British referees, best in the word or bent?

[iamasadlittleboy]

I swore blue murder when Malik Scott was counted out at 9 against Derick Chisora but was widely regarded as a man talking out of his arse. I was then told "British referees are the best in the world"

 

Today people want to bitch about the Froch-Groves stoppage.

 

Are British referees no longer the best?

[The_budweiser]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

First thing that needs to happen in boxing is that promoters need to stop paying referees. They should be sending the money to the governing body.

 

Its never going to change Scott, refs will always have their favourites.

 

Look at the Klits recent fight, how can you get away with that amount of pushing down?

 

I lost count of the amount of times Froch was hitting after the break not to mention the unpunished elbow.

 

Khan-Prescott??? Fight should of been stopped but O'Conner lets it go on

 

Cleverly carried back to the ring by O'Conner recently.

Edited November 24, 2013 by the_budweiser

[Ton]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

I've thought for a long good while we have the worst in the world! Last night just the latest in a line line of fuck ups, though last night wasn't quite as bad as many are making out. Groves was heading into trouble, ref has a decision to make. Definitely premature but was well within his rights to stop it.

 

I've founds its more when they judge that the refs get exposed. Terry O'Connor in the Fury/McDermott fight springs to mind for one. And I can't remember the fight but Ian John-Lewis proper stitched some poor unfancied or foreign fighter in recent times.

[WelshDevilRob]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

So, many fights in the UK end far too early. Been happening for years. These refs need to understand that this is a combat sport not a tickling competition.

 

BBBoC need to be firm and look into that stoppage by Howard Foster - it stunk.

[JamieC]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

I've thought for a long good while we have the worst in the world! Last night just the latest in a line line of fuck ups, though last night wasn't quite as bad as many are making out. Groves was heading into trouble, ref has a decision to make. Definitely premature but was well within his rights to stop it.

 

I've founds its more when they judge that the refs get exposed. Terry O'Connor in the Fury/McDermott fight springs to mind for one. And I can't remember the fight but Ian John-Lewis proper stitched some poor unfancied or foreign fighter in recent times.

 

Zack Page against Tom Dallas :-(

[WelshDevilRob]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

George Groves Statement

 

I've watched it back enough times. Carl Froch landed a few shots in which time I was still moving, defending and firing back. I was NOT in any real trouble. The tide of the fight was NOT turning as I had stiffed Froch's legs with a jab earlier in the round. The only point I stopped punching back was when Howard Foster got me in a head lock with his full weight on me. It was an absolute joke whether it was sinister or not Froch's boxing celebrity status has stood in the way of me becoming world champion. Away from dodgy reffing why was I only one point up at this point on two judges score cards? This corruption in boxing needs to end now. We have seen far too many wrong decisions in the UK of late and it will only serve to put fans off the sport.

[Aaron]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

I am not sure you can say our refs are any better or worse than anywehere else, america has there bad ones also.

 

Reffing a fight in there defence is so much harder than almost any other sport, because a boxing match in my opinion can vary a hell of a lot more than say a football or cricket match whatever.

 

Add to that you get split seconds to make what are huge decisions not only in context of the game but sometimes a guys health, I am not sure I would liket the job to be honest.

[JamieC]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

Groves' statement is interesting and makes a fair point. But if he's honest with himself he'll know he was in trouble there, he was desperate to clinch and then on the ropes was firing from the hip and ate 5/6 shots. the stoppage was early and unfair but he was tiring and got hurt with time left in the round. I do think they have a point that Froch's reputation as a warrior meant Foster let him carry on when he would have stopped other boxers

[mofo2]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

I don't think we have ever really had the best referees....however if the ref feels its appropriate to stop a fight in real time, its all too easy after the fact to cry foul!!

 

We have to decide if we are willing to put up with a number of poor stoppages to ensure another Michael Watson doesn't happen I guess!!

[davemurphy]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

Hmmmmm......I still need to catch up on my fights from the weekend, so I'm going to watch this one and comment, but it sounds like you guys think Groves is just talking sour grapes, huh?

[Ton]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

Hmmmmm......I still need to catch up on my fights from the weekend, so I'm going to watch this one and comment, but it sounds like you guys think Groves is just talking sour grapes, huh?

 

Anything but, Murph!

 

The consensus is that it WAS an early stoppage and Groves should probably have been given his chance to continue. It was the first time in the fight he had been in any bother, was (or should have been) well ahead on the scorecards, and had had Froch in trouble numerous times in the fight.

 

There's an argument that Froch's reputation for being a warrior allows the ref to let him take more punishment before jumping in, whereas Groves doesn't have that comfort.

 

It's an awkward situation. Those who are not watching the fight with any kind of bias to any one fighter can understand that the ref has a split second to make a decision, and if he hadn't, there's the risk of serious damage being done.

 

But at the same time this is boxing, there are risks that the boxers know about, and there were 2 world belts on the line.

[LondonRingRules]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

First thing that needs to happen in boxing is that promoters need to stop paying referees. They should be sending the money to the governing body.

 

Its never going to change Scott, refs will always have their favourites.

 

Look at the Klits recent fight, how can you get away with that amount of pushing down?

 

I lost count of the amount of times Froch was hitting after the break not to mention the unpunished elbow.

 

Khan-Prescott??? Fight should of been stopped but O'Conner lets it go on

 

Cleverly carried back to the ring by O'Conner recently.

 

--- Assume you are referring to Povetkin/Wlad specifically since Vitali does less grabbing and otherwise no fouling as opposed to the, ahem, current Ring #1 P4P!

 

Your first statement cuts to the heart of the matter, include the judges in that statement too. Make the promoter put up purses to be held for each of them by the BBBC who releases after end of the fight assuming no monkey business.

 

The Groves stoppage was premature, but this judge had to be very sensitive of recent brain injury spikes in boxing. This Mago fighter having gone the distance without ever being in much trouble and gave as good as he got in return. Much better decision however wrong than Chisora/Scott, but then I blame Scott for being such a loose noodle as to indicate he's ready to be stopped at anytime he stops fighting for no good reason.

 

As to Povetkin/Wlad, yeah started out esp ugly on Wlad's part, but then he's going against a guy who ducks below his waist. I fairly well enjoyed the last rounds from 7 onward when Povetkin had to hold on to keep from going down. If you push a guy who is holding on hurt trying to drag you down and he goes down, well, he went down because he was hurt and had no strength left to hold down. At the end Wlad looked like a rampaging Valuev when the little guys would try to hang on him and then go flying off to bounce in the ropes. At the end of the day, Povetkin was well battered and beat up compared to the feather dusters at ring center in Canelo/Floydy where most of the scored punches maybe had a 1/4 to 1/2 inch impact penetration or were mostly slipped or blocked.

[LondonRingRules]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

Anything but, Murph!

 

The consensus is that it WAS an early stoppage and Groves should probably have been given his chance to continue. It was the first time in the fight he had been in any bother, was (or should have been) well ahead on the scorecards, and had had Froch in trouble numerous times in the fight.

 

--- It wasn't near as bad as previous British shams this year. Froch was hitting marshmallows on the break with impunity, just waiting for the monster shot off the break. The ref is too scare to DQ him, and Groves was warned for butting and a terrible display of sportsmanship when he jumped Froch from behind. If Groves is suddenly brain damaged in such a dirty fight, well, you chaps would be all over the ref in mass hysteria, so he was in a no win situation.

 

Groves wasn't well ahead on the official cards and would have been even at best had he survived the round. I had Froch comfortably ahead and I defy anyone to review that fight again and try to find some genius in Groves boxing. He's a lesser version of Froch which is a big improvement over what I saw last year in the only fight of his I've seen. Froch may be slipping as to be expected after his wars and advanced age, but I'll guarantee a knockout or all time beating on Groves if we see an immediate rematch. Froch contrary to reports, never appeared hurt, not nearly so bad as the Taylor knockdown he easily recovered from.

 

Great that you chaps want to promote a new gun, but a rematch 3 months down the road and you're gonna understand that at least through Froch you're boy just ain't got it. Maybe fighting a step lower to perfect his craft and maturity, he can come back for a belt, but that's up to him and his promoter.

[JamieC]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

@LondonRingRules nothing wrong with Chisora-Scott stoppage imo mate! Scott was not fully upright at 10 and the ref had gestured for him to hurry, he just wanted a way out

[WelshDevilRob]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

--- It wasn't near as bad as previous British shams this year. Froch was hitting marshmallows on the break with impunity, just waiting for the monster shot off the break. The ref is too scare to DQ him, and Groves was warned for butting and a terrible display of sportsmanship when he jumped Froch from behind. If Groves is suddenly brain damaged in such a dirty fight, well, you chaps would be all over the ref in mass hysteria, so he was in a no win situation.

 

Groves wasn't well ahead on the official cards and would have been even at best had he survived the round. I had Froch comfortably ahead and I defy anyone to review that fight again and try to find some genius in Groves boxing. He's a lesser version of Froch which is a big improvement over what I saw last year in the only fight of his I've seen. Froch may be slipping as to be expected after his wars and advanced age, but I'll guarantee a knockout or all time beating on Groves if we see an immediate rematch. Froch contrary to reports, never appeared hurt, not nearly so bad as the Taylor knockdown he easily recovered from.

 

Great that you chaps want to promote a new gun, but a rematch 3 months down the road and you're gonna understand that at least through Froch you're boy just ain't got it. Maybe fighting a step lower to perfect his craft and maturity, he can come back for a belt, but that's up to him and his promoter.

 

----You must have missed the after fight interview, where Froch didn't even remember having been knocked down.

 

I haven't heard of anyone else having Froch ahead on the scorecards, I certainly didn't.

[selij]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

Back to the original question......................just about the worst in the world and the odd one or two definitely bent. As was the case in the Froch debacle which has to go down as robbery of the year in the upcoming awards process. Severe case of the brown envelope from the Froch camp. Proven by the amount of times he was taken to task over hitting after the break but never deducted a point though...............and the forearm smash went unpunished too. And how dangerous is it to grab a boxer around the waist throwing him off balance? Really was a disgraceful spectacle.

 

True, I hate on Froch, but I dont love Groves by any stretch of the imagination but that lad now has an 0 - due to a bent ref.

Edited November 26, 2013 by selij

[LondonRingRules]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

----You must have missed the after fight interview, where Froch didn't even remember having been knocked down.

 

I haven't heard of anyone else having Froch ahead on the scorecards, I certainly didn't.

 

--- I don't listen to any prefight, fight, or post fight audio any more than I check out the contents of empty stalls in public restrooms.

 

During Post fight many winning fighters have had their bells rung and thus poor interviews being exploited by pathetically shameless announcers. Happens all the time in pro football. I said Groves hit him with a beautifully time shot, a counter in an exchange, but Froch was up quickly and Groves never leveraged that moment. As to scoring, dozens of so called "robberies" every year in big fights. The ABCs and commishes have effectively dumbed down the rules, judging, and reffing to make a mockery of the general understanding of rules and officiating.

 

I just don't see the robbery of Groves in this case though I wish the fight had at least continued to give him a chance to recover or for Froch to knock him out as he was seriously mangled at that point. Froch as the winner was robbed of a clear concussive result, but everyone seems bent on whining about Groves who has a chance to take the immediate rematch. We'll see what transpires, but the whole thing smacks of the first Wlad/Tony Thompson fight when Tony put up a good, game performance on to be beat down. The rematch was too easy to bear repeating and you'll see the same with the Groves rematch I would suspect unless Froch is as "shot" as you seemed to indicate in the 1st fight leadup...http://www.ringnews24.com/boxingforum/images/icons/icon6.png

[gavpowell]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

 

True, I hate on Froch, but I dont love Groves by any stretch of the imagination but that lad now has an 0 - due to a bent ref.

 

He has a 1 - his 0 had to go ;)

[selij]

Re: British referees, best in the word or bent?

 

He has a 1 - his 0 had to go ;)

 

my bad :thumb: