Instant Replay Saves Anthony Thompson…or Maybe Not

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

By Cliff Rold - As far as anyone knew before Friday night, there is no instant replay in Boxing. Then, suddenly, there was at Ibiza Nightclub in Washington, DC. [details]

[STEELHEAD]

eyes are on you washington d.c.!!!

man...theyre lucky teddy wasnt in the house!

hope thompson wins the appeal and the right thing is done!

[Scott9945]

eyes are on you washington d.c.!!!

man...theyre lucky teddy wasnt in the house!

hope thompson wins the appeal and the right thing is done!

Good point about Atlas. He lives for **** like that.

[Pepe Smith]

Thompson needs to buy a Rabbit's foot

[edgarg]

By Cliff Rold - As far as anyone knew before Friday night, there is no instant replay in Boxing. Then, suddenly, there was at Ibiza Nightclub in Washington, DC. [details]

I believe that Joe Tessitore went to VERY unseemly lengths to try to gain Thompson a win. It was far, far beyond what a boxing host's duties are supposed to be. For whatever is happening in the ring, there are the required officials, including a referee, who gave his judgement. It's not Tessitore's business to try to change the ref's mind. He isn't even an expert video analytical expert. He's an announcer and "host" who was probly never even in the ring. These are always the most fervent and vociferous "experts".

I saw the "replay" about 8 times, and although I saw a "brush" not clash, of heads, which may have been buffered by Thompson's left glove, I did not see ANY cut resulting from the supposed clash. And certainly no blood. And NO picture pinpointed it.

The referee said it was from a punch, and, we MUST presume, that he had a specific punch in mind.

Thompson was by far the superior fighter in all but courage, but that alone doesn't entitle him to this win. It was for a title and I think the ref acted appropriately. We must wait and see what eventuates.

[Zarco]

This was complete bull****. How the hell was Arvin going to land a punch that did that damage if we all knew who was dominating that fight. Hope Thompson gets this reversed some how or beats the **** out of Arvin again.

[MWMerlino]

I believe that Joe Tessitore went to VERY unseemly lengths to try to gain Thompson a win. It was far, far beyond what a boxing host's duties are supposed to be. For whatever is happening in the ring, there are the required officials, including a referee, who gave his judgement. It's not Tessitore's business to try to change the ref's mind. He isn't even an expert video analytical expert. He's an announcer and "host" who was probly never even in the ring. These are always the most fervent and vociferous "experts".

I saw the "replay" about 8 times, and although I saw a "brush" not clash, of heads, which may have been buffered by Thompson's left glove, I did not see ANY cut resulting from the supposed clash. And certainly no blood. And NO picture pinpointed it.

The referee said it was from a punch, and, we MUST presume, that he had a specific punch in mind.

Thompson was by far the superior fighter in all but courage, but that alone doesn't entitle him to this win. It was for a title and I think the ref acted appropriately. We must wait and see what eventuates.

This is the kind of sheep minded follow the Shepard thought that ruins everything. Why in this society we choose to worship rule and structure instead of actuality and common sense, I do not know.

[edgarg]

This is the kind of sheep minded follow the Shepard thought that ruins everything. Why in this society we choose to worship rule and structure instead of actuality and common sense, I do not know.

It's so that "rule and structure" which are far more lasting and conducive to proper, non-belligerent enactment of social responsibility between peoples may prevail, leading to mutual peace and co-operation, as well as enjoyment of the good life we have within our grasp.

[I hope you noticed I didn't write "bellige-rant"- which might have more to do with "rant" than "bellum"].

AND If I was writing "shep-hard" like you did, I'd have difficulty making my true meaning comprehensible, as you do. There's nothing "hard" about my letter, only common sense, logic, and adherence to the "rules" you so dislike.

When it comes to "sheep", or flocks, then a "shepherd" is the answer, and I hope you remember this for your future education.........Didn't do well in spelling... HEY??

Stay Well.

[edgarg]

It's so that "rule and structure" which are far more lasting and conducive to proper, non-belligerent enactment of social responsibility between peoples may prevail, leading to mutual peace and co-operation, as well as enjoyment of the good life we have within our grasp.

[I hope you noticed I didn't write "bellige-rant"- which might have more to do with "rant" than "bellum"].

AND If I was writing "shep-hard" like you did, I'd have difficulty making my true meaning comprehensible, as you do. There's nothing "hard" about my letter, only common sense, logic, and adherence to the "rules" you so dislike.

When it comes to "sheep", or flocks, then a "shepherd" is the answer, and I hope you remember this for your future education.........Didn't do well in spelling... HEY??

Stay Well.

Oh sorry, I see it's shepard, which can only mean a "she" "pard". My recollections from my Medieval History is that a pard was like a "leo-pard", the leopard being the cub of a mated lion and pard. The pard ancestry provided the spots.

Perhaps you are unconsciously having a "glance-back" to your own "medieval" teenage period, when YOU were the one with a copious supply of "spots".................

[MWMerlino]

It's so that "rule and structure" which are far more lasting and conducive to proper, non-belligerent enactment of social responsibility between peoples may prevail, leading to mutual peace and co-operation, as well as enjoyment of the good life we have within our grasp.

You are completely full of ****.

[I hope you noticed I didn't write "bellige-rant"- which might have more to do with "rant" than "bellum"].

I was busy waiting for you to write some thing interesting instead of trying to flex your intellectual ****.

AND If I was writing "shep-hard" like you did, I'd have difficulty making my true meaning comprehensible, as you do. There's nothing "hard" about my letter, only common sense, logic, and adherence to the "rules" you so dislike.

You can rely on rule and structure and I will look past your lack of imagination and original vitality.

When it comes to "sheep", or flocks, then a "shepherd" is the answer, and I hope you remember this for your future education.........Didn't do well in spelling... HEY??

Stay Well.

As obviously stung as you were by my comment, I can only believe that what I said was completely true. And like so many who squander their intellect by worshiping their education, you are sad and egotistical. I never understand people like you. People that quickly retreat into the safety of the rules and wait for other men to "eventuate" their opinion. I apologize for hurting your feelings and causing you to write two very dull and revealing posts in an attempt to disarm me.