Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Serious Robbery Here...

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    I don't see why everyone is all worked up about this fight..


    The punches when Barkley was down, and little to no effect.. He still gets stopped in 1.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
      I don't see why everyone is all worked up about this fight..


      The punches when Barkley was down, and little to no effect.. He still gets stopped in 1.
      Well its been explained quite well...the Jones Montell affair being a great example... You may just have a need to negate this incident, and if you feel better doing so by all means! Its not about the stoppage alone its about the effects of the punches and the way a fighter is vulnerable at that point and unable to deend.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by billeau2 View Post
        Well its been explained quite well...the Jones Montell affair being a great example... You may just have a need to negate this incident, and if you feel better doing so by all means! Its not about the stoppage alone its about the effects of the punches and the way a fighter is vulnerable at that point and unable to deend.
        I get why its uncalled for and dirty, but i don't see it having a huge effect on the outcome of this fight. Barkley squared up and traded with benn and got rocked and dropped multiple times and ultimately stopped. The dirty punches by benn after the knockdowns really played no role in the outcome.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
          I get why its uncalled for and dirty, but i don't see it having a huge effect on the outcome of this fight. Barkley squared up and traded with benn and got rocked and dropped multiple times and ultimately stopped. The dirty punches by benn after the knockdowns really played no role in the outcome.
          I'm glad you're not a referee. Good lord. How about when a guy goes down, let the opponent just keep hitting him? Why have a count? Good lord. Some people on this site are clueless about human decency.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by anthonydavid11 View Post
            This is why I never liked Benn. He would cheat like hell and loved rabbit punches. Barkley should have sued over this.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g78Rci47wcs
            Lmao... You must be a bleeding heart liberal..

            The fight was a robbery? He should be sued???


            What about when manny hit marquez and shattered his nose in the third kd of the first fight, or when barrera hit marquez when he was done.. This stuff happens all the time..
            And the fight you highlighted would have been no different if benn didn't punch late.. His sucker punches didn't even land and had no impact on the outcome..


            So if it's a robbery and benn should be sued, you think barkely would have miracously started outboxing benn.. Lmao... Dude squared up and was getting blazed by the quicker hand speed of benn..

            Anyone with any common sense can tell barkely is getting slaughtered.. How the hell do you think it's a robbery and benn should get sued..

            At worst, he should have gotten a warning, then a point or 2 deducted, but none of that mattered becaise Barkley was getting stopped n a hurry..

            You could take 2 points away from benn and he still would have won by 1st rd stoppage, so what is your point in this thread..

            You sound like barkley's mom..

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
              Lmao... You must be a bleeding heart liberal..

              The fight was a robbery? He should be sued???


              What about when manny hit marquez and shattered his nose in the third kd of the first fight, or when barrera hit marquez when he was done.. This stuff happens all the time..
              And the fight you highlighted would have been no different if benn didn't punch late.. His sucker punches didn't even land and had no impact on the outcome..


              So if it's a robbery and benn should be sued, you think barkely would have miracously started outboxing benn.. Lmao... Dude squared up and was getting blazed by the quicker hand speed of benn..

              Anyone with any common sense can tell barkely is getting slaughtered.. How the hell do you think it's a robbery and benn should get sued..

              At worst, he should have gotten a warning, then a point or 2 deducted, but none of that mattered becaise Barkley was getting stopped n a hurry..

              You could take 2 points away from benn and he still would have won by 1st rd stoppage, so what is your point in this thread..

              You sound like barkley's mom..
              Hhmm. You decide on my political philosophy from a post on a boxing website. That's astounding. So clairvoyant. How do you do it?

              Haha.

              Barkley went down and a solid second later, Benn rears back and lands a blow to the back of his head. It was premeditated. It was a disqualification either way you look at it.

              You also seem to miss the fact that Barkley came back on him very well. This was anything but a one-sided fight. If you're a Benn fan, fine. Most fans want to rewrite history in favor of their guy. However, here he was flat out wrong and the referee should have disqualified him. The problem these days with many cheaters is that their fans feel a need to let them off the hook when they cheat. I understand emotions can run high, but after taking a little while and calming down, common sense should kick in. Benn landed a shot to the back of the man's head a good second or two after the man was down on his knees and not even facing him. That does constitute a disqualification. If the DQ would have happened, I can see Barkley giving him a rematch and next time Benn could stay within the rules and win that way. When something like this happens, make no mistake. It is the fighter's fault for the foul and then the ref's fault if he does nothing about it.

              You can stick up for him all day long, but I've watched it three times. Wrong. Every. Time.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by anthonydavid11 View Post
                Hhmm. You decide on my political philosophy from a post on a boxing website. That's astounding. So clairvoyant. How do you do it?

                Haha.

                Barkley went down and a solid second later, Benn rears back and lands a blow to the back of his head. It was premeditated. It was a disqualification either way you look at it.

                You also seem to miss the fact that Barkley came back on him very well. This was anything but a one-sided fight. If you're a Benn fan, fine. Most fans want to rewrite history in favor of their guy. However, here he was flat out wrong and the referee should have disqualified him. The problem these days with many cheaters is that their fans feel a need to let them off the hook when they cheat. I understand emotions can run high, but after taking a little while and calming down, common sense should kick in. Benn landed a shot to the back of the man's head a good second or two after the man was down on his knees and not even facing him. That does constitute a disqualification. If the DQ would have happened, I can see Barkley giving him a rematch and next time Benn could stay within the rules and win that way. When something like this happens, make no mistake. It is the fighter's fault for the foul and then the ref's fault if he does nothing about it.

                You can stick up for him all day long, but I've watched it three times. Wrong. Every. Time.

                So you still think it's a robbery???

                You think Barkley would have won and was robbed?????

                He should sue????

                Robbery????

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
                  So you still think it's a robbery???

                  You think Barkley would have won and was robbed?????

                  He should sue????

                  Robbery????
                  The incredible part is you still do not think it was a robbery.

                  But hey. Agree to disagree. You could show class about it next time without trying to assume what I think about politics. No reason to get personal.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by anthonydavid11 View Post
                    The incredible part is you still do not think it was a robbery.

                    But hey. Agree to disagree. You could show class about it next time without trying to assume what I think about politics. No reason to get personal.
                    Relax, quit getting so sensitive...


                    How was it a robbery,,, the best case scenario is the ref will take 2 points away.. Barkely was getting stopped no matter what, how can you call that a robbery??

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
                      Relax, quit getting so sensitive...


                      How was it a robbery,,, the best case scenario is the ref will take 2 points away.. Barkely was getting stopped no matter what, how can you call that a robbery??
                      I thought Benn should have been DQ'd for the foul, but it was painfully obvious that Barkley had no other chance to win that fight.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP