Groves expect 'no-contest' bid to fail

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • LacedUp
    Still Smokin'
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Oct 2009
    • 29171
    • 781
    • 381
    • 132,163

    #1

    Groves expect 'no-contest' bid to fail

    George Groves believes he has a strong case to get his defeat to Carl Froch declared a no-contest, but admits he is not expecting his bid to be successful.

    The Londoner lost his unbeaten record when he was controversially stopped in nine rounds by IBF and WBA super-middleweight champion Froch in November.

    Howard Foster was widely criticised for his decision to end the fight and the IBF subsequently ordered a rematch, ruling "inappropriate conduct" by the referee contributed to Groves losing.

    The 25-year-old has now asked for the result to be amended by the British Boxing Board of Control.

    “I’m well within my rights to contest it, I feel,” said Groves, speaking to Hawksbee and Jacobs.

    “The fight was more than a premature ending. The fight was not finished. The IBF agreed and they did everything they could in their power, which was to force an immediate rematch.

    “I’d like my last fight to be amended to a no-contest because I didn’t lose that fight. The IBF agreed I didn’t lose that fight, therefore it shouldn’t count."

    Groves, however, is not holding out much hope that the British Boxing Board will rule in his favour.

    “I don’t expect much because the British Boxing Board of Control have already done their upmost to stand by Howard Foster, the referee, although he has gone on to resign from the IBF, which I’m assuming was because of his performance in the fight," he continued.

    “It will be interesting to see what they come up with. I certainly have a very strong case and a good argument.

    “They are having a meeting about it in the middle of February, I understand, and that’s when I will hear back from them.”

    Groves is yet to thrash out terms with Froch over a rematch, but insists he is not the one holding up the negotiations.

    Froch hit out at his fellow Brit last week after claiming he had rejected a seven-figure offer.

    But Groves said: "I have secured a shot at the IBF title. It's up to Carl Froch to accept that and not vacate.

    "It is an interesting time. Anyone who thinks I have rejected a fight with Carl Froch is wrong. All I did was turn down the terms his promoter made in an offer."

  • yoz
    Yoz
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • May 2011
    • 8617
    • 439
    • 427
    • 16,868

    #2
    Quite right, too.

    Just sign the damn contract and stop b1tching.

    Comment

    • IronDanHamza
      BoxingScene Icon
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Oct 2009
      • 49445
      • 5,022
      • 269
      • 104,043

      #3
      He has no case.

      Everyone knows it will fail.

      Comment

      • LacedUp
        Still Smokin'
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Oct 2009
        • 29171
        • 781
        • 381
        • 132,163

        #4
        Originally posted by IronDanHamza
        He has no case.

        Everyone knows it will fail.
        It would be quite strange if it was changed. And unjustly so as well.

        But then again, the IBF did force a rematch - which is more or less the same from their side.

        Comment

        • soul_survivor
          LOL @ Ali-Holmes
          Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
          • Jun 2013
          • 18949
          • 623
          • 473
          • 65,236

          #5
          Na, it shouldn't be a no contest, that's ridiculous. He shoud just take the rematch.

          Comment

          • Citizen Koba
            Deplorable Peacenik
            Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
            • Jun 2013
            • 20457
            • 3,951
            • 3,801
            • 2,875,273

            #6
            Originally posted by LacedUp
            It would be quite strange if it was changed. And unjustly so as well.

            But then again, the IBF did force a rematch - which is more or less the same from their side.
            It is kinda the same (at least it implies they thought the result controversial) though without the same ramifications, but then the IBF don't really give a damn. Another mando means more lovely sanctioning fees for them, hell do they care who Froch fights next? They just like the idea it's gonna be soon.

            But there's almost no chance it gets overturned by the BBBofC, whatever you think of the result it would imply a lack of faith in one of their top guys and also potentially open the floodgates for a host of other challenges.

            In any case NCs are basically only awarded post factum if someone (either the fighters or officials) can be proved to have cheated in some way, which is not really the case in this instance - realistically the most that can be alleged is incompetance (and even that ain't gonna make Groves many friends at the BBBofC).

            Groves just needs to get the hell on with it now - sign the damn contract even if it ain't as fat as he wants (or deserves) and get this fight made.
            Last edited by Citizen Koba; 02-06-2014, 07:18 AM.

            Comment

            • Earl-Hickey
              Banned
              Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
              • Nov 2009
              • 29031
              • 2,832
              • 1,384
              • 297,750

              #7
              The IBF didn't make Khan-Petersen a NC when Petersen failed drugs test, got a robbery and had a weird hat man distracting the judges, so i dont think they will for a stoppage that was 10 seconds early

              Comment

              • LacedUp
                Still Smokin'
                Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                • Oct 2009
                • 29171
                • 781
                • 381
                • 132,163

                #8
                Originally posted by Koba-Grozny
                It is kinda the same (at least it implies they thought the result controversial) though without the same ramifications, but then the IBF don't really give a damn. Another mando means more lovely sanctioning fees for them, hell do they care who Froch fights next? They just like the idea it's gonna be soon.

                But there's almost no chance it gets overturned by the BBBofC, whatever you think of the result it would imply a lack of faith in one of their top guys and also potentially open the floodgates for a host of other challenges.

                In any case NCs are basically only awarded post factum if someone (either the fighters or officials) can be proved to have cheated in some way, which is not really the case in this instance - realistically the most that can be alleged is incompetance (and even that ain't gonna make Groves many friends at the BBBofC).

                Groves just needs to get the hell on with it now - sign the damn contract even if it ain't as fat as he wants (or deserves) and get this fight made.
                Totally agreed. They probably saw the $$$$ on the line for the fight. I don't think there's anyway in hell this fight should be turned to NC. I also think the BBBofC have much more integrity than that.

                Originally posted by Earl Hickey
                The IBF didn't make Khan-Petersen a NC when Petersen failed drugs test, got a robbery and had a weird hat man distracting the judges, so i dont think they will for a stoppage that was 10 seconds early
                That was the worst sanctioning of all times. Fight should have clearly been called a NC - arguably with the shady judging and refereeing + hat man. But when you add PEDs on top of that.. Well, Peterson is from the west coast right? Pretty close to NJ.

                Comment

                • ZottyCar
                  Amateur
                  Interim Champion - 1-100 posts
                  • Feb 2014
                  • 27
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  • 6,060

                  #9
                  It would set a precedent if it was approved. It wasn't 'that bad' anyway

                  Comment

                  • LacedUp
                    Still Smokin'
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • Oct 2009
                    • 29171
                    • 781
                    • 381
                    • 132,163

                    #10
                    Originally posted by ZottyCar
                    It would set a precedent if it was approved. It wasn't 'that bad' anyway
                    It was pretty bad.

                    Not bad enough for a NC - but it was pretty bad.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    TOP