BoxRec

117 - 110 to McDonnell!!!

WHAT... THE... fornicate!!!

Seems about fair.

Did anyone watch the fight on a non british channel? What was the reaction there?

对不起，还没有得到天空 我没有看到它

PokerRob wrote:117 - 110 to McDonnell!!!

WHAT... THE... eff!!!

I hope your not gonna take the law into your own hands ,make like terry marsh......and re-enact Christmas 1989

Rexob wrote:对不起，还没有得到天空 我没有看到它

where's them keys on a qwerty keyboard ffs ?

I don't know if any channel that wasn't british aired that fight, but I definitely thought it was a disgraceful robbery, and it lowered my opinion of Jamie McDonnell even further. I've seen him fight about 4 times, and 2 of those 4 times he's received a robbery decision in his favor.

To be fair Nelson, smith and bellew all said they had mcdonnell losing

Bricks wrote:

PokerRob wrote:117 - 110 to McDonnell!!!

WHAT... THE... eff!!!

I hope your not gonna take the law into your own hands ,make like terry marsh......and re-enact Christmas 1989

rio wrote:To be fair Nelson, smith and bellew all said they had mcdonnell losing

McDonnell didn't look too impressed when Nelson opened the interview with "Jamie, you were a lucky boy tonight"

PokerRob wrote:117 - 110 to McDonnell!!!

WHAT... THE... eff!!!

Then we go from crap scoring to Malik Scott seemingly coming for a free holiday in Monte Carlo. It's one thing a journeyman coming not to get KOd, but that was a gutless pathetic performance. So many of us, myself included, have said "you have to respect anyone who steps through the ropes" , but that was pathetic.

We often compare boxing to UFC and complement certain things that happen in UFC that's missing in boxing (best fighting best etc..). Well that performance would not be tolerated there, not by the promoters , and more importantly the fans. Scott would've taken some stick during and between rounds for that negative pathetic performance and not been booked again.

rio wrote:To be fair Nelson, smith and bellew all said they had mcdonnell losing

Yeah maybe but none of them are outraged by the result, they just say it was lucky and oh well that's the way it goes sometimes

They should be demanding answers as to what the fornicate those judges saw for them to score it that way.

It's just accepted and it shouldn't be

I guess a judge from Puerto Rico (,or wherever) is flown to Monte Carlo, put up in plush hotel, has expenses paid etc... all by the shows promoter and thinks "wouldn't mind some more of this"

Wales wrote:I guess a judge from Puerto Rico (,or wherever) is flown to Monte Carlo, put up in plush hotel, has expenses paid etc... all by the shows promoter and thinks "wouldn't mind some more of this"

Yeah I think that's exactly it. That's why there needs to be a commission that sees this judge out of a job when he turns in a garbage scorecard.

Wales wrote:

rio wrote:To be fair Nelson, smith and bellew all said they had mcdonnell losing

McDonnell didn't look too impressed when Nelson opened the interview with "Jamie, you were a lucky boy tonight"

I thought it was a bit tactless as well. I've seen hundreds of really bad decisions in the ams but you don't tell the kid on his way out of the ring that they lost. Bad form by Johnny.

mickey1975 wrote:

Wales wrote:

rio wrote:To be fair Nelson, smith and bellew all said they had mcdonnell losing

McDonnell didn't look too impressed when Nelson opened the interview with "Jamie, you were a lucky boy tonight"

I thought it was a bit tactless as well. I've seen hundreds of really bad decisions in the ams but you don't tell the kid on his way out of the ring that they lost. Bad form by Johnny.

The whole post fight interview was poor.
They asked McDonnell how he thought he did, as expected he thought he did well
They asked Hearn "rematch?" He swerved that option then said something like "weve all spoke and we will look at moving up"
Then went back to McDonnell who said (I think) he didn't want to move up

Sky could do with a really direct interviewer who asks the right questions and isn't fobbed off with a round the houses answer.

mickey1975 wrote:

Wales wrote:

rio wrote:To be fair Nelson, smith and bellew all said they had mcdonnell losing

McDonnell didn't look too impressed when Nelson opened the interview with "Jamie, you were a lucky boy tonight"

I thought it was a bit tactless as well. I've seen hundreds of really bad decisions in the ams but you don't tell the kid on his way out of the ring that they lost. Bad form by Johnny.

Won't somebody think about the poor champion who received a gift decision and still stands to receive a belt holders purse next time he fights. Let's not hurt his feelings eh.

To be honest I've always thought it was a bit harsh to interview guys straight after a fight and then judge them on their reactions

Jamie would have found out people's opinions in due course, even during the interview. Nelson said it 'off camera', or so he thought. It was wrong.

rd350lc wrote:

Rexob wrote:对不起，还没有得到天空 我没有看到它

where's them keys on a qwerty keyboard ffs ?

Copy and paste

Wales wrote:Sky could do with a really direct interviewer who asks the right questions and isn't fobbed off with a round the houses answer.

There is no easy answers here but one thing that needs to happen post fight regarding the judges cards...,

Simply all judges should provide round by round reasoning on paper to explain what they are scoring and why!

Ideally this should be time linked, eg done in real time and logged so it can be checked back afterwards and be released to the public so we all know what's being scored and why..

This would sort this problem out instantly.

mickey1975 wrote:Jamie would have found out people's opinions in due course, even during the interview. Nelson said it 'off camera', or so he thought. It was wrong.

What would you have rather he said?

Act like some kiss arse fanboy and say great fight you easily won that one ?

bripez wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Jamie would have found out people's opinions in due course, even during the interview. Nelson said it 'off camera', or so he thought. It was wrong.

What would you have rather he said?

Act like some kiss arse fanboy and say great fight you easily won that one ?

No, not say anything. Like I say, there is a time and a place. You don't rush in telling a fighter he was lucky unless you're a complete wanker. Jamie didn't score the fight.

mickey1975 wrote:

bripez wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Jamie would have found out people's opinions in due course, even during the interview. Nelson said it 'off camera', or so he thought. It was wrong.

What would you have rather he said?

Act like some kiss arse fanboy and say great fight you easily won that one ?

No, not say anything. Like I say, there is a time and a place. You don't rush in telling a fighter he was lucky unless you're a complete wanker. Jamie didn't score the fight.

Fair enough mate, I know what you are saying but when would be the right time and place?

Although that type of question might be best asked of managers and promoters, it is also fair to remember that boxers these days use all kinds of social media to generate positive publicity (which translates to special nsordhip and therefore money) as well as the usual interviews etc but not all publicity is always positive - sometimes it is a double edged sword and you have to take the rough with the smooth

mickey1975 wrote:

bripez wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Jamie would have found out people's opinions in due course, even during the interview. Nelson said it 'off camera', or so he thought. It was wrong.

What would you have rather he said?

Act like some kiss arse fanboy and say great fight you easily won that one ?

No, not say anything. Like I say, there is a time and a place. You don't rush in telling a fighter he was lucky unless you're a complete wanker. Jamie didn't score the fight.

I agree. Nelson needs to get the hell off the TV. He doesn't have the personality for it and offers nothing as a pundit. They way he spoke down Jamie "pffff you were lucky boy" was as patronising as it was awkward.