Comments Thread For: Lamont Roach Jnr not surprised NYSAC declined appeal of Gervonta Davis draw

[MulaKO]

I'm not. A fighter can take a knee from a low blow/borderline shot (see Usyk-Dubois), a headbutt, a thumb in the eye, etc. It's up to the ref to make the call.

None of the above actually happened
So none of the above are actual reasons and not very plea sable reasons
Being thumbed in the eye or a low blow is still at the discretion of the ref meaning you don’t stop fighting unless you drop
There’s just no way to justify him taking a knee and getting wiped down to boot

[QballLobo]

You don't understand what I'm saying. I never said it was the right call, but it was the ref that made the decision not to call it a knockdown. You're not on my level.

But that’s the point here. The ref clearly made an error that affected the outcome of the fight. That error could have easily been corrected by replay or by NYSAC but they chose to protect the money fighter.

Sure the ref has some discretion in the fight but none of that applies to this scenario.

[Aware]

None of the above actually happened
So none of the above are actual reasons and not very plea sable reasons
Being thumbed in the eye or a low blow is still at the discretion of the ref meaning you don’t stop fighting unless you drop
There’s just no way to justify him taking a knee and getting wiped down to boot

You are failing to understand my argument.

[MulaKO]

You are failing to understand my argument.

I guess I am
I still believe the ref was on track to make the right call ( by beginning the count ) to then just having an explanation figuratively to expand his mistake
Imo , Roach won the fight without the knockdown

[QballLobo]

You are failing to understand my argument.

You really have no argument. You say the ref has discretion to make that call. But there is an official way they are trained to do that to make it clear to everyone what is happening. That wasn’t followed here so what the ref can do has no baring on what the ref DID do, or more importantly did not do.

Try and keep up here.

[Aware]

You really have no argument. You say the ref has discretion to make that call. But there is an official way they are trained to do that to make it clear to everyone what is happening. That wasn’t followed here so what the ref can do has no baring on what the ref DID do, or more importantly did not do.

Try and keep up here.

None of what you wrote follows logic.

"What the ref can do has no bearing on what the ref did do..."??? Are you serious? You're trying too hard for someone who doesn't have it.

[QballLobo]

None of what you wrote follows logic.

"What the ref can do has no bearing on what the ref did do..."??? Are you serious? You're trying too hard for someone who doesn't have it.

It’s simple if you have an ounce of common sense.

The ref CAN grant a timeout to a fighter IF they follow the correct process they go through training to do.

The ref CANNOT decide to not follow the rules to when a fighter takes a knee and runs to the corner without prior approval from the ref.

If that doesn’t make sense to you then you are just a low IQ person.

[Aware]

where are all these fights where boxers have taken knees from low blows headbutts thumbs and what else????

Is it your argument that this never happens? Did you ignore the Dubois-Usyk example?

[MulaKO]

Is it your argument that this never happens? Did you ignore the Dubois-Usyk example?

Roach committed no foul so your arguing something that just isn’t there
The actual foul was committed by Tank no matter what discrepancies you might wanna throw in
Let’s start there

[Aware]

It’s simple if you have an ounce of common sense.

The ref CAN grant a timeout to a fighter IF they follow the correct process they go through training to do.

The ref CANNOT decide to not follow the rules to when a fighter takes a knee and runs to the corner without prior approval from the ref.

If that doesn’t make sense to you then you are just a low IQ person.

Can you explain how, " What the ref can do has no bearing on what the ref did do..." means that? Let me see if I can fit together what you say you meant using your logic. What a ref can do is grant a timeout if he follows the correct process, but this has no bearing on the fact that the ref decided not to follow the rules when a fighter takes a knee... The "no bearing" phrase does not make sense here. What you mean is, what a ref can do under the rules is not what the ref did in the fight.

Does it matter to you why a fighter takes a knee? If not, we can end the argument.