..U.K. FANS: Where's The Complaining Now?...

Very nice, especially for your first post. Lol. Nice. Thanks for the welcome mate :grouphug:

to be honest, yea i guess most aren't complaining because joe won. but also i think cause the inside fight is hatton's game...joe's isn't joe boxes inside and out hatton wouldn't really do that as much so people were complaining that he didn't get to fight his fight. i know that a ref has to do his job and ref each match the exact same way as the last but these are some points people will make. but does it really matter? it's over now and the best fighter won, but that's IMO :) Very nice, especially for your first post. Lol. Nice.

to be honest, yea i guess most aren't complaining because joe won. but also i think cause the inside fight is hatton's game...joe's isn't joe boxes inside and out hatton wouldn't really do that as much so people were complaining that he didn't get to fight his fight. i know that a ref has to do his job and ref each match the exact same way as the last but these are some points people will make. but does it really matter? it's over now and the best fighter won, but that's IMO :)

I don't get the sense that Brits have the same passion for Calzaghe as they do for Hatton. Calzaghe is more arrogant, doesn't bleed, doesn't quaff pints in the pubs, and has a sissy fight style. Do the British fans consider Joe as "one of the lads"? I'm not from the U.K., so I can't answer that from that standpoint. However, I can say that he doesn't seem as popular. Popular, but not as popular. Def. not 'one of the boys' as Calzaghe is SMART in between fights and doesn't drink his career away.

it works because in each fight the American fighter was favoured by the referee & was given the opurtunity to capatalise on favourable refereeing Brits just wanted it both ways as in if Hatton tried to hold then be fair & warn Floyd aswell for his elbows etc ,im not saying Hatton should have been allowed to hold but Hatton was penalised for his fouls but when Floyd comminted any kind of foul he got away with it The only time Mayweather COULD elbow is when Hatton rushed in to hold. That isn't the ref saying.. 'Fair is fair' But he can't favor either FOULER. That's something you have to just let happen, or speerate the fighters and move along. Hatton got penalized for attempting to hit Mayweather on the back of the head with Mayweather defenseless and in between the ropes. He caught the bullet. If Mayweather had tried the same shit, I'm almost positive he'd of gotten the point taken away. Both faught a bit 'rough' that fight.

For the record, I don't really like clinches all that much. My question is, U.K. fans COMPLAINED about how Hatton wasn't allowed to fight his fight. Yet, Hopkins clinches just as much as Hatton, does his work on the inside, a lot and yet.... SURPRISE, no complaints. Same ref, did the same job and now he doesn't even get talked about for doing essentially the same job and making sure the clinches were broken up. How does that work out? it works because in each fight the American fighter was favoured by the referee & was given the opurtunity to capatalise on favourable refereeing Brits just wanted it both ways as in if Hatton tried to hold then be fair & warn Floyd aswell for his elbows etc ,im not saying Hatton should have been allowed to hold but Hatton was penalised for his fouls but when Floyd comminted any kind of foul he got away with it

I don't believe Hatton clinched anywhere near as much as Hopkins, or even when he did, in the same way like holding arms and hitting. Hopkins clinched 160 times against Joe, initiated virtually every one. So going by the Hatton fight, even conservatively, Cortez should have broken up and been as harsh on Hopkins. He wasn't.

Hopkins was also walking backwards for much of the fight, then clinching in close. Hatton was going forward and wanting to fight on the inside but wasnt given a chance. Cortez was breaking Hatton and Floyd up almost before they clinched.

He allowed more infighting by Hopkins than he did with Hatton. The Hatton fight proceeded like this: Hatton feints, jumps in and throws a punch, Floyd throws one punch and holds. Cortez breaks them and warns Hatton Lather, rinse and repeat. Hopkins was able to hold on with one arm and punch repeatedly for much of the fight. Cortez waited before separateing Joe and Bernard, in the Hatton fight at times he was shouting for a break before the fighters were even touching. Plus he was eager to warn Joe for low blows but never mentioned the obvious use of the ehad by Hopkins at any point in the proceedings.

what could Cortez do to fuck Joe? He isn't obviously dirty. Cortez showed consistancy, if your an inside fighter......your fucked. I agree. However, I've always known this. Hatton fans look at the Cortez job in the Hatton/Castillo fight in the wrong way. Hatton was on his toes MUCH more in that fight. He fought herad to head, not really arms entangled. And when they were, Joe seperated the action. He hardly got involved in that fight and then fans gave Joe a bad time for reffing like he ALWAYS does. Except that in the Mayweather fight, Hatton wasn't on his toes and clinched much more. This thread isn't to hate on Calzaghe (top three favorite fighters right now) or to defend Hopkins (also top three). It's to point out that my favorite referee gets a bad wrap.

The thing is Hatton didnt fight or punch on the inside and many breaks where because of that , actually Hatton done nothing ! I actually agree, I watched this fight again for only the 2nd time............Hatton was a bundle of nerves

what could Cortez do to fuck Joe? He isn't obviously dirty. Cortez showed consistancy, if your an inside fighter......your fucked.

Calzaghe wasn't using elbows, but refs don't ref fights based on, 'No blood, no foul' or 'Well, he got him back with a foul, so now it's even' They are to implement the rules, plain and simple. I'm ALL for head to head fighters, throwing punches. But when arms are entangled, it needs to be broken up. I am ALL for Hopkins getting his clinches broken up, and I'm a Hopkins fan. What I'm 'complaining' about is how the same fans who got pissed at Cortez (my favorite ref, to be honest) for breaking up clinches in one fight, don't complain whatsoever when he refs virtually the same fight in terms of clinches, THE SAME WAY. It's hypocritical. That's all. Maybe,But my point was...I complained about him in the Hatton/Mayweather fight cause he was on Riks back all the time when Floyd was fouling it was Bernard fouling, so he got penalised.

Aight, if we gotta turn this into an argument them: He did it to Hatton (a brit) so by doing it to Bernard (an american) Its even. I dont believe it but thats what your gunna get EDIT- Oh, and the fact Floyd was using loads of Elbows etc amd Calzaghe wasnt :) Calzaghe wasn't using elbows, but refs don't ref fights based on, 'No blood, no foul' or 'Well, he got him back with a foul, so now it's even' They are to implement the rules, plain and simple. I'm ALL for head to head fighters, throwing punches. But when arms are entangled, it needs to be broken up. I am ALL for Hopkins getting his clinches broken up, and I'm a Hopkins fan. What I'm 'complaining' about is how the same fans who got pissed at Cortez (my favorite ref, to be honest) for breaking up clinches in one fight, don't complain whatsoever when he refs virtually the same fight in terms of clinches, THE SAME WAY. It's hypocritical. That's all.

He definetely allowed some inside fighting in fairness. But he was consistant. Guy hates inside fighting. But if he was such a hard ass he should have deducted points from Hopkins for excessive clinching. Cortez did well in that he take points of Joe for the low blow. Hatton has one dimension who was always liable to an assfucking by an overzealous ref. Joe Calzaghe isn't. So the comparisons aren't fair.

He did the same job he broke them up as much as he did hatton as long as he kept iut fair saying that i dunno lol Aww maybe it coz Calzaghe won lol He the boy\!!!!

I saw him coming in JUST as much as he did in the Hatton/Mayweather fight. Aight, if we gotta turn this into an argument them: He did it to Hatton (a brit) so by doing it to Bernard (an american) Its even. I dont believe it but thats what your gunna get EDIT- Oh, and the fact Floyd was using loads of Elbows etc amd Calzaghe wasnt :)

actually, there were a couple of threads about it already. Well, I've been busy. Nonetheless, it's still a bit...... hypocritical.

Because Cortez allowed Bernard to fight on the inside more than he did Hatton. I'm Brit but i ain't complaining, i didnt want him ot so the same thing he did to Hatton, i wanted him to let Hopkins work on the inside, he did a bit. I saw him coming in JUST as much as he did in the Hatton/Mayweather fight.

actually, there were a couple of threads about it already.