do illegal shots have to be taken into context?

[Larry the boss]

Depends how relevant the illegal shot was to the stoppage.

[IMG]https://media.*****.com/media/dt1qoDOgSr31K/*****.gif[/IMG]

The last punch AJ landed on Klitschko was a rabbit punch, does that invalidate the stoppage?

lol.............

[Citizen Koba]

Got em

If Lemieux had been rendered unable to continue then Golovkin should have been DQd, yes. As it was he should have got at least 1pt deduction. Another bad piece of reffing.

[kafkod]

I was gonna mention this. That was a foul.

Yeah, it was a foul alright. That's why the ref called an immediate break to allow Lemieux to recover and gave Golovkin a warning.

If he'd waved the fight off and given Golovkin the win instead, then you would have a point.

[TonyGe]

Illegal shots should be called before they lead to a sstopoage. The referee's job is to make sure the fight is conducted according to the rules of boxing. That doesn't mean he has to call every infraction. If a fighter is warned and continues to foul he should be deducted a point or disqualified.

[BoxingIsGreat]

Yeah, it was a foul alright. That's why the ref called an immediate break to allow Lemieux to recover and gave Golovkin a warning.

If he'd waved the fight off and given Golovkin the win instead, then you would have a point.

I got you. In Kovalev's case, though, the ref ruled the punch legal. Hence the stoppage.

[Citizen Koba]

Yes the context in which the punch occurs matters. It tells you how relevant the illegal shot was to the stoppage.

[IMG]https://media.*****.com/media/dt1qoDOgSr31K/*****.gif[/IMG]

The last punch AJ landed on Klitschko was a rabbit punch, does that invalidate the stoppage?

2 points here. The first perhaps shouldn't be relevant but maybe is - simply that rabbit punches in the heat of the action are generally regarded as a less egregious foul.

The second issue is that in AJ Klitschko the rabbit punch was thrown after Fields had made the decision to stop as was moving to try to break them. ie. He had already decided the fight was over.

In Ward - Kovalev Weeks waved the fight off shortly but clearly after the low blow. He just didn't see it I think. **** happens. Had he seen it I'm of the opinion that since the fight was still ongoing he would have been obliged to act upon it.

Just to say, once again, that I'm firmly of the opinion that Kovalev was done - this is merely a discussion over a technicality of the rules as far as I'm concerned, not some effort to discredit or dispute Ward's victory.

[Madison Boxing]

Lol at comparing an unintentional foul in ggg lemiux fight to 3 successive low blows by ward

I keep seeing people regurgitate what the hbo commentators were saying .."kova was done from the body shots". When a fighter is badly hurt to the body to the point of being unable to continue they go down. Kova didnt go down from any legal punch

yeah. im not a boxer but i remember that being the one thing they say always say about body shots, 'you cant get up from them, you cant move', kovalev never even went down from it

[BrometheusBob.]

2 points here. The first perhaps shouldn't be relevant but maybe is - simply that rabbit punches in the heat of the action are generally regarded as a less egregious foul.

The second issue is that in AJ Klitschko the rabbit punch was thrown after Fields had made the decision to stop as was moving to try to break them. ie. He had already decided the fight was over.

In Ward - Kovalev Weeks waved the fight off shortly but clearly after the low blow. He just didn't see it I think. **** happens. Had he seen it I'm of the opinion that since the fight was still ongoing he would have been obliged to act upon it.

Just to say, once again, that I'm firmly of the opinion that Kovalev was done - this is merely a discussion over a technicality of the rules as far as I'm concerned, not some effort to discredit or dispute Ward's victory.

Yeah, I'm sure what REALLY did Klitschko in was the 2nd to last punch which he blocks completely.

[IMG]https://media.*****.com/media/YWJBCXSep6w7K/*****.gif[/IMG]

Or maybe it was the rabbit punch landed earlier in this same combination.

Or maybe, just MAYBE, it isn't always about the last punch or two that lands at all. Maybe the ref was coming in because of the damage he received earlier in the round. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that Klitschko looked gassed/finished. Maybe it had to do with how many punches he was throwing back. Maybe it had something to do with how ineffectual he appeared to be in getting away from/fending off Joshua.

Crazy idea, I know.

My point is just that the context matters. Just slowmo gifing a single punch and saying "it's illegal!" is not always a strong counter argument to a stoppage.

[kafkod]

so is hitting a man when he is down

GGG only did it once doe .. and Lemieux was already done, so why did the ref give Golovkin a warning instead of just giving him the win?

[kafkod]

I got you. In Kovalev's case, though, the ref ruled the punch legal. Hence the stoppage.

So, even excusing Weeks for being as blind as a bat, why didn't he give Kovalev a count? He hadn't been in any serious trouble in the fight till that round, and the round was nearly over.