Is It Time To Bring Back STANDING COUNTS To Reduce Early Stoppages?

[FlatLine]

Referees need the option to issue a standing eight count. Right now the only option they have is to stop a fight if they think a fighter is in trouble - why not bring in the standing count so referees can pause the action, check integrity of the fighter before deciding to stop it. This would reduce controversial early stoppages and possibly make for more fight drama while still protecting the fighter and giving the fighter more opportunity to protect his own career.

[Adamjr91]

No. If Fighter A is unloading on a Fighter B, it is Fighter B's job to fight out or take a knee.

I find the notion that a Referee can break the fighters apart and give fighter B an 8 second breather utterly ridiculous and completely unfair on Fighter A.

[I Love Jesus!]

No. If Fighter A is unloading on a Fighter B, it is Fighter B's job to fight out or take a knee.

I find the notion that a Referee can break the fighters apart and give fighter B an 8 second breather utterly ridiculous and completely unfair on Fighter A.

I voted yes but this is also a good point

[BTL]

Would the standing count, count as a knockdown?

[FrankieClutch]

It's tough man. I feel like that would only make the referee's job more subjective

[$£X]

Froch-Groves 1 and Kovalev-Pascal could have used a standing count instead of just finishing off the fights. We want proper knockouts!

[Dr Rumack]

I've often thought about this. At time it seems like the right answer alright.

But ultimately the solution to early stoppages is clearer definition of the circumstances that a make a stoppage justified. That's why so many stoppages are controversial, refs vary massively in their interpretation of how much punishment a fighter needs to have taken, what's the body language that says he's done, how long they've been covering up and not returning fire etc.

You'll always rely on the referee's experience to some extent, but there should be some effort to clearly describe the conditions that make a stoppage the right call. It would benefit everyone, the referees, the fans, and most of all the fighters.

[NEETzsche]

I've often thought about this. At time it seems like the right answer alright.

But ultimately the solution to early stoppages is clearer definition of the circumstances that a make a stoppage justified. That's why so many stoppages are controversial, refs vary massively in their interpretation of how much punishment a fighter needs to have taken, what's the body language that says he's done, how long they've been covering up and not returning fire etc.

You'll always rely on the referee's experience to some extent, but there should be some effort to clearly describe the conditions that make a stoppage the right call. It would benefit everyone, the referees, the fans, and most of all the fighters.

i think an easy way to judge the situation is the position of the fighter's gloves. if they are still up and he's taking hard, unanswered blows, then a standing 8 could be beneficial (kovalev-pascal); if his hands drop after a hard, unanswered blow but he stays on his feet, then stop the fight (froch-bute).

[Outwest Exp 355]

I think the ref should at least have the option. I know California used to do that. Not sure if they still do.

[SalimShady1212]

NO, as it can kill a fighters momentum. Although it may prevent early stoppages, it's not fair if a fighter is about to go for the kill and you stop him mid combination. It will prevent a stoppage and also give the other guy time time recover. Bad idea that willdiscuss the flow of a boxing match.