Laurence Cole ref of the year ...do you think he would have this job with out his da

Texas referee Laurence Cole, was the third man in the ring on November 25th in Hidalgo, Texas, when Filipino Jimrex Jaca met Juan Manuel Marquez for the WBO Interim Featherweight title. Many of you might remember the 8th round in particular, when Cole asked a badly cut Marquez and I paraphrase, whether he wanted to continue, adding that he was ahead on the cards. I sat in front of my TV in utter disbelief, hoping that perhaps the commentators would comment on what was said, but they didn't. I missed Larry Merchant, and I missed Jim Lampley, a lot... It was obvious that the B.A.D. crew on duty that night was not going to delve into what amounted to a serious infraction on the part of the referee. Here we are, we can't agree on open scoring, but a referee can tell a fighter he is ahead on the cards and doesn't have to continue if he doesn't want to???? (Marquez had a decent size cut across his forehead and the blood was never contained). I wrote an editorial column on the subject, expressing my frustration at the arrogance -for lack of a better word- Mr. Cole had displayed during his officiating of this title bout. I also questioned whether Mr. Cole's 'private' -or so he thought- sidebar with Mr. Marquez marked the introduction of a new spin to the debate that surrounds open scoring in boxing. (Much to Marquez's credit, he fought on like a true champion and stopped his opponent in the 9th round). Other issues were mentioned in the piece, such as the fact that I only saw the ringside physician examine Marquez once, relatively early on, although Marquez bled quite a bit for several rounds. Last, but certainly not least, I pointed out the very disturbing fact that out of such an illustrious corner as Marquez had, headed by Nacho Beristain, no coagulants were ever applied to his cut. Whether by design or neglect, I believed that to have been totally unacceptable. A couple of days after the blatant faux pas, a rather small rumble began to brew from the ranks of the paying customers, and the story got some ink in other web sites. Headlines about Cole having been suspended and fined were posted, although in my experience with this type of situation I doubted very much that punishment could have been handed down so quickly. In other words, I smelled a rat.... On behalf of interested boxing fans and for my own understanding, I decided to contact the boxing director of the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, Mr. Dick Cole, who also happens to be Laurence Cole's dad. When I spoke with the senior Cole, I could sense a scintilla of aggravation in his voice, as well as a sense of resignation as I pressed him to answer my questions. This is what our one-on-one was about. 1) I asked Mr. Cole's office to please FAX me the certificate of the company that insured the show. I felt it necessary to know whether the most obvious of all the conflicts of interest had taken place. For your information, Mr. Cole's office complied and I can verify that the promoter of the event had purchased his insurance from a California agent, and not from the Cole family. 2) I then asked Mr. Cole about his son's alleged one year suspension plus the $3000 fine that was being posted and talked about over the internet. Mr. Cole assured me under no uncertain terms that Laurence has not been suspended nor fined. Actually, a complaint hadn't even been lodged against him at the time of our conversation, (which took place on Thursday, December 14th). Mr. Cole went on to say that without someone lodging a complaint with his Commission, they can't even investigate a situation, let alone agree on issues such as suspensions or fines. He added that this is a judicial process that begins with the lodging of a complaint, followed by an investigation of the particular situation expressed in the complaint. The Association of Boxing Commissions is notified of the complaint as well as the result of the investigation. The Commissioners then vote and decide whether -in their opinion- the complaint is valid or not. if the answer is yes, they make recommendations as to what punishment should be assigned. If the resolution is to suspend someone's license, only the D.A.'s office can officially suspend a license, (and with it the capability of an individual to earn a living). The person that was investigated, and is about to be suspended, should that be the scenario, can then appeal the decision reached. "This entire process can take months, even years," said Mr. Cole, "so how can they be saying that there has been a fine and a suspension against Laurence Cole?" 3) Mr. Dick Cole conceded that Laurence Cole had "used the wrong words." Upon further questioning, he did say that "no matter what words he used, Laurence Cole should have never said what he said to Marquez." I would like to thank Mr. Cole for taking the time to speak to me under what I'm sure are not the most pleasant of circumstances for him, as a Commissioner and a father. I also appreciate his candor and ultimately the recognition that what Laurence Cole did was not right, under any circumstance. Now, I ask you: Should there be a complaint lodged against Laurence Cole? If so, who do you think will or should file it? It is my understanding that anyone can lodge a complaint, not just the main characters involved in the situation. The headlines claiming Laurence Cole was fined and suspended... Do you think they may have been posted hoping the issue would go away quietly? Just some food for thought, dear readers. I say no more, for now anyway