BoxRec

The Daily Telegraph wrote:Those that smugly hoped Fenech-Nelson III wouldn't embarrass boxing will be pleased to know that boxing didn't need to wait for the main event.

Scoring St Clair's fine win as a unanimous loss did it for them.

98-92. To say Gairy St Clair only won two rounds is simply beyond belief. Gairy owned the ring, made Kickett miss and dominated on the inside. For the most part St Clair made Kickett fight his fight, he controlled the style and tempo of the fight. He had Kickett and his trainers shamelessly buying time with tactics such as "forgeting" his mouthguard and applying to much vaso. Kickett did have his moments throughout the fight, no doubt, however in the end he was simply outclassed. If you want to talk about robberies in the memory of Fenech Nelson I it doesn't get any more flagrant than what we saw last night.

To add to the quote above, the crowd in the pub I was watching simply laughed when the decision was anounced. What could have been a great night for Australian boxing turned into a farce. It is now evident that as soon as the fight was signed it was always going to be a win for the young prospect, no matter what happend in the ring...

Watching this travesty of a decision, the old "Lang Park" chant: "Bullshit, Bullshit, Bullshit" was started up by the watchers as soon as the decion was announced.

As I said something similar in the another thread: Remind the three judges not to forget to pick up their white canes at the door when they leave!

yeah that certainly was a horrible decision...no wat kickett won that

I would never condemn anybody on the basis of a Telegraph story.

Brute wrote:I would never condemn anybody on the basis of a Telegraph story.

That was just an example mate, I saw the fight with my own two eyes and in this case the Telegraph summed it up nicely...

Marlin wrote:

Brute wrote:I would never condemn anybody on the basis of a Telegraph story.

That was just an example mate, I saw the fight with my own two eyes and in this case the Telegraph summed it up nicely...

Maybe so, but it is still an abortion of a newspaper.

Brute wrote:

Marlin wrote:

Brute wrote:I would never condemn anybody on the basis of a Telegraph story.

That was just an example mate, I saw the fight with my own two eyes and in this case the Telegraph summed it up nicely...

Maybe so, but it is still an abortion of a newspaper.

Have you read the Herald lately? It is just as bad, if not worse...

I have posted a response the the scores in another thread, but it was absolute crap.
There was a group of us sitting here, in Perth, going for Cool Willie. I even with our bias approach we were all in agreeance Willie probably did enough to win 3 rounds...how could they come up with those scores ?? Maybe the ring announcer carrying on about how good Willie is going to be in the future, bewteen rounds, swayed the judges. It's a bad loss for Gary at this stage of his career, and one he didnt deserve.

amwsnw wrote:I have posted a response the the scores in another thread, but it was absolute crap.There was a group of us sitting here, in Perth, going for Cool Willie. I even with our bias approach we were all in agreeance Willie probably did enough to win 3 rounds...how could they come up with those scores ?? Maybe the ring announcer carrying on about how good Willie is going to be in the future, bewteen rounds, swayed the judges. It's a bad loss for Gary at this stage of his career, and one he didnt deserve.

Well said mate.

spot on. felt sorry for gairy.

i was going for willie, i felt that st claire nicked it, maybe a draw at best for willie. however, the commentators were very bias

thunderfromdownunder wrote:i was going for willie, i felt that st claire nicked it, maybe a draw at best for willie. however, the commentators were very bias

yeah they were, but one of them said kickett needed a kayo going into the last round.

Watch the fight and turn off the sound for anyone that has it recorded, The commentators were way off and i couldnt believe round after round they gave them to StClair because he came forward. Kickett landed the far cleaner and harder punches in every single round.

it was also surprising how st clair didnt bat an eyelid at the decision and didnt protest...he actually winked at kickett after the decision was announced.

What St Claire didn't pretest the DEC???????

After the fight they interviewed him and he wouldnt shut up about how he thought he won

ScottAaron wrote:What St Claire didn't pretest the DEC???????

After the fight they interviewed him and he wouldnt shut up about how he thought he won

eh? on what? i was watching main event coverage and i didnt see that? i only saw kickett get interviewed.

It was hardly the worst decision in terms of giving the fight to Kickett ....it was just the scores of 92-98 that were corrupt! -- I scored the fight a draw the first time and have watched it again and could be persuaded to go 1 round either way for either fighter.

It was a very close fight. Alot of punches were thrown that didnt land from both men, I thought kickett landed the bigger punches and superman landed more...its the age old argument when scoring close rounds do you go for quality or quantity??

That said I cannot for the life of me see how any person with any boxing knowledge could honestly score that fight 92-98 ...its not possible!!!

But Kickett I believe was entitled to win a close decision and Superman was very entitled to be disappointed in losing a very close fight!

The commentry during the fight was very biased towards Superman I cant believe people thought it was biased towards Kickett...they had lifted supermans arm after round 8!!!

laceemup wrote:It was hardly the worst decision in terms of giving the fight to Kickett ....it was just the scores of 92-98 that were corrupt! -- I scored the fight a draw the first time and have watched it again and could be persuaded to go 1 round either way for either fighter.

It was a very close fight. Alot of punches were thrown that didnt land from both men, I thought kickett landed the bigger punches and superman landed more...its the age old argument when scoring close rounds do you go for quality or quantity??

That said I cannot for the life of me see how any person with any boxing knowledge could honestly score that fight 92-98 ...its not possible!!!

But Kickett I believe was entitled to win a close decision and Superman was very entitled to be disappointed in losing a very close fight!

The commentry during the fight was very biased towards Superman I cant believe people thought it was biased towards Kickett...they had lifted supermans arm after round 8!!!

well said but still think Gary won

laceemup wrote:It was hardly the worst decision in terms of giving the fight to Kickett ....it was just the scores of 92-98 that were corrupt! -- I scored the fight a draw the first time and have watched it again and could be persuaded to go 1 round either way for either fighter.

It was a very close fight. Alot of punches were thrown that didnt land from both men, I thought kickett landed the bigger punches and superman landed more...its the age old argument when scoring close rounds do you go for quality or quantity??

That said I cannot for the life of me see how any person with any boxing knowledge could honestly score that fight 92-98 ...its not possible!!!

But Kickett I believe was entitled to win a close decision and Superman was very entitled to be disappointed in losing a very close fight!

The commentry during the fight was very biased towards Superman I cant believe people thought it was biased towards Kickett...they had lifted supermans arm after round 8!!!

Both men were shaken, not one any more than the other. An Gary was busier. This is why the majority of viewers and those in attendance (going by the boos) thought Gary deserved the win. I don't know about you but I haven't let commentary, especially by Fox commentators, sway me when I have viewed a fight. If I did I would never have Mundine losing a fight....

i think laceemup summed it up perfectly,a decision either way would,nt been bad,my crowd lent towards kickett he landed the more telling blows he also fought well on the backfoot,a lot of st clair,s punches were taken on gloves and elbows.i thought the prelims were good,the fenech farce was a joke, i think fenech saw a repeat of melbourne when when his legs wobbled,he should have been disqualified for not fighting in the 9-10 rounds,the clown commentator said it was great evasive footwork,what was he evading ,fresh air?lewis said after a fenech training session that fenech would still give some of the top fighters a run for their money,lewis has forgotten pads and bags dont hit back,all the best.

amwsnw

i dont know which poll you got the consensus that the "majority of viewers and those in attendance" thought that superman deserved the win. From the comments i read on Boxrec i would say it was more like fifty fifty split and the column in the West Australian was very comfortable with a cool willie win!! Thats because it was a close fight.

As for the booing as I previously stated it was because of the ridiculas scores when they were announced. I laughed out loud as they were called (could just as easy booed). It was a close fight and the scores should have reflected that...hence the boos.

As for Mundine you never need the commentators to sway you with Mundine he only fights people half his size,washed up or a never been...its a bit of a no brainer to score his fights lately!!!

laceemup wrote:amwsnw

i dont know which poll you got the consensus that the "majority of viewers and those in attendance" thought that superman deserved the win. From the comments i read on Boxrec i would say it was more like fifty fifty split and the column in the West Australian was very comfortable with a cool willie win!! Thats because it was a close fight.

As for the booing as I previously stated it was because of the ridiculas scores when they were announced. I laughed out loud as they were called (could just as easy booed). It was a close fight and the scores should have reflected that...hence the boos.

As for Mundine you never need the commentators to sway you with Mundine he only fights people half his size,washed up or a never been...its a bit of a no brainer to score his fights lately!!!

I am glad you take a lot from the West Australian and the article...they would have been very unbiased with a fight involving Cool Willie....NOT. It appears most people who believe Willie won, also believe it was very close. Whilst others like myself who thought Gary won, thought he did it comfortably...interesting.

mmm.. just reading a few of the comments above, the people that are backing superman mention nothing of a runnaway win and i quote "he just nicked it" and i certainly dont have a problem with that consensus! Kicket was lucky to get the win in what should have been a closely scored fight.

laceemup wrote:mmm.. just reading a few of the comments above, the people that are backing superman mention nothing of a runnaway win and i quote "he just nicked it" and i certainly dont have a problem with that consensus! Kicket was lucky to get the win in what should have been a closely scored fight.

You saw the fight, open both eyes then make an educated statement (I think you only had the WEst Aussie eye open).....not a guess like "it could have gone this way, it could have gone that way." Do you think Willie won and do you think he deserved it ?? Wiilie was lucky, but did he deserve it ??

Ive already stated ....numerous times that I scored the fight a draw both times that I watched it!! As far as I'm aware it is possible to score a fight a draw especially for a 10 round closely fought fight!! That said there were a couple of rounds mid fight that could have gone either way and as such a round here or a round there and I would have been comfortable with either fighter winning a close decision...WHATS WRONG WITH THAT? Yes Willie deserved to win the fight it was just the scores that the so called experts gave that left everyone with a sour taste in their mouth!! and i sympathise with superman he was entitled to be disapointed with the decision...my eyes were wide open!! did you really watch the fight? Im starting to doubt it...