Comments Thread For: Saturday's Scorecard Result Deserves Commendation

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

By Lyle Fitzsimmons - Don’t get me wrong. I do loves me some cookies.

Still, when asked by an esteemed BoxingScene.com colleague on Saturday night if I thought the judges for the Kell Brook-Shawn Porter welterweight title fight deserved one, I had to concede no.

Maybe he’s right. Maybe Adelaide Byrd and Max DeLuca shouldn’t be plied with sweets simply for doing their jobs and getting the verdict right in a close fight.

But it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t at least take notice.

Lest anyone forget, the boxing record book has been crammed to the margins with iffy decisions and flat-out crimes in the last few years, to the point where you can’t log on to Twitter on a fight night and go five minutes without someone cyber-screaming about a bad decision in some corner of the world.

Whether it’s been a good old hometown nod, a blatant swerve in favor of a promotion’s house prospect or simply a case of three blind mice masquerading as three licensed officials, there’s been more than enough fodder in recent months to make “robbery” a repeated go-to in modern-day boxing lingo. [Click Here To Read More]

[Wicky]

It's a long winded article but I love the sentiment. If we criticise judges for often terrible (and clearly partisan) decisions, it's only right to commend for an unbiased result.

I'm surprised by the 14.7% that favoured Porter. How is that even possible? It was like watching a matador vs a bull.

[Lou Cipher]

Porter was robbed. Judges and journalists were paid off. Khan embarrasses Brook. Khan beat Maidana. Maidana beat Mayweather. End of discussion.

[trufightfanatic]

Porter was robbed. Judges and journalists were paid off. Khan embarrasses Brook. Khan beat Maidana. Maidana beat Mayweather. End of discussion.

What about the fans? Most fans saw the fight the same as the media and judges. I know I had Kell Brook 8-4 and no one sent me a check. Anyone who feels Porter won that
fight must also feel that Maidana won the fight versus Floyd because the fights looked very similar from my vantage point. Both losing combatants were ultra agressive but woefully inaffective and were out boxed by the more precise puncher with better defense, ring generalship and seemingly a better boxing IQ.

[Cracaphat]

Porter wasn't robbed.He's just not as good as the American hype machine made him out to be.His demolition of Paulie M was overstated.Paulie has been done for years.
Porter is a poor man's Aaron Pryor and he looked clueless about what to do when held by Brook.When your best and only effective punches were at the back of the head,you ain't that good.
And Brook will wipe the floor with chinny Khan no problem.

[Mr. Philadel]

anything other than a UD for Brook was a bad decision imo...Brook clearly won that fight...I had it 9-3

[Mike D]

Anybody who seriously thought that Porter won, has got to be one of his family members. Has to be.

I mean **** I was even going for Porter. But I'm not going to sit here and get **** twisted. Shawn had zero case of winning that fight. Zero.

[nycsmooth]

Porter wasn't robbed.He's just not as good as the American hype machine made him out to be.His demolition of Paulie M was overstated.Paulie has been done for years.
Porter is a poor man's Aaron Pryor and he looked clueless about what to do when held by Brook.When your best and only effective punches were at the back of the head,you ain't that good.
And Brook will wipe the floor with chinny Khan no problem.

Please, not even in the same breath, hint @ any form of comparison btwn Pryor & Porter...Aaron was a complete HOF fighter, Porter, a media, over-hyped, strong guy that will never win a title again...

[gmc_rfc_06]

The decision ended up correct, but a split decision was not correct.

I can only imagine the British judge had it even because he was soring any close round for Porter to avoid looking biased. Porter won 4 rounds max.

[-PBP-]

114-114 was a bum card. There is always 1 judge that is watching a different fight.