Scott Quigg v Hozumi Hasegawa
Posted: 09 Oct 2013, 09:09
Story from Japan is that HH is willing to travel to our shores for a fight with Quigg, how'd we see it going?
Why have you posted that?columbo wrote:I give you http://www.BS.com/salinas-inju ... oms--70401
Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.Horse wrote:Why have you posted that?columbo wrote:I give you http://www.BS.com/salinas-inju ... oms--70401
Explain yourself.columbo wrote:Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.
There is no rematch clause Salinas will have to get himself back into mandatory position. Quigg should fight Cermeno on the Froch bill as his voluntarycolumbo wrote:Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.Horse wrote:Why have you posted that?columbo wrote:I give you http://www.BS.com/salinas-inju ... oms--70401
God I hope not.columbo wrote:I give you http://www.BS.com/salinas-inju ... oms--70401
There is no rematch clause Salinas will have to get himself back into mandatory position. Quigg should fight Cermeno on the Froch bill as his voluntary[/quote]columbo wrote:Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.Horse wrote:Why have you posted that?columbo wrote:I give you http://www.BS.com/salinas-inju ... oms--70401
Because Quigg was awarded the title, I believe Salinas counted as his mandatory and usually in that situation the result is final unless there's seriously dodgy officiating.columbo wrote:What do you mean there was no rematch clause? It was a mandated fight. It's not like it was made with any kind of conditions attached. Look at when Bellew fought Chilemba the first time. Ended up being a rematch with it being a draw.columbo wrote:There is no rematch clause Salinas will have to get himself back into mandatory position. Quigg should fight Cermeno on the Froch bill as his voluntaryHorse wrote: Isnt it obvious? If not im disappointed in you.