Comments Thread For: Did Joseph Parker deserve to be stopped by Fabio Wardley? BoxingScene round table

[pollywog]

Wardley definitely battered him, but the ref stopped him...FACTS!!!

[dannnnn]

It was an early stoppage. My initial reaction was one of mild disgust, not because I wanted Parker to win - I didn't - but because I just detest early stoppages and the taste it leaves. British refs have been particularly bad for it for about twenty years now. I also hate the phrase "better one early than one late" with a passion because whenever you hear that, it was never one early was it? It's more like ten or twenty punches early and a bad stoppage we'll excuse by guilt-tripping people because nobody wants to see permanent injury.

It's one thing if a guy is stumbling around unable to properly defend himself, or he's up and down like a yo-yo, but that wasn't the case. Parker hadn't touched down even once. He was laying on the ropes, guard up, trying to ride out the storm. Wardley was landing one then missing two. By the end of the onslaught he was clearly knackered and his punches were ragged. I just don't understand how you can stop someone who clearly still has their wits about them and is intelligently defending himself. So what if he isn't punching back! It's your job as the ref with an up-close view to discern whether a fighter is still capable of defending themselves, and if I could tell from watching on telly there's no excuse for the ref.

"Parker might have got knocked out with the next punch" Yeah and he might have got knocked out with the previous twenty. Getting punched in the head is an unpredictable business. It's not the referee's job to guess what might happen next, it's his job to protect a fighter who can no longer properly defend himself. The ref MIGHT have saved him from a KO, we don't know, but what he definitely did save him from is a shot at the undisputed heavyweight title and the payday that goes along with it. That's another reason I hate "better one early than one late", because although you may have prevented him from taking any extra punches, in doing so you've also immediately rendered the previous 100+ he's taken to all be for nothing. That is often far more damning to a career when you factor in the abundance of further punches he will then need to sustain to get back to this position career-wise.

Personally I wanted Wardley to win and think he probably would have done anyway given how the momentum had shifted. The over-hyping of Parker was becoming annoying as he has clearly shown his level to be average. That being said, it pisses me off to see any fighter getting stiffed like that by an incompetent (best-case scenario) referee. I would actually prefer refs went into fights with the mentality of "better one late than one early" not because I wish to see anyone incur irreparable damage but because in the current state of things too many fighters are being robbed of their chance to come back. Refs have gone too far the other way. The truth is, you simply cannot make a sport where the aim is to render your opponent unconscious, safe. Let it be what it is and stop ****ing up careers.

[El_Mero]

Didn't like Parker coming in massively overweight. Didn't like that the ref stopped it even though nothing really landed. Thought Parker,as the champ deserved better. Oh well

[pollywog]

If sparked the fück out Dillian got a rematch against the corpse of Povetkin to reclaim his interim status, then surely Parker does even more ?

[SouthpawRight]

It was an early stoppage. My initial reaction was one of mild disgust, not because I wanted Parker to win - I didn't - but because I just detest early stoppages and the taste it leaves. British refs have been particularly bad for it for about twenty years now. I also hate the phrase "better one early than one late" with a passion because whenever you hear that, it was never one early was it? It's more like ten or twenty punches early and a bad stoppage we'll excuse by guilt-tripping people because nobody wants to see permanent injury.

It's one thing if a guy is stumbling around unable to properly defend himself, or he's up and down like a yo-yo, but that wasn't the case. Parker hadn't touched down even once. He was laying on the ropes, guard up, trying to ride out the storm. Wardley was landing one then missing two. By the end of the onslaught he was clearly knackered and his punches were ragged. I just don't understand how you can stop someone who clearly still has their wits about them and is intelligently defending himself. So what if he isn't punching back! It's your job as the ref with an up-close view to discern whether a fighter is still capable of defending themselves, and if I could tell from watching on telly there's no excuse for the ref.

"Parker might have got knocked out with the next punch" Yeah and he might have got knocked out with the previous twenty. Getting punched in the head is an unpredictable business. It's not the referee's job to guess what might happen next, it's his job to protect a fighter who can no longer properly defend himself. The ref MIGHT have saved him from a KO, we don't know, but what he definitely did save him from is a shot at the undisputed heavyweight title and the payday that goes along with it. That's another reason I hate "better one early than one late", because although you may have prevented him from taking any extra punches, in doing so you've also immediately rendered the previous 100+ he's taken to all be for nothing. That is often far more damning to a career when you factor in the abundance of further punches he will then need to sustain to get back to this position career-wise.

Personally I wanted Wardley to win and think he probably would have done anyway given how the momentum had shifted. The over-hyping of Parker was becoming annoying as he has clearly shown his level to be average. That being said, it pisses me off to see any fighter getting stiffed like that by an incompetent (best-case scenario) referee. I would actually prefer refs went into fights with the mentality of "better one late than one early" not because I wish to see anyone incur irreparable damage but because in the current state of things too many fighters are being robbed of their chance to come back. Refs have gone too far the other way. The truth is, you simply cannot make a sport where the aim is to render your opponent unconscious, safe. Let it be what it is and stop ****ing up careers.

in defense of this ref

prolonged passive defending after being hurt made Joseph look like he didn’t want it

it’s the ref’s job to save fighters

Joseph gets his share of the blame too

[pollywog]

prolonged passive defending after being hurt made Joseph look like he didn’t want it...

A successful rope-a-dope strategy would look that way also...

[NihonJim]

These people would've stopped Ali/Foreman because Ali "wasn't throwing back"

If people think the "rope a dope" was Ali laying on the ropes stunned, taking shots not throwing anything back

It wasnt that at all

[IronDanHamza]

These people would've stopped Ali/Foreman because Ali "wasn't throwing back"

I must have missed the part where Ali was stumbling around the ring like a drunk and looking at the floor vs Foreman.

[pollywog]

If people think the "rope a dope" was Ali laying on the ropes stunned, taking shots not throwing anything back

It wasnt that at all

...and that wasn't what Parker was doing either.

He threw a couple of shots to show it wasn't. Sure they were ineffective, but so were Wardley's last few.

Fabio emptied the tank and hoped the ref would do the rest cos Parker wasn't going down with his pitty pats.

Who knows what would have happened next but I'd have bet Parker getting dropped wasn't...

[Dr Z]

Parker didn't say no mas and turn his back so so I'n hindsight was stopped prematurely,as Parker did give Fabio shot when didn't need to, so shouldve let Parker continue if he wanted to. Parker could probably take a knee or hold but was too proud to as that is admission your hurt
There's actually no right or wrong answer as ultimately ref has control. I've seen worse, more premature stoppages, so you could say this was in hindsight fair, but with a leaning towards being premature stoppage

I'd let the fight go a few more seconds. It was a borderline permature stoppage and the ref's call.

A better question to ask was Parker going to be done for if the fight continues?