It was the Worse decision I have seen in a superfight (and yes, including Lewis vs Holyfield I). DLH boxed a tactically smart fight, showed that at this weight he was faster than Moseley - I don't know the punch stats but he must have thrown and landed the more shots and most of his punches were meaty (unlike in the last 3 rounds against Trinidad).
Glenn McCory scored it nine rounds to 3 (giving Moseley the 5,6, 9), Ian Darke scored it 10 - 2 (5, 9). I scored it 9 rounds to 3 (5, 9, 12 to Moseley).
In my opinion the only round Moseley won clean, beyond all doubt was the 9th, the were only 4 rounds that he could bring up a case 5, 6, 9, 12, the rest of the rounds DLH gave him a lesson.
Moseley looked confused throughout the contest, couldn't handle DLH's superior speed and his corner knew it. Moseley, while on the front foot, didn't do enough work to win the rounds and, as opposed to running like he did against Trinidad, DLH boxed as smart as I've seen him. He was landing some hard shots.
I give Moseley some credit, he looked the natural Light Middle of the two and his punches (the little that he threw and landed) seemed to have more of an effect DLH than in their first meeting. However, he didn't sustain the action when he had DLH in fairly serious trouble in the 9th - that body shot took everything away and I'm sure if he'd kept that intensity up into the 10th he would have at least closed the scoring, cause I think DLH would have gone down.
DLH showed remarkable fitness to win the 10th and 11th after being so badly hurt - he could have afforded to lose the rounds and still win the fight on my card, but he won both rounds.
DLH conducted himself well in the interview, I think he must have been in shock with that decision, Moseley's father with that 'I was saying he's behind cause were in DLH terridory' is lying, I knew, and Shane knew that he got a gift.
I wouldn't blame DLH for sacking Mayweather for this loss (we all know he usually does if he loses) some of the things Mayweather was saying were ridiculous and the looks DLH was giving him were just class. Did you here Mayweather say that Moseley was spent after ONE round.
Moseley vs DLH Worse Decision in a Superfight?
Moseley vs DLH Worse Decision in a Superfight?
Last edited by stujones on 14 Sep 2003, 11:18, edited 1 time in total.
I don't think i'm alone here in thinking the decision was a disgrace, when it was announced look at Mosley, look at his face and look at the reaction of his camp NO ONE expected him to win. His father was despondent throughout and desperation was creeping in at times, people say that in America the judges like to score the fights on aggression. That is EFFECTIVE AGGRESSION, fair enough Mosley was at most points fighting on the front foot but he was not landing quality punches, QUALITY OVER QUANTITY. Not that Mosley even had the quantity! DLH was fighting on the back foot throughout, IS THAT A CRIME!! If he is landing the better shots then regardless of his tactics he is winning the rounds, the same folks who thought Jirov won against Toney are the only guys who can seriously see Shane winning this fight. He lacked speed and mobility but surprisingly carried power and rocked DLH at times and showed extra strength, i didn't think DLH had it all his own way against Vargas and when Fernando used his extra strength he looked the more capable man in that fight. Sky commentators Glenn McCrory and Ian Darke had it 117-112 and 118-110 respectively and i had it at least 116-112 being kind to Mosley. The sad thing is the inept scoring was by three experienced and usually competent judges, if these people are letting us down then what have we got left for the sports credibility?
-
Dave1armedTua
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 204
- Joined: 01 Apr 2003, 22:29
Sorry Tantum, it was no where near as close of a fight as Mayorga and Forrest, and THAT fight wasn't close at all. That should tell you how bad the decision was.
I swear to God, Joe Cortez shit his pants when he heard the decision. Ref's are supposed to keep a straight face, but he knew something was wrong and couldn't stop the look of confusion from sprouting for a few seconds.
I swear to God, Joe Cortez shit his pants when he heard the decision. Ref's are supposed to keep a straight face, but he knew something was wrong and couldn't stop the look of confusion from sprouting for a few seconds.
The only thin g I can say to defend the decision was that Mosley was able to hurt DLH in the fight - ODLH won the rounds, yes - but never actually HURT Mosley - wheras Mosley hurt DLH on a couple of occasions and once REALLY ROCKED DLH and had him hanging on.
I felt the result was wrong - but have heard people say repeatedly that professional boxing is about power and quality not just volume of punches landed - and Mosley won that aspect IMO (bizarrely!?!?)
I felt the result was wrong - but have heard people say repeatedly that professional boxing is about power and quality not just volume of punches landed - and Mosley won that aspect IMO (bizarrely!?!?)
When Mosley stepped on the scales I thought then he looked very strong indeed, then when the fight got going he looked even stronger - but he DID NOT win that fight. God knows what those judges were on.
I actually thought the Trinidad fight was closer - being my absolute kindest to Tito I scored that 115-114 to Oscar. As for Mosley I couldn't give him more than 3 rounds. Just as I said - he doesn't have that old intesity anymore (except for in rare bursts where he looks great). Oscar didn't look brilliant himself but he did exactly what he needed to do to win, he had a couple of shaky moments along the way but that should not have cost him his titles. It's decisions like this that make me want to walk away from boxing for good.
Oh and if ONE person on here even thinks about implying that I've been in some way influenced by Ian Darkes commentary I'm going to hunt you down and kill you.
I actually thought the Trinidad fight was closer - being my absolute kindest to Tito I scored that 115-114 to Oscar. As for Mosley I couldn't give him more than 3 rounds. Just as I said - he doesn't have that old intesity anymore (except for in rare bursts where he looks great). Oscar didn't look brilliant himself but he did exactly what he needed to do to win, he had a couple of shaky moments along the way but that should not have cost him his titles. It's decisions like this that make me want to walk away from boxing for good.
Oh and if ONE person on here even thinks about implying that I've been in some way influenced by Ian Darkes commentary I'm going to hunt you down and kill you.
Accessing the forum 36 hours after the events of Saturday night I fully expected most views to have already been covered and expressed and indeed they were. My first reaction was that DLH got shafted. As I was almost certain the fight would go the distance I kept tabs from the off and first round I gave Mosely was the 9th. I actually thought he won the 10th too, DLH fought back well but Shane was still the more effective in that round.
Anyways, ring announcer clears his throat "All 3 judges are in favour of" and of course you think DLH has earned himself a nice unanimous decision as widely predicted "And the new", well I spat my beer across the front room much to the disdain of the other half. Remarkable scoring really, I gave Mosely 3 rounds, DLH 8 round and one even.
Oscar never really won any rounds BIG but he was winning rounds no doubt.
It's funny, you would have thought if anyone was going to get shafted it was going to be Mosely what with DLH being the one who generates millions of PPV and lives sales, I really figured if it was close it would go to Oscar. In that respect I was even slightly surprised they gave Mosely the first fight, what with the Trinidad fight the judges have certainly made DLH pay for those earlier victories in his career over Whitaker and Quartey that many never forgave him for.
It will be interesting, this outcome may change the face of boxing. In De La Hoya they may have picked the wrong man to give out a bad decision to in a major fight. He has pledged to push for an inquiry and threatens to hire the mst expensive lawyers to challenge and even overturn it, if he were to prove successful they will change how fights are scored.
Anyways, ring announcer clears his throat "All 3 judges are in favour of" and of course you think DLH has earned himself a nice unanimous decision as widely predicted "And the new", well I spat my beer across the front room much to the disdain of the other half. Remarkable scoring really, I gave Mosely 3 rounds, DLH 8 round and one even.
Oscar never really won any rounds BIG but he was winning rounds no doubt.
It's funny, you would have thought if anyone was going to get shafted it was going to be Mosely what with DLH being the one who generates millions of PPV and lives sales, I really figured if it was close it would go to Oscar. In that respect I was even slightly surprised they gave Mosely the first fight, what with the Trinidad fight the judges have certainly made DLH pay for those earlier victories in his career over Whitaker and Quartey that many never forgave him for.
It will be interesting, this outcome may change the face of boxing. In De La Hoya they may have picked the wrong man to give out a bad decision to in a major fight. He has pledged to push for an inquiry and threatens to hire the mst expensive lawyers to challenge and even overturn it, if he were to prove successful they will change how fights are scored.
-
MightyWarrior
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 13262
- Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 14:01
I don't think it was an outrageous decision, I think we've seen a lot worse than that.
Barrera/Morales 1 for one: a least MAB made that fight, only to get robbed.
Oscar did just enough I thought, just tried to nick a points win with minimal involvement - it was a very disappointing fight overall.
Yes Mosley was lucky to get it, but I don't have any great sympathy for Oscar this time: he's had close ones go his way before and he's still walking off with 20 million.
I scored it 115-115 - but I was probably being generous to Mosley, so Oscar should've got a close one.
But there were so many close rounds, with hardly any major punches landed. Pitty pat shots from Oscar and occasional big shots from Mosley.
Barrera/Morales 1 for one: a least MAB made that fight, only to get robbed.
Oscar did just enough I thought, just tried to nick a points win with minimal involvement - it was a very disappointing fight overall.
Yes Mosley was lucky to get it, but I don't have any great sympathy for Oscar this time: he's had close ones go his way before and he's still walking off with 20 million.
I scored it 115-115 - but I was probably being generous to Mosley, so Oscar should've got a close one.
But there were so many close rounds, with hardly any major punches landed. Pitty pat shots from Oscar and occasional big shots from Mosley.
I thought Golden Bollocks won it, but I only lost a tenner on the result unlike Bob Arum, who clearly bet a lot more on his charge, and it's hardly the worst decision I've seen. In fact, there have been far worse. Think of Norton in the third fight with Ali, or the first Jose Luis Ramirez-Pernell Whitaker fight.
Lupe pintor against Carlos Zarate in 1979 looked very dodgy. Zarate quit the sport in disgust for several years.
Alfredo Escalera received a 'gift' decision over Philadelphia's Tyrone Everett in 1976 at the Spectrum IN Philadelphia (even the Philadelphia judge scored in Escalera's favor). It was a decision that sent Everett spiralling into a drugs and sex hell ("that's no plaything," he said to his girlfriend just before she shot him dead; she had come home unexpectedly and caught Everett having sex with a man). In Nigel Collins's 1991 book, 'Boxing Babylon', promoter Russell Peltz Jr recalls how he watched a tape of the fight with Tyrone a few days after the event. Everett sat there and said nothing about the action until a moment late in the 15-rounder when he made Escalera miss and stumble head first into his groin area. "Man," shouted Everett, "I made him suck my dick!"
It was his dick that cost him his life. But the judges helped kill him, too.
But bad decisions will always crop up. Humans err. TV distorts. Fights are subjective. Crowds influence. Decisions that stunned me at first go, don't appear so bad on tape. Or appear worse. Decisions that had people screaming from the highest rooftops, like the Lewis-Holyfield draw, were not so bad to me in the first place.
I thought Panama's Guillermo Jones was robbed against Johnny Nelson for the WBO cruiserweight title. Jeff Fenech's draw with Azumah Nelson in Las Vegas in 1991 was another stinker. Fenech was the better man that night, and rocked Nelson in the last half minute to put the seal on a magnificent performance. But it still wasn't enough.
Yet another draw that caused an outcry came when Pernell Whitaker and
Julio Cesar Chavez clashed in 1993. Chavez was 87-0 record and fighting in front of 60,000 adoring fans in San Antonio. Did two of the judges sit on the fence with scores of 115-115? Mickey Vann went for Whitaker.
Lupe pintor against Carlos Zarate in 1979 looked very dodgy. Zarate quit the sport in disgust for several years.
Alfredo Escalera received a 'gift' decision over Philadelphia's Tyrone Everett in 1976 at the Spectrum IN Philadelphia (even the Philadelphia judge scored in Escalera's favor). It was a decision that sent Everett spiralling into a drugs and sex hell ("that's no plaything," he said to his girlfriend just before she shot him dead; she had come home unexpectedly and caught Everett having sex with a man). In Nigel Collins's 1991 book, 'Boxing Babylon', promoter Russell Peltz Jr recalls how he watched a tape of the fight with Tyrone a few days after the event. Everett sat there and said nothing about the action until a moment late in the 15-rounder when he made Escalera miss and stumble head first into his groin area. "Man," shouted Everett, "I made him suck my dick!"
It was his dick that cost him his life. But the judges helped kill him, too.
But bad decisions will always crop up. Humans err. TV distorts. Fights are subjective. Crowds influence. Decisions that stunned me at first go, don't appear so bad on tape. Or appear worse. Decisions that had people screaming from the highest rooftops, like the Lewis-Holyfield draw, were not so bad to me in the first place.
I thought Panama's Guillermo Jones was robbed against Johnny Nelson for the WBO cruiserweight title. Jeff Fenech's draw with Azumah Nelson in Las Vegas in 1991 was another stinker. Fenech was the better man that night, and rocked Nelson in the last half minute to put the seal on a magnificent performance. But it still wasn't enough.
Yet another draw that caused an outcry came when Pernell Whitaker and
Julio Cesar Chavez clashed in 1993. Chavez was 87-0 record and fighting in front of 60,000 adoring fans in San Antonio. Did two of the judges sit on the fence with scores of 115-115? Mickey Vann went for Whitaker.
Last edited by bennie on 15 Sep 2003, 13:38, edited 1 time in total.
-
MightyWarrior
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 13262
- Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 14:01
Yep the Ramirez/Whitaker was one of the worst in recent memory - and a lot of people said Whitaker won his fight with Oscar, as well as the Chavez robbery.
The Chavez/Randall 1st fight was pretty scandalous, though not down to the judges that time.
Larry Holmes got a few dubious wins late in his career. Even 15 years on there's people who'll tell you Hagler was robbed blind against Leonard.
I think one of the judges scored around nine rounds even in that one!
The Chavez/Randall 1st fight was pretty scandalous, though not down to the judges that time.
Larry Holmes got a few dubious wins late in his career. Even 15 years on there's people who'll tell you Hagler was robbed blind against Leonard.
I think one of the judges scored around nine rounds even in that one!
I don't understand when people are saying DLH tried to nick the decision, what he did in the last 4 rounds against Trinidad was trying to nick a decision.
He threw more punches, landed more punches and its not as if he was throwing pitter patter punches they were solid. Just because Moseley was able to take them without flinching doesn't say they weren't scoring punches.
Do you know what recent fight, Saturdays mega-fight reminded me of. Harrison vs Medina (with Medina being DLH and Harrison being Moseley) Medina did the same tactics, nicked the rounds by boxing (DLH punches were better than that).
For me, people who thought Moseley won this fight, must have thought Harrison won that Match up - cause there was one or two rounds in that fight which were fairly reminiscent of the 9th in this one - Harrison pressure towards the end was definately causing an effect. The rest was all Medina (for me) the same with Saturdays outcome.
Bennie, IMO it does go into the Norton vs Ali III, Lewis vs Holyfield I bracket of terrible decisions. Its far worse the Morales vs Barrera I (watch the fight again) I actually scored it Barrera by 1, but thanks to that controversial 10-8 final round. Thats the thing with round by round scoring - Barrera undoubtedly won the fight, cause he won his rounds bigger.
However, overall I had it Medina by a wide margin and likewise I had DLH be a wide margin.
He threw more punches, landed more punches and its not as if he was throwing pitter patter punches they were solid. Just because Moseley was able to take them without flinching doesn't say they weren't scoring punches.
Do you know what recent fight, Saturdays mega-fight reminded me of. Harrison vs Medina (with Medina being DLH and Harrison being Moseley) Medina did the same tactics, nicked the rounds by boxing (DLH punches were better than that).
For me, people who thought Moseley won this fight, must have thought Harrison won that Match up - cause there was one or two rounds in that fight which were fairly reminiscent of the 9th in this one - Harrison pressure towards the end was definately causing an effect. The rest was all Medina (for me) the same with Saturdays outcome.
Bennie, IMO it does go into the Norton vs Ali III, Lewis vs Holyfield I bracket of terrible decisions. Its far worse the Morales vs Barrera I (watch the fight again) I actually scored it Barrera by 1, but thanks to that controversial 10-8 final round. Thats the thing with round by round scoring - Barrera undoubtedly won the fight, cause he won his rounds bigger.
However, overall I had it Medina by a wide margin and likewise I had DLH be a wide margin.
De La Hoya won clearly. Mosley followed him round the ring swiping at air for eight rounds and eating jabs. The only round Mosley won conclusively was the ninth.
Oscar showed he was the superior boxer. There was no knockdowns as a result from Shane's more "effective" punching.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSCAR CAN WALK AWAY NOW
BY MIKE NOSKY
Words like controversial, disputed and questionable simply do not do justice to Saturday night's rematch between Oscar De La Hoya and his nemesis Sugar Shane Mosley. It is, quite frankly, one of the worst moments in boxing that I have seen and I don't mind telling you that when I woke up this morning, I had two lingering thoughts about the fight.
The first is that Oscar was victimized by his forgetful ending against Felix Trinidad four years ago and the other was that there is no need for Oscar to look for a third bout. We have seen the two friends in the ring twice now, and its obvious who the better fighter is: Oscar De La Hoya.
Much like what happened when Trinidad was awarded the final rounds unanimously by the ringside judges against Oscar, Mosley swept away the last four rounds on all three cards. Certainly, Shane won the ninth round and it is obvious that the judges were more intent on punishing Oscar for his worst four rounds ever, then they were on rewarding him for outclassing Shane on Saturday night.
Looking back over the pay-per-view telecast, even with Shane's apparent domination In the ninth, by the way - that is the only round out of the twelve that could unquestionably have gone to Mosley, he still managed to only land four more punches in the frame. In the following round, Oscar bounced back and landed nine more shots, while throwing eleven more.
Regardless, however, of the punch stats, De La Hoya controlled the fight at nearly all times. Even when Shane was being the aggressor, he was not being effective. Unless you call getting caught with jabs and being led around the ring, being effective.
The talk before this fight was that De La Hoya would possibly move on to a bout with reigning world lightweight champion Floyd Mayweather, Jr. or world middleweight champion Bernard Hopkins some time next year. Those plans, well maybe not a Hopkins fight, are now scuttled for sure. We expect that there will be talks between Shane and Oscar for a third fight.
But Oscar won the fight, even if the judges didn't give it to him. There is no need to see it again. As much as this loss will be tough on De La Hoya, its even worse on the boxing fan who will again have to explain how something so apparently obvious went bad.
Much like Marvelous Marvin Hagler did after his epic bout with Sugar Ray Leonard sixteen years ago, I hope that Oscar turns his back on boxing and never comes back. He is the "Golden Boy" and deserved better from this sport. He earned his check on Saturday night, the judges did not.
Oscar showed he was the superior boxer. There was no knockdowns as a result from Shane's more "effective" punching.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSCAR CAN WALK AWAY NOW
BY MIKE NOSKY
Words like controversial, disputed and questionable simply do not do justice to Saturday night's rematch between Oscar De La Hoya and his nemesis Sugar Shane Mosley. It is, quite frankly, one of the worst moments in boxing that I have seen and I don't mind telling you that when I woke up this morning, I had two lingering thoughts about the fight.
The first is that Oscar was victimized by his forgetful ending against Felix Trinidad four years ago and the other was that there is no need for Oscar to look for a third bout. We have seen the two friends in the ring twice now, and its obvious who the better fighter is: Oscar De La Hoya.
Much like what happened when Trinidad was awarded the final rounds unanimously by the ringside judges against Oscar, Mosley swept away the last four rounds on all three cards. Certainly, Shane won the ninth round and it is obvious that the judges were more intent on punishing Oscar for his worst four rounds ever, then they were on rewarding him for outclassing Shane on Saturday night.
Looking back over the pay-per-view telecast, even with Shane's apparent domination In the ninth, by the way - that is the only round out of the twelve that could unquestionably have gone to Mosley, he still managed to only land four more punches in the frame. In the following round, Oscar bounced back and landed nine more shots, while throwing eleven more.
Regardless, however, of the punch stats, De La Hoya controlled the fight at nearly all times. Even when Shane was being the aggressor, he was not being effective. Unless you call getting caught with jabs and being led around the ring, being effective.
The talk before this fight was that De La Hoya would possibly move on to a bout with reigning world lightweight champion Floyd Mayweather, Jr. or world middleweight champion Bernard Hopkins some time next year. Those plans, well maybe not a Hopkins fight, are now scuttled for sure. We expect that there will be talks between Shane and Oscar for a third fight.
But Oscar won the fight, even if the judges didn't give it to him. There is no need to see it again. As much as this loss will be tough on De La Hoya, its even worse on the boxing fan who will again have to explain how something so apparently obvious went bad.
Much like Marvelous Marvin Hagler did after his epic bout with Sugar Ray Leonard sixteen years ago, I hope that Oscar turns his back on boxing and never comes back. He is the "Golden Boy" and deserved better from this sport. He earned his check on Saturday night, the judges did not.
What was scandalous about the Randall-Chavez first fight, MW? I thought Randall deserved the verdict.MightyWarrior wrote:Yep the Ramirez/Whitaker was one of the worst in recent memory - and a lot of people said Whitaker won his fight with Oscar, as well as the Chavez robbery.
The Chavez/Randall 1st fight was pretty scandalous, though not down to the judges that time.
Larry Holmes got a few dubious wins late in his career. Even 15 years on there's people who'll tell you Hagler was robbed blind against Leonard.
I think one of the judges scored around nine rounds even in that one!
Agree with Bennie here, I remember the fight and it was close all the way through, if memory serves me correct, late in the fight (might have been the last) Randall put the great man on the seat of his pants. That really confirmed the score cards. Now the second fight was dodge (maybe thats what your refering too.bennie wrote:What was scandalous about the Randall-Chavez first fight, MW? I thought Randall deserved the verdict.MightyWarrior wrote:Yep the Ramirez/Whitaker was one of the worst in recent memory - and a lot of people said Whitaker won his fight with Oscar, as well as the Chavez robbery.
The Chavez/Randall 1st fight was pretty scandalous, though not down to the judges that time.
Larry Holmes got a few dubious wins late in his career. Even 15 years on there's people who'll tell you Hagler was robbed blind against Leonard.
I think one of the judges scored around nine rounds even in that one!
I know Watson vs Eubank I doesn't fall into the superfight category, but that one was scandelous and I'm a Eubank fan.
Yes, that nine point card in the Leonard vs Hagler fight was rediculous, but the right man won.
-
MightyWarrior
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 13262
- Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 14:01
Yes you're both right, I don't think it was the 1st fight - just recall something very dubious going on when JC got knocked down - headbutt or something?? WBC president stepped in an saved Mexico's Golden Boy that night.stujones wrote:Agree with Bennie here, I remember the fight and it was close all the way through, if memory serves me correct, late in the fight (might have been the last) Randall put the great man on the seat of his pants. That really confirmed the score cards. Now the second fight was dodge (maybe thats what your refering too.bennie wrote:What was scandalous about the Randall-Chavez first fight, MW? I thought Randall deserved the verdict.MightyWarrior wrote:Yep the Ramirez/Whitaker was one of the worst in recent memory - and a lot of people said Whitaker won his fight with Oscar, as well as the Chavez robbery.
The Chavez/Randall 1st fight was pretty scandalous, though not down to the judges that time.
Larry Holmes got a few dubious wins late in his career. Even 15 years on there's people who'll tell you Hagler was robbed blind against Leonard.
I think one of the judges scored around nine rounds even in that one!
I know Watson vs Eubank I doesn't fall into the superfight category, but that one was scandelous and I'm a Eubank fan.
Yes, that nine point card in the Leonard vs Hagler fight was rediculous, but the right man won.
I think Mighty Warrior is still nursing a hangover from his all-nighter on Saturday. Randall floored Chavez with a peach of a right hand. No seriously, I know what he is referring to. Chavez was docked points for low blows and would have won otherwise, or at least held on to his title with a draw, I can't quite remember which.
It was a bitter pill to swallow for the great Julio, who wanted to win 100 fights on the spin.
Incidentally, I have full details of that Hagler scorecard somewhere. I'll try and dig it out.
It was a bitter pill to swallow for the great Julio, who wanted to win 100 fights on the spin.
Incidentally, I have full details of that Hagler scorecard somewhere. I'll try and dig it out.
-
MightyWarrior
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 13262
- Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 14:01
Your're not wrong there mate! Takes me awhile to get over the allnighters these days....bennie wrote:I think Mighty Warrior is still nursing a hangover from his all-nighter on Saturday. Randall floored Chavez with a peach of a right hand. No seriously, I know what he is referring to. Chavez was docked points for low blows and would have won otherwise, or at least held on to his title with a draw, I can't quite remember which.
It was a bitter pill to swallow for the great Julio, who wanted to win 100 fights on the spin.
Incidentally, I have full details of that Hagler scorecard somewhere. I'll try and dig it out.
That judge was oriental I think - Japanese?? Belongs in the Guiness Book Of Records at any rate.
-
MightyWarrior
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 13262
- Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 14:01
It's your good advice!! Where's Goz when I need him...MightyWarrior wrote:bennie wrote:Can someone confirm for me that they can see my avatar of Julio Cesar Chavez cracking Jose Luis Ramirez please.
I was just about to ask you, what the fukcs up with your avatar??! All we can see is - x - can you sort it out please bennie? Are you on the Stafford Ale again tonight?