Sauerland To Reconsider Plan For Valuev-Holyfield Rematch

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

Team Sauerland will reconsider its plan to offer Evander Holyfield a rematch against WBA heavyweight champion Nikolai Valuev following Tommy Brooks´ outrageous remarks in the press. The coach of the 46-year-old boxing legend, who lost a close majority decision by the scores of 116-112, 115-114 and 114-114, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: “I think it was just some home cooking for a promoter’s fighter. I think somebody was just greasing somebody’s palms.” [details]

[Silencers]

It's kind of dodgy that they aren't willing to offer Holyfield a rematch because of what Brooks said, that shouldn't have anything to do with it.

Anyways, it does seem like people at ringside saw a different fight from the one people saw on TV, 38 of 40 writers at ringside had Valuev winning, whereas most of the writers watching on TV had Holyfield winning.

[Bad Boy Dazza]

It's kind of dodgy that they aren't willing to offer Holyfield a rematch because of what Brooks said, that shouldn't have anything to do with it.

x2 that's fuxed up

[BattlingNelson]

It's kind of dodgy that they aren't willing to offer Holyfield a rematch because of what Brooks said, that shouldn't have anything to do with it.

Anyways, it does seem like people at ringside saw a different fight from the one people saw on TV, 38 of 40 writers at ringside had Valuev winning, whereas most of the writers watching on TV had Holyfield winning.

Really? All robbery cries must end now then.

Controversial yes. Robbery no.

[MANGLER]

Sad thing is if Holy gets anotha shot he probably won't be able to pull it off. That robbery was tragic.

[UTFISH]

Experts?

So, I guess the announcers at ring side were watching it on television when they said Valuev should be drug tested after the fight to see how many sleeping pills he took, and that he couldn't have won more than two rounds.
Give me a break! What defines an expert at ringside anyway?

[The Hammer]

Really? All robbery cries must end now then.

Controversial yes. Robbery no.

People watching on American TV were influenced by the very pro-Holyfield commentary by Al Bernstein and the very emotional Nick Charles.

[sitai]

i watched it on dutch tv and they thought it was a robbery...
personally i had it veryu close
they showed pictures of the crowd and people were screaming and getting rowdy

[SickmyDuck]

It's kind of dodgy that they aren't willing to offer Holyfield a rematch because of what Brooks said, that shouldn't have anything to do with it.

Anyways, it does seem like people at ringside saw a different fight from the one people saw on TV, 38 of 40 writers at ringside had Valuev winning, whereas most of the writers watching on TV had Holyfield winning.

interesting

Where did you hear about how the experts scored it Silencers? Got a link?

[TheGreatAli]

The Sun newspaper in the UK called for Holyfield to retire and nothing was mentioned of a robbery, they talked about the fight like his fight with Ibragimov, calling him crazy to fight again.