If judges had to face the media or the fans this sport would be completely different.
Unfortunately, that wouldn't help anything. The criteria for judging is so ambiguous that you could justify giving many rounds in a fight to either fighter. If 'Fighter-A' is the aggressor and comes forward landing 40% of his power shots, the judge can still reward the round to 'Fighter-B' for practicing better defense. Or can claim that the 40% wasn't effective enough to earn him credit for 'effective aggression'.
But, the vague language used in the rules has allowed judges to feign some sort of faux esoteric insight, all while the corrupt en****** of days gone by could use it to their advantage.
———
We are about to witness the most controversial decision in boxing history.
Two incompetent and corrupt bastards get to decide on a historical fight.
They are not going to be needed, they should stay home, it’s ending in a KO or TKO, compliments from the BUD camp -
Well, at least Harvey Dock is the ref. He's done a good job in the fights I've seen him in recently. As expected though, Crawford will need a KO to win with those judges.
One of the best things about Harvey Dock is he doesn't stop fights too early. He handled Benavidez vs. Lemieux and Beterbiev vs. Smith Jr. and did a good job with both. He also refereed Haney vs Loma and Plant vs Dirrell, so he's done a good job with recent high profile fights.
Comment