The_budweiser Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Gervonta Davis vs Liam Walsh There was controversy and divided opinions in the BoxNation studios but what was your take on the stoppage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selij Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? Walsh's legs had totally gone, he couldn't walk straight and they were crossing over each other, which means the nervous system was in trauma. Completely correct decision. Late if anything, in fact, the ref should have stopped it at the KD with one minute to go of the third and that would have saved Walsh from taking that cracking, chopping shot to the temple that could have brain damaged him for life that finally finished him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonRingRules Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? --- Boxnation, if those grunts didn't have each other to argue with, they'd be without job since, like most boxing media, they're utterly worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selij Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? --- Boxnation, if those grunts didn't have each other to argue with, they'd be without job since, like most boxing media, they're utterly worthless. 100% correct Bobby and Sky Sports presenter Spencer Oliver is living proof of stupid, fucking pundits saying "he should have let that go on a bit longer, it was premature, its a title fight............" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cableaddict Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? The ref saved Walsh from serious hurt. - He should have stopped it sooner, as Selij wrote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelfistsmith Posted May 24, 2017 Share Posted May 24, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? --- Boxnation, if those grunts didn't have each other to argue with, they'd be without job since, like most boxing media, they're utterly worthless. couldnt agree more woodhall said the fight was stoped to soon joke he was finished after the first knockdown and bunce talked abolut davis as a poors man jeff lacy how nobody knew who he was and hes just media hype did you see his face after the fight picture he knew he looked like he didnt have a clue the guy shouts alot but that to hide the lack of knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repsac Posted May 24, 2017 Share Posted May 24, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? I avoided this thread because i thought is was for some other fight, and i didn't want the outcome ruined for me. I liked the stoppage. Walsh was done. And as much as i shit on Howard Foster, i agree with his stoppage in the Walsh vs McCollough fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_budweiser Posted May 25, 2017 Author Share Posted May 25, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? I thought it was a premature stoppage. Here's why: The referee could of stopped the fight when the legs of Walsh crossed over, but, he didn't. He allowed Walsh to his feet giving him seconds to recover. He put his hand on him and turned Walsh giving him time to check Walsh over and look in his eyes and ask him if he was ok. This was the second time he could of stopped Walsh, but again he didn't stop the fight. The fight continued. Davies threw 3 punches and Walsh ducked avoiding the first 2 punches, the third punch grazed the top of his head. Surely the ref after allowing the fight continue should only jump in if Walsh is unable to continue, surely Walsh ducking and avoiding 2 punches and being able to duck to avoid the third punch and stop it landing clean is an indication he could of continued? Don't get me wrong Davies would of probably went on and won the fight in that round. But, I think the referee should of either stopped it when Walsh legs crossed or let the fight continue longer than when he eventually stopped it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavpowell Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? I thought it was a premature stoppage. Here's why: The referee could of stopped the fight when the legs of Walsh crossed over, but, he didn't. He allowed Walsh to his feet giving him seconds to recover. He put his hand on him and turned Walsh giving him time to check Walsh over and look in his eyes and ask him if he was ok. This was the second time he could of stopped Walsh, but again he didn't stop the fight. Surely the ref after allowing the fight continue should only jump in if Walsh is unable to continue, surely Walsh ducking and avoiding 2 punches and being able to duck to avoid the third punch and stop it landing clean is an indication he could of continued? I'd be quite happy to see the ref stop the fight on the grounds he realised he'd screwed up - there are no rules governing when he can and can't call a halt. I thought it was premature given he'd allowed it to continue, but I also thought he shouldn't have allowed it to continue, so it was only his own consistency that was the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cableaddict Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? I'd be quite happy to see the ref stop the fight on the grounds he realised he'd screwed up - there are no rules governing when he can and can't call a halt. I thought it was premature given he'd allowed it to continue, but I also thought he shouldn't have allowed it to continue, so it was only his own consistency that was the issue. I think the ref got some tips from Howard Foster, who was (incredibly) one of the judges for this fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ton Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? I'd be quite happy to see the ref stop the fight on the grounds he realised he'd screwed up. I think this is it right here!! Think during the 10 count the ref did everything he could to let the fight carry on, given Walsh was the home fighter, on a Warren card, on Warrens TV station.... But as soon as he stepped back he realised there was little sense in allowing the onslaught. Also Walsh didn't avoid the first punch as he ducked when Davis came back in, as Bud has suggested. First one hit his chin and he then rocked back onto his heels and into the ropes! It was a perfectly acceptable stoppage in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APW Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 Re: Davies-Walsh - Your take on the stoppage? I didn't see Walsh being able to get a foothold back in the fight so no real complaints to the stoppage. Had it continued the beating Walsh could have taken may have proved difficult to rebound from, even domestically. He was being beaten handily imo and the outcome certainly wouldn't have changed if the fight continued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now