BoxRec

Sorry but the referee bottled it big style with the Jason Cook fight. For those who missed the Kelly masterclass on the undercard Jason Cook won his comeback fight via disqualification I think in the second round. Basically, his opponent hit him low (not a dangerously low shot) and Cook stayed down..... The referee didn't signal it low.

Cook was given the five minutes to recover, but didn't..... The ref diqualified Reid. Cook was awarded the win.

Sorry, but is this the rules? Looking at two famous examples where the fighter has not continued after a foul and there have been some varyations in the rules.... Dan Sherry vs Chris Eubank - went to the cards. Santana vs Norris - Santana awarded the win. Honeyghun vs the Korean in a title defence - Honeyghun awarded the win (he was the one who commited exactly the same offense).

Sorry, but that should have been a no contest or even a Reid win. Especially as the ref only appeared to acknowledge it low when it looked like Cook wasn't getting up.

Cook didn't quit, he was hurt and he wasn't looking for a way out, but he is very lucky come out of that scenerio with a win. To be fair, he admited that no way he should have won (should have been a no contest) - I think the ref bottled it and it was a bad call. Of course there were alternatives. Surely if the punch wasn't bad enough for a instant DQ then why should he be DQ'd almost as an after thought.

Seeing it on the sky coverage tonight, it looked like Cook just didn't fancy it. I mean, was the shot that bad? How did it compare to Hatton pinpointing one into Tszyu's nuts in the summer? Cook looked fleshy coming into the fight, and I think he made a meal of it.

Not saying that Cook would fake it just to get a win, because I don't think he's the sort, as his post-fight words proved, but I don't think he wanted to fight tonight. He looked fleshy tonight, and his weight bore that out. Is he really up for it anymore? I'm not so sure.