BoxRec

Right Chaps

Was reading Boxing News last night and there were calls for the referee who precided over Enzo Macs brutal KO loss to Frenkel to be banned.

Does anyone else think this is a bit harsh?

I mean Enzo beat the count and was level headed enough to say he was fine and could box on, his corner did nothing to protect him.
Unless his eyes were rolling around his head, speech slurred and knees going, how would the ref know otherwise?
Other boxers if feeling groggy in this situation would have come out cautious and maybe tried to hold on a bit to the end of the round or at least till he got his sense back, maybe move around the ring and try to avoid being hit for a while.
Enzo did not, he walked straight out with purpose, with his hands low, and paid the price.

Anyone have any thoughts?

Cheers SLH

You have to know your boxers. That referee should know that Macca's legs leave him, and when that happens, he should stopped. Look against Haye or Afolabi for examples. He will get up but he's always never really in a position to protect himself. If was a bad moment for both Enzo and that referee.

That sort of thing only seems to happen, to the Home Fighter D

I enjoyed the brutal knockout, so being honest, I'm glad the referee let the action continue.

If a fighter says let me fight, beats the count - then so be it.

If anyone should take stick, then it should be Enzo's corner.

I tell you what, if they had thrown the towel in, Enzo would be moaning and having yet another fight.

Personally I think Enzo was let down by the ref and his own corner. Ofourse a fighter is going to say he's alright to carry on, it's what fighters do. The ref and corner are there to protect the fighter in these situations when he can't protect himself. People complained about the Dilks stoppage, but at least Carl can take another fight and continue his career.

When Dublin's Pat McCormack went over to Denmark in 1973 to fight the unbeaten Meronen, he agreed to make it look good. However, he wasn't getting hit hard enough to go down convincingly and tapped the Finn to the body in the fourth round to gee him up, only for the fragile Meronen to crumple to the canvas. There is a picture of McCormack snarling and bawling over the fallen Meronen. Pat looks for all the world the ferocious animal in the picture, revelling in his success. He later admitted to Harry Mullan that he is pleading with Meronen, "Get up! Get up!"


http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

The BN was very uneven about this, they barely criticised Parris when Khan got knocked out, let alone call for him to be banned.
British referee's are rarely called to account

Coco wrote:The BN was very uneven about this, they barely criticised Parris when Khan got knocked out, let alone call for him to be banned.
British referee's are rarely called to account

It wasn't Parris it was O'connor
I think British refs usually tend to stop them early rather than too late

Coco wrote:The BN was very uneven about this, they barely criticised Parris when Khan got knocked out, let alone call for him to be banned.
British referee's are rarely called to account

I agree wholely... Indeed, that decision "not to leave it to doubt" was applauded on here. Similarly, Lewis vs McCall 1 (Lewis was in worst state than Enzo IMO) has been called a bad decision on many times. Lewis had to be held up by the ref as he waved it off.

I do somewhat disagree with the poster who says about a ref should know a fighter. Yes, he should - but in the examples you said Enzo was stopped, so nobody knew how Enzo would have continued. Good decisions the pair of them I might add, but this ref wasn't too know how quickly Enzo could recover. Indeed, looking at the fights in which Enzo was BADLY hurt and allowed to continue - Enzo ended up flooring (KO'ing one of them) and beating both fighters.

I have seen worse...but whoever I say this to looks at me as if I'm mental.

I have seen worse.

The ref in the Naz Liendo fight was the worst I have seen.

However, the ref in the Enzo fight should be banned.

Look, as a fighter I imagine even if you are close to knacked, you will know when a ref asks you if your ok you say Yes. Enzo was clearly not and should have been saved from himself and not left to basically have his face smashed in which is what happened.

It was very lucky he was not seriously hurt.

And to be fair this rant is coming from someone who generally thinks fights are stopped too early.

We saw both extremes that night with Degale v Dilks then Enzo.

It was not nice to watch, and at the time I thought it was a bit late, but he beat the count, so you have to let him continue until he gets KO'd.

No you dont Carl.

A ref's job surely is to make sure a fighter is stopped if he is in no position to continue regardless of whether he beats the count or not.

Enzo was in no fit state to go on and should have been protected against further punishment and possible injury.

It was clear cut, he was not and the ref deserves to be criticised for it.

It was one of the worst I have seen, as I said Naz v Liendo was the worst example closely followed by Arthur Mercante Jnr in the Ayers/Rogby fight where the fighters did his job for him.

Its a difficult job but that does not mean ref's should be imune from criticism.

There's no doubt he should have stopped it. I was 20 rows back and I could see his eyes weren't right. The ref or the corner are there to protect the fighters as much as anything and they both let down Enzo on the night in my opinion.

That said, I it does tend to be the other way round in Britain - both the DeGale and Gavin fights were called off way too early. It happens all the time in mis-matched undercard fights but both of those two were boxing for titles. Protecting fighters is paramount but you have to give them a chance as well. Dilks had trained for 6 or 8 weeks for his shot and he was even given the chance to weather the storm and re-adjust. And it doesn't cut it to say "ah he was outclassed, it would've only been a matter of time anyway, blah blah..." If he was good enough to be a worthy opponent in the build up then he's good enough to be allowed a proper chance. And the real crux is if it was the other way around and he'd caught DeGale and backed him up there's no way the ref would've jumped in.

Your right about Enzo to be fair, I was there, and he was wobbling all over the shop, that ref did not even do the basic checks on him. Regarding the Dilks fight, and many many like it. It is bordering on fixing. What if Dilks would of settled in a few round and was really giving DeGale a hard fight. DeGale could of crumbled, we will never know until they decide to chuck him in at the deep end....like they did with Mitchell. And we all know how that turned out..

Coco wrote:The BN was very uneven about this, they barely criticised Parris when Khan got knocked out, let alone call for him to be banned.
British referee's are rarely called to account

Spot on.

I think that had the ref called the fight off after the first knockdown then Enzo would have complained. Thats the impression I got. Yes he was gone, but fighters in a worse state then that have come back to win. Further to this I'm struggling to think of a fight where the person who got absolutely demolished ended up injured- its usually a steady beating that causes injury not just one big shot. Joey Gamache was one that sprung to mind that goes a little against the grain though I'm not sure how injured he was.