Atleast Dick Turpin wore a mask

buzz · Post by **buzz** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:17

Poor Vanzie, love him or loathe him yet again he was shit on by either Spunks Waxwork or British Boxing Board or both.

What a total let down this boxing game is at times.

I dont mind home favourites and close calls, but daylight robbery like that makes me feel sick and that is from an neutral point of view.

Terry O'conner, what a big wet puff. :x

beduff · Post by **beduff** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:26

me to not a vanzie fan but that was plan robbery.train hard and gets robbed by someone taking a back hander,terry o conor should never referee another british title fight again[the man is a disgrace to the sport.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:27

To quote Barry Hearn recently: Glenn McCrory needs to get a proper job and so does his B-team sidekick Adam Smith. I thought it was a close fight. Yet the B-team kept telling us Vanzie was winning easily. They were plain wrong in my opinion. It was a close fight.

kevin · Post by **kevin** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:28

Totally agree Bennie, I had it by 2 rounds to Earl as did Tony C from Boxing News, Abrams had Vanzie by one round and we are all sitting next to each other, so that's how close it was!

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:29

Such a shame for Vanzie. He was robbed.

The ref shouldn't be officiating at championship level. He has made a mess of championship fights before now. I'm looking with interest to see what the bbbc do about this.

f~ck all probably, except fine Vanzie.

beduff · Post by **beduff** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:35

nothing to do with the commentators i had music on so i could not hear them

vanzie outboxd earl.earl did not know what to do with vanzie,for me the punchstats were close but vanzie was throwing the better shots.robbery.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:36

beduff wrote:nothing to do with the commentators i had music on so i could not hear them vanzie outboxd earl.earl did not know what to do with vanzie,for me the punchstats were close but vanzie was throwing the better shots.robbery.

Good post. I was about to pose the question: I wonder how the fight would have been viewed minus the B-team?

kevin · Post by **kevin** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:37

Very partisan crowd favouring Earl which also could have played on the ref's mind as I said I had some rounds very close, but gave them to Earl from where I was sitting, but I'll probably score differently watching it again!..

Kev

paulyb · Post by **paulyb** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:39

unbelievably the refs score card showed that he has scored round 4 to Earl. If he had counted the knock down he would have scored it 10 8 to Vanzie which would have made Vanzie the winner by 2 points.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:40

Regrettably, Vanzie is going to get suspended for calling the game "corrupt". Jack Doughty tried to stop him, but to no avail.

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:44

I know it's a leading question, but does anyone think what Vanzie has said is really that wide of the mark?

Not just in regards to tonight's fight, but about boxing in general?

I think I already know the answer's you guys would give, and maybe such a topic deserves to have it's own thread for us to discuss it in, just wondered really.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:46

Twinkle Toes wrote:I know it's a leading question, but does anyone think what Vanzie has said is really that wide of the mark?

Not just in regards to tonight's fight, but about boxing in general?

I think I already know the answer's you guys would give, and maybe this topic deserves to have it's own topic for us to discuss it in, just wondered really.

It's the same all over the world when you fight the 'house' fighter. You don't expect any favours. So two things you don't do are 1) stand off when you have your man wobbling and 2) showboat.

DOG · Post by **DOG** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:50

Vanzie by 4 in my book.
Listened to all the crap afterwards.

And we think Germany is a joke?

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 05 Jun 2004, 19:50

totally disagree with bennie and kevin, no way was that close.
apart from the knockdown which wasn`t and being out on his feet in the sixth earl came off second in all the exchanges.
bad night for boxing imo.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:07

Yeah, Vanzie won more clearer than the last time. I actually think some the good start Earl made, according to McCory and Smith, was slightly exagerated.

IT IS HIGH TIME THAT WE APPOINT THREE JUDGES IN A FIGHT, THE RULE IS OLD AND IS EVEN WORSE THAN THE 1/2 POINT ROUNDS. WHEN IT COMES TO THE POINT WHERE I CAN TELL THE WAY IS SCORING THE FIGHT BECAUSE OF THE BODY LANGUAGE, ITS TIME TO CHANGE.

I KNEW THAT VANZIE NEEDED A KO IN THE LAST FEW ROUNDS, CAUSE IT SEEMED APPARENT THE O'CONNOR DIDN'T APPRECIATE HIS TACTICS, BY HAVING GOES AT HIM CONTINUALLY, THE SAME APPLIES FOR DANNY WILLIAMS DEFEAT BY SPROTT AND ALSO VINCENT VS BARNES, I JUST KNEW WHO THE REF APPRICATED MORE.

I don't think its necessary a house fighter thing, but there seems to be some bias there - Like Williams' showboating, Vanzie's elbows were affecting the refs judgment and he was giving the closer rounds to the fight he "likes".

The fact I'm not gob smacked by who hands O'Conner raised says alot about the current rule.

Its got to change and change now.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:09

I know some people don't like Vanzies style or Attitude though I've always thoght he was a good guy who has a real knowledge and interest in the game. Vanzies never got a break, while Ayers, Dunn, Rigby and Scewer were all fighting for World titles Bobby had to stick to the british title and at his best he was better than all those guys. Boxing is subjective and i agree that some of the rounds were clsoe but IMO Vanzie won it clearly... it reminds me a bit of the 2nd Delahoya vs Mosely match.... though I think this was a clearer victory for Vanzie.... it was a robbery I believe. Bobby was dictating the fight, had Earl following him around doing little for many of the rounds..... that is called being outboxed........ and what about the knockdown???.... and the ref (HA!) GAVE THAT ROUND TO EARL!!!!.... EVEN NICKY 'I'M SO PLEASED WITH MYSELF' PIPER SAID THAT THIS WAS A BIT STRANGE!!!. It's not so much that boxing is currupt as its not wise to fall out with certain promoters who run the game and can perhaps influence flatulent and short sighted referees!.....
It's a total traversty!!!!!!!!!.
I'm also old enough to remember a great boxer of the 80s Slugger O'Toole/Fidel Castro (he used both names) who had a very sinular style to Vanzie and was forced out of the game after a string of such robberies..... one of which was vs Robert Mccracken who he totally out-boxed but to no avail..... Rob was ofcourse the promoters fighter too that night funnily enough!!!............ funny old game!.......... I'M GOING TO START WATCHING WWF WREASTLING I THINK FOR A BIT OF SANITY AND HONESTY!!!....... 8)

:x

buzz · Post by **buzz** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:09

Surely in this day and age with human rights and freedom of speech, Vanzie can speak out how he feels.

The Boxing board should fine that shithouse of a ref.

Even Nicky Piper was shit scared that he may of upset the 'Spunks Waxwork Board of Control'.

The honourable sport of boxing does not need the assholes dragging it into the gutter. :x :x

buzz · Post by **buzz** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:13

The ref couldnt wait to raise Earls hand at the final bell.

kevin · Post by **kevin** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:17

As I said, I had 4 rounds very close to call. I honestly thought Vanzie was going to stop Earl in the 6th. The ref had Vanzie winning the first 3, I had Earl winning 2 and one even.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:18

buzz wrote:Surely in this day and age with human rights and freedom of speech, Vanzie can speak out how he feels.

The Boxing board should fine that shithouse of a ref.

Even Nicky Piper was shit scared that he may of upset the 'Spunks Waxwork Board of Control'.

The honourable sport of boxing does not need the assholes dragging it into the gutter. :x :x

Thing is Buzz Nicky is one of them... the stuffed suits that turn a blind eye for the Status Quo and are ready to slit Vanzies tongue out of his head for daring to suggest that the game is a bit dodgey. Did you hear Nicky saying that he thought Vanzie will be 'frozen out' for a while!!!.... oh yeh! I bet he will!. And what about Pipers comment on the Mirovic retirement 'No boxer should ever quit' he said or something like that..... all heart our Nicky aint he!!!........... 8)

buzz · Post by **buzz** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:20

silkov wrote:
buzz wrote:Surely in this day and age with human rights and freedom of speech, Vanzie can speak out how he feels.

The Boxing board should fine that shithouse of a ref.

Even Nicky Piper was shit scared that he may of upset the 'Spunks Waxwork Board of Control'.

The honourable sport of boxing does not need the assholes dragging it into the gutter. :x :x
Thing is Buzz Nicky is one of them... the stuffed suits that turn a blind eye for the Status Quo and are ready to slit Vanzies tongue out of his head for daring to suggest that the game is a bit dodgey. Did you hear Nicky saying that he thought Vanzie will be 'frozen out' for a while!!!.... oh yeh! I bet he will!. And what about Pipers comment on the Mirovic retirement 'No boxer should ever quit' he said or something like that..... all heart our Nicky aint he!!!........... 8)

Piper seems to have forgot he was a fighter once.......or was he??

I get the feeling he looks down at the fighters now.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:22

Piper's anger was visible after the Vanzie interview. That was unprofessional on his part.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:32

Pipers a prat, just interested in keeping the butter wet on his slice of bread!....... he was a crap fighter too!....

:x

Lefthookhappy19 · Post by **Lefthookhappy19** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:34

I think the refs scorecard had Earl winning rounds 7 to about 11, like he was making up the difference. That knockdown was clear as fornicating day, it wasn't even a slap like they said, a clear punch landed and he went down. Maybe the ref isn't good at math and didn't want to have to work out a 2 point round into his planned scorecard. Like the Ottke vs Reid fight scorecards that had Ottke winning most the early rounds when he didn't land a punch.

kevin · Post by **kevin** » 05 Jun 2004, 20:36

Ref's scorecard
1-3 all Vanzie
4 & 5 - Earl
6 - Vanzie
7-10 - Earl
11 - Draw
12 - Vanzie