paid to keep George Michael Carman's undefeated record intact by scoring the Bowen fight a draw, but thoughts of their use on future shows must come into play.

You kinda accept close rounds being scored to the home fighter (not that we should) but in a fight like Lynes v Purdy the rounds just weren't close. For the integrity of the sport his scorecard has to be held under scrutiny. No one wants a witch hunt J, but that doesn't mean we should just put our heads in the sand.

The standard of officiating in this country isn't good enough and that isn't all down to IJL[/quote]

Lenny (apols, can't do the quote thing for some reason)

Might the subconscious there be the time spent as a fighter, BF Williams, on the same circuit as George Gypsy Carmen? Who can tell, but the nature of the best means officials might have long standing relationships within the sport which could impact on their decision making

But who determines their use on a particular show?

Surely that's the board's job as the governing body......

Deserter wrote:

J wrote:CLASSIC. so now he is being blamed for ones he got right!

case in point.

I think you've misunderstood J. He didn't get it right, he still controversially awarded the fight to Dallas, just by not as wide a margin as the original poster thought.

Yep, I was just pointing out what the score was, it was still an absolute SHOCKER of a decision. Dallas walked away at the final bell and looked as surprised (and almost ashamed) as anybody to get his hand lifted by IJL.

TheCobra wrote:referee: Ian John-Lewis 78-76

He scored it 78-76, you just need to search for boxers records on this very site.

I re-watched the fight yesterday, and Zack Page clearly won AT LEAST fight rounds. Jim Watt and the other commentator thought so too.

That was a robbery, no matter how Lewis scored it.

And don't you think he should have stopped the Briggs-Klitschkos fight? Everybody from the ESPN commentators to the German media thought so, and Briggs was hospitalized for a week after the fight. His responsibility is to make sure the boxers do not get hurt.

Deserter wrote:

J wrote:CLASSIC. so now he is being blamed for ones he got right!

case in point.

I think you've misunderstood J. He didn't get it right, he still controversially awarded the fight to Dallas, just by not as wide a margin as the original poster thought.

my bad but that just makes it it subjective rather than the allegaitons of corrupt.

as for the briggs fight if ut had been stopped i am sure plenty owuldhave ben on here lambasting hom for not letitng briggs se the final bell. You cant win, who'd be a ref.

Fact is judging by boxing monthly and the comments by the pros in there they still feel the standard of refereeing is higher than in other countires. Froch being particularly vocal on it.

boxing fans moan too much FACT.

Ian John Lewis. We all know what he's up to! Terrible, terrible judge.

Yes, someone coined it when they said IJL has had loads of stinkers.

He's been on a warning since the prizefighter decision, and racked up a few more howlers.

Therefore, the need for action rests with the the regulator/governing body - it is what they are going to do, or more pertinently, not going to do, thus endangering other people's lives and financial livelehoods.

Can understand people's frustrations, but the blame is ultimately with the regulator.

J wrote:but that just makes it it subjective rather than the allegaitons of corrupt.

What do you feel about his performances as a judge and what would be your explanation for his scorecards being consistently dramatically at odds with neutral observers and always playing out in favour of the home fighter? As I've previously stated, it defies all normal laws of logic, which would dictate his 'subjective' cards play in favour of the 'away' fighter on occasion.

Tunney wrote:

TheCobra wrote:referee: Ian John-Lewis 78-76

He scored it 78-76, you just need to search for boxers records on this very site.

I re-watched the fight yesterday, and Zack Page clearly won AT LEAST fight rounds. Jim Watt and the other commentator thought so too.

That was a robbery, no matter how Lewis scored it.

And don't you think he should have stopped the Briggs-Klitschkos fight? Everybody from the ESPN commentators to the German media thought so, and Briggs was hospitalized for a week after the fight. His responsibility is to make sure the boxers do not get hurt.

That win did nothing to improve Dallas's career in fact it made it worse. He got blasted out of it by David Price a few weeks later. Had he lost to Page, I wonder would he have been offered the Price fight.