-
-
"Decent" and "objective?" Dude what planet are you posting from, seriously? Is that an honest characterization of this thread?
some posters, like zaruko and i want to "MAKE" this thread a decent and objective one...
sadly, we are finding it a little difficult as some posters do not have the capacity to be decent and objective.....
if only we could hold some for contempt of court...he he heComment
-
No Doctor has the balls to say he certified Froid
No official reason for dehydration.
To this day.. Nothing..
Last edited by Spoon23; 11-08-2015, 03:45 AM.Comment
-
even handed?
may be or may be not!? it depends on how one looks at my posts...
i post replies in line or in keeping up with the views put in front of me...
when other posters threw in ****, i have to admit there were times i hit back...
but if you will go back to some of my posts, i have pointed out that this issue is more than floyd and pac...that this issue is really not about personalities...
it is the shortfall in the system...Comment
-
So in other words no, you haven't been as objective as your current cries for reason suggest. Perhaps it's the responsibility of other posters for making you go astray from the moral rigidity of your mock jurisprudence or perhaps you aren't as even handed as you believe? Either way, I'm not certain if you're the best representative of the court....Comment
-
I would recuse myself, from being a judge.
I don't know anything about the actual alleged facts in this case.
I do know what I saw in the ring. An easy fight for Floyd!
But the IV is the topic of this thread. The ex post facto TUE is something I never heard of before, but just because I never heard of something before doesn't invalidate or validate it. I just never heard of it before.
Rath posits the idea that the name of the doctor who certified Floyd's alleged dehydration is needed. Additionally he wants names of other persons who may or may not have witnessed Floyd's IV being administered.
An interesting approach, but since none of us has any power to compel any person to give a sworn statement, his argument is not persuasive .
Some fans claim Floyd will have an asterisk next to the PAC win. This will not be the case.
Roach admits PAC lost. He adds that PAC thinks he beat Mayweather.
In my opinion, no amount of wishful thinking, slow motion or super slow motion videos will change the fact that Floyd won.
Floyd used his pre-fight skills to frustrate Manny & his team. Typical Floyd moves. He may have had some influence in the selection of the refs?
But Floyd used his boxing skills to beat a good one dimensional fighter easily.
It is not Floyd's fault that PAC failed to cut off the ring, threw very few punches compared to other fights PAC has been in. Was inaccurate & appeared off balance many times in the fight. Manny could not close the distance enough to land the punches that beat other fighters.
I find it rather odd that Floyd is villified for being a better boxer. He is also a mentalist, planting seeds of doubt into Manny's simple mind in the pre fight build up. Masterful if you really analyze his statements. Edward Bernays would be proud of Floyd's ability to use propaganda to weaken Manny's mind.
The IV issue, has pretty much been quashed by the NSAC, USADA, & the media!
Unlike Christ, your pumpkin head messiah cannot be resurrected! Marquez the pumpkin smasher showed that! Floyd easily beat that PAC-O-LANTERN!
I await challenges on this post!
Best Regards,
ZarokuComment
Tweet
Comment