Comments Thread For: Burns-Di Rocco Title Fight Still Part Of WBA Consolidation Process

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

For those concerned that the World Boxing Association (WBA) is threatening to return to its old ways take a deep and relax. Even what appears to be a random title fight sanctioning is in fact part of a well thought-out plan.

An understandable amount of confusion has come from the announcement of a vacant super lightweight title being at stake in the May 21 showdown between Ricky Burns and Michele Di Rocco in Glasgow, Scotland. From such classification came the suggestion that the pair will vie for the title recently stripped from Jose Benavidez, rather than the WBA just eliminating the belt as part of its promise to consolidate the number of fighters it refers to as "champion."

The latter is a mission still being carried forth by WBA head Gilberto Jesus Mendoza. However, an exception was made in making a concession he felt was necessary to move forward with a pair of fights.

Di Rocco was actually the mandatory challenger for full champion Adrien Broner, who will instead defend versus Ashley Theophane. Their April 1 clash will headline at D.C. Armory in Washington, D.C., with Spike TV to televise. The lead promoter for the event is Mayweather Promotions, who has Theophane under its banner and asked the WBA for the exception with the promise of the winner honoring such mandatory obligations.

The simple solution as most boxing fans would see it would have been for Broner to face Di Rocco, with Burns and Theophane to meet in an eliminator with the winners to square off.
[Click Here To Read More]

[The Conundrum]

Time for Burns to finally get to outbox and out fight Broner

[The Conundrum]

Burns will make history and become a 3 weight world champion! Respect!!

[Pigeons]

The WBA is blowing smoke up everybody's ass. There are 17 weight divisions in boxing, the only division that the WBA has only 1 champion in is 140. That will no longer be the case after Burns-Di Rocco.

17 weight classes: 8 divisions with 3 champions, 9 divisions with 2 champions after Burns-Di Rocco.

[techliam]

Boxingscene, with WBA-funded adverts, it posting a pro-WBA article defending one of its most absurd decisions in recent times? Say it isn't so. I'm sure we'll see an IBO article of similar calibre soon.

How you can you keep a straight face whilst typing this babble? This is shameful. Why couldn't they give credence to being WBA no.1 challenger instead of making another 'world title'? Oh, to give the fight more lustre? Get a grip. There is literally no reason for a 'world title' to be at stake here. None whatsoever, especially as the winner is guaranteed a shot at the proper WBA title after the fight.

Why is Burns even considered part of a 'tournament' to consolidate the WBA title? What has he done at 140 to deserve this? Wouldn't ordering Benevidez-Di Rocco make more sense? Then again, it is the WBA so i'm using the wrong approach.

'Understanding how the business model works' is exactly what a sanctioning body should be campaigning against. But we all know the business model is whatever makes more financial sense, and making 3 world champions rakes in more sanctioning fees.

[giacomino]

Burns will make history and become a 3 weight world champion! Respect!!

Yeah, he's won three of his last seven fights and get rewarded with a setup fight for an alphabet belt at home against a soft touch. Respect. A three-time "world champion" like Armstrong, Duran, Leonard, Hearns, Arguello, etc.

[Cobra_]

Maybe we will finally get Broner/Burns. Why the hell did Burns not take that fight a few years ago. He would have made so much money.

[Pigeons]

Boxingscene, with WBA-funded adverts, it posting a pro-WBA article defending one of its most absurd decisions in recent times? Say it isn't so. I'm sure we'll see an IBO article of similar calibre soon.

How you can you keep a straight face whilst typing this babble? This is shameful. Why couldn't they give credence to being WBA no.1 challenger instead of making another 'world title'? Oh, to give the fight more lustre? Get a grip. There is literally no reason for a 'world title' to be at stake here. None whatsoever, especially as the winner is guaranteed a shot at the proper WBA title after the fight.

Why is Burns even considered part of a 'tournament' to consolidate the WBA title? What has he done at 140 to deserve this? Wouldn't ordering Benevidez-Di Rocco make more sense? Then again, it is the WBA so i'm using the wrong approach.

'Understanding how the business model works' is exactly what a sanctioning body should be campaigning against. But we all know the business model is whatever makes more financial sense, and making 3 world champions rakes in more sanctioning fees.

It's sad really. "We are continuing the consolidation process by taking the only weight class we have 1 champion in and adding a 2nd titleholder in that weight class". "This is all part of the consolidation plan". "Trust us, we're the WBA, we've only had 2-3 champions in every weight class since 2001". "Just trust us".

First Fat Dan started peddling this BS. Now Boxing Scene is peddling it. The WBA is the only sanctioning body in the world that needs to set up 8 man tournaments that will span 1 year (and likely never finish) just to get down to 1 titleholder per weight class.

Boxing would be better off getting rid of the WBA and the WBO.