Marquez, that was a clear robbery.
Who was more deserving of a win? Khan or JMM?
Collapse
-
-
You really think that there's justice in every decision just because the judges say so? Really?Posts like this are hardly worth replying to. The choice is like chosing between Scylla and Charybdis. Neither fighter deserves this choice because they both lost. Khan lost more obviously than Marquez, looking like Oscar in the last 5 rds of his fight with Trinidad. It would have been worse if he hadn't been strong-arming Peterson right through the fight, with only 2 points taken, although I think the second point is controversial only because it's not certain if it was because of another strong-arm push, or the uppercut with which he followed it. I can't rrecall if the ref called a break there. Peterson's body atrack was SOLID.
As for Marquez, he boxed very well, but constantly on the retreat, and why he looked good it was because his was often the last punch ending an exchange. However he so blatantly and deliberately stepped on and pinned down Pacquiao's foot,(preventing him from balancing properly or getting away) when he delivered some of his best combinations, makes him, as far as I'm concerned, just as "foul-happy" as Khan. I was astonished to see that in the last rd, he actually stepped WITH his foot on top of Pacquiao's for at least 2 paces.
And got away with it.....
They were both good fights for the spectators.Comment
-
Khan although the point deduction suck. Pac punches harder than Marquez and Pac landed more hard punches in every round except those 3 rounds Marquez clearly dominated Pacquaio. The 3 rounds Marquez clearly dominated Pacquaio was not the whole story though. There are other rounds Pac clearly dominated Marquez and the rest are extremely close but Pac landed more, threw more punches, the aggressor and the most important he is the champion! so who do you think the judges will give the close round in those circumstances?Comment
-
Comment
Comment