Comments Thread For: WBC President Exploring Ways To Prevent Fury vs Usyk Controversy

[Smash]

I think you're closer to being correct than those who cite elaborate conspiracies. A combination of incompetence and having a poor view are more likely explanations.

A promoter putting on a show wanting their star guy or just their guy under contract to win is not really that elaborate, judges know they will not be picked for the big fights if they go against that grain, no need for brown envelopes in this case really either

[dan-b]

A promoter putting on a show wanting their star guy or just their guy under contract to win is not really that elaborate, judges know they will not be picked for the big fights if they go against that grain, no need for brown envelopes in this case really either

Okay, but that's more nebulous and difficult to provide evidence for.

[Smash]

Okay, but that's more nebulous and difficult to provide evidence for.

Screen-Shot-2017-09-17-at-160625.webp

.....

[Boxing Scene]

Anything this crook says should be no. ****ing guy is a clown and only cares about money.

[Boxing Scene]

That's even worse if looking at both ring and video. Cause that would only make sense if all 3 judges look at the ring and tv same time or they can be judging different v***s

More judges is a better idea.

No it isn't. More people to be corrupt is not a good idea.

[elfag]

both fighters were in agreement against the more judges idea, so then just shut the *** up about it, its their career and if they are both in agreement then what is the problem again?

[N/A]

Sulaiman has a lot to be criticised for, but I wouldn't say the other federations are any better - they're utter holes, but they're otherwise.

The good thing about Mauricio is that he dares to talk about innovations, changes... And that's not always a bad thing, because boxing in some aspects is outdated by a century - it's not traditions and it's not a good thing.

Yeah - why not have 5 judges instead of 3? Precisely because it is expensive to bribe more judges. Why not use CompuBox from them in the final decision if the match is close? Why not have committees on every controversial judging decision? Why shouldn't there be no declaring fights "NC" under crooked referees - Pabon is a great example of one: unless he's corrupt, or incompetent and corrupt: the guy judged Klitschko-Povetkin a clean fight; ruled a low blow in Usyk's second fight with Joshua; similarly ruled in Usyk's favor against Dubois... My how can you not think he's a Ukrainian lackey?

Well, instant replay is difficult to introduce into boxing due to the nature of the sport - the outcome and result are not determined by the subject matter that opponents throw around (tennis, volleyball, football, etc).

Side referee(s) could be introduced to have a look over different cameras and thus feed information to the main referee in controversial situations, which remains particularly to be introduced just because of the specifics but could remain valid for possibly changing the result afterwards. Yes, some will say that post facto is late (no - it's not) or sucks - perfect! This will push the referees themselves to play more adequately/quality.

The WBSS had a fourth referee to change a tie - why force a winner? But the fans are fine with these utterly ridiculous rules: they included a countback method in the event of a draw even after the fourth referee's decision. And it was under those ridiculous rules that Usyk became a unified champion, but when I say the man always took the shortcut to false greatness, various fanboys jump in offended...

In short: raising questions about the big flaws in boxing, the current incompetency of some professionals and corruption in this sport is a good thing.

[TheOneAboveAll]

Well, hell, why stop at 6 judges? None of these imbeciles realize that the #1 problem in boxing scoring is the scoring system itself. There will always be controversy when you tell people that there are 4 different things to score. Only one of the stated scoring criterion actually matters, and that's clean, hard punching. The others (defense, ring generalship, 'effective aggression) are incidental to clean, hard punching. What other sport has competing scoring criteria?

[Smash]

Well, hell, why stop at 6 judges? None of these imbeciles realize that the #1 problem in boxing scoring is the scoring system itself. There will always be controversy when you tell people that there are 4 different things to score. Only one of the stated scoring criterion actually matters, and that's clean, hard punching. The others (defense, ring generalship, 'effective aggression) are incidental to clean, hard punching. What other sport has competing scoring criteria?

what happens if the clean hard punching doesnt land because of good defence?

[theface07]

Do even Fury fans think this is going to happen in time? Why not just set a more reasonable date from the get go to allow the damned thing to heal??

I seriously doubt Fury even has a cut. I'm no conspiracy theorist but when it comes to Fury I wouldn't put it passed him to fake a cut. For one, the image he posted is meaningless. Everybody knows how easy it is to edit an image of a face to add a cut, little kids can do this nowadays. Furthermore, the video clip of the sparring where he supposedly got cut also proves nothing. There's no blood visible and it cuts off before you can actually see if he was cut or not. If it were any other heavyweight I would say it's legit, Fury, on the other hand, lies through his teeth on a regular basis.
May is probably not enough time to allow a cut like the one Fury is supposed to have to heal which is what begs the question, along with Fury's lack of credibility and blatant lies and general nonsense, is it just more mind games by Fury knowing how bad he looked against Ngannou coupled with the fact that he knows Usyk has been training hard for the most important fight of his life.