BoxRec

Scott got up at 9 and the stoppage was dodgy, Scott's still a bit of an idiot. Most fighters get up before 8. Better be safe than sorry

The referee made a mistake, end of

Shambles wrote:The referee made a mistake, end of

Scott made a bigger one

jessi wrote:

Shambles wrote:The referee made a mistake, end of

Scott made a bigger one

It was a big mistake largely because the referee botched the count. Scott would've beaten a properly administered count and a good referee would likely see that he was lucid and able to continue.

It's prudent to rise before Scott did, but that doesn't mean he and the referee are equally at fault and it doesn't justify the stoppage; it's a 10 count, not a 9.2 count.

crusader wrote:

jessi wrote:

Shambles wrote:The referee made a mistake, end of

Scott made a bigger one

It was a big mistake largely because the referee botched the count. Scott would've beaten a properly administered count and a good referee would likely see that he was lucid and able to continue.

It's prudent to rise before Scott did, but that doesn't mean he and the referee are equally at fault and it doesn't justify the stoppage; it's a 10 count, not a 9.2 count.

It's not a 10 count it's 9 then out!

Im pretty sure ten is never used its out and i think you can be counted out in the act of rising.Ill have to check but im sure thats what it says

At 10 your out and Malik wasn't fully upright at ten/out. Get over it.

Scott was up at 9 1/2. The count never reached 10 before he was up and ready to go.

If the count does not reach 10, you are not out. Simples.

Poor slag was robbed. I feel mugged off good and proper innit.

crusader wrote:

jessi wrote:

Shambles wrote:The referee made a mistake, end of

Scott made a bigger one

It was a big mistake largely because the referee botched the count. Scott would've beaten a properly administered count and a good referee would likely see that he was lucid and able to continue.

It's prudent to rise before Scott did, but that doesn't mean he and the referee are equally at fault and it doesn't justify the stoppage; it's a 10 count, not a 9.2 count.

It doesn't justify it but he knew the count was at 9. Most get up before 8. I'm not defending the ref but I would always panic that thing could happen and get up much sooner

You can say what you want, if your a pro you don't wait until 9.2 seconds before you even attempt to get up !

jessi wrote:You can say what you want, if your a pro you don't wait until 9.2 seconds before you even attempt to get up !

That's my point. It doesn't amke the ref right but Scott's an idiot

It's not a 10 count it's 9 then out!

It's essentially a ten count.

The referee counts nine and what would be a count of ten is instead declared as out. That means the boxer can rise at any point within ten seconds assuming a second per count; if they rise before that period, the bout shouldn't be stopped simply because they rose late in the count.

I don't understand why people seem to think nine then out implies a 9.0 second period to rise assuming a second per count, or that a boxer must be standing when a nine count is reached.

jessi wrote:You can say what you want, if your a pro you don't wait until 9.2 seconds before you even attempt to get up !

True, but it seemed like he still left himself enough time to rise within a properly-administered count. Contrary to what some suggest, it doesn't always take a full second to get up when you're primed to do so.

Perhaps this will be a lesson to boxers that it's best to play it safe with the count.

The Insider wrote:At 10 your out and Malik wasn't fully upright at ten/out. Get over it.

The referee waves the fight off immediately after reaching nine, not a second after reaching nine. My main issue with the stoppage is that 10/out was premature.

jonp wrote:Im pretty sure ten is never used its out and i think you can be counted out in the act of rising.Ill have to check but im sure thats what it says

You are correct Jon.

He would of got ktfo soon after he got up, if he was allowed to carry on so the ref did a good job and saved him from further punishment.

crusader wrote:

The Insider wrote:At 10 your out and Malik wasn't fully upright at ten/out. Get over it.

The referee waves the fight off immediately after reaching nine, not a second after reaching nine. My main issue with the stoppage is that 10/out was premature.

It wasn't immediately after but I'll grant you it wasn't quite a full second so your argument or gripe is that the ref short counted by a couple of tenths of a second? If as a pro you want to gamble on that narrower a margin you've got yourself to blame imo.

I timed it at 9.2 and Scott was almost up by then; I have no doubt he would've been completely up with nearly a full second more.

It was an unwise move from Scott, no argument.

crusader wrote:I timed it at 9.2 and Scott was almost up by then; I have no doubt he would've been completely up with nearly a full second more.

It was an unwise move from Scott, no argument.

Next time maybe Phil will take his stop watch in with him

He doesn't need to.

He just needs to ensure that he doesn't wave the count immediately after reaching nine. So seven........eight.......nine........out and not seven.......eight.......nine.out.

I don't have much sympathy for Scott because it's just sensible not to leave it to the last fraction of a second but i thought the boxer had to be ready to continue at the count of ten. So whether it's 9 & out or up to 10 then waved off if you weren't ready to continue when the count reached ten - it didn't make any difference.

If that's not the case can't a boxer take his knee of the canvas a fraction of a second before the 10 count, slowly stand upright for 11, 12. Have the ref wipe his gloves and look into his eyes for 13, 14, 15 and wave to opponent back in, 16,17?

So which is it? I've looked on the bbbofc site and can't find clarification. Does a boxer just have to be only touching the canvas with the soles of his boots when the count reaches 10 or must he be ready to fight so that the ref could in theory wave the opponent in at 10?

Maybe that the ref knew Scott wasn't going ready to continue at 10 and that's why he waved it off less than one second after the count of 9. But maybe he bodged it. I don't really care but i'd be interested in know the official rule and if it is different in the US.

Also of course if you are only counting to 10 then a full 10 seconds are never given as the fight will be over 0.1 of a second after 9.9. A full 10 seconds ends just before 11.

crusader wrote:He doesn't need to.

He just needs to ensure that he doesn't wave the count immediately after reaching nine. So seven........eight.......nine........out and not seven.......eight.......nine.out.

I can't believe you are sad enough to actually put a stop watch on the count 9.2 FFS

Shirow wrote:So which is it? I've looked on the bbbofc site and can't find clarification. Does a boxer just have to be only touching the canvas with the soles of his boots when the count reaches 10 or must he be ready to fight so that the ref could in theory wave the opponent in at 10?

For me, this is the important point and hasn't really been clarified in the discussions surrounding this whole thing.

The ref never gets to say 10. He waves his arms instead, thats the way it goes 9 then they wave it off. In this case i do think the ref got it wrong he said 9 then it was waved off before it giving another second but Scott was an idiot for giving the ref the (home town) option

grub wrote:

Shirow wrote:So which is it? I've looked on the bbbofc site and can't find clarification. Does a boxer just have to be only touching the canvas with the soles of his boots when the count reaches 10 or must he be ready to fight so that the ref could in theory wave the opponent in at 10?

For me, this is the important point and hasn't really been clarified in the discussions surrounding this whole thing.

A contestant who is down must get up unassisted and be in a position to defend within 10 seconds; the opponent meanwhile shall retire to the furthest neutral corner and shall not resume boxing until ordered to do so by the Referee. A boxer is to be considered down even when on one or both feet, at the same time any other part of the body is touching the ground, or in the act of rising.

taffytoon wrote:

crusader wrote:He doesn't need to.

He just needs to ensure that he doesn't wave the count immediately after reaching nine. So seven........eight.......nine........out and not seven.......eight.......nine.out.

I can't believe you are sad enough to actually put a stop watch on the count 9.2 FFS

I can't believe you'd see measuring the exact time as sad when time is at the crux of the matter and timing the count takes only a few seconds.

:P :) --Do these faces strengthen my point?

You have no point