Comments Thread For: WBC Prez Backs Fury: Loaded Glove Allegations Are Ridiculous, Sad, Irresponsible

[OneHittaQuitta1]

****m protested the hands being wrapped before he got to the dressing room, he didnt protest the wraps themselves. The commission had already signed off on Margarittos wraps and at first tried to allow Margs to keep wrapping, but ****m continued to pit pressure on them and the commission caved. It's the commission's job to make sure these things do not happen. The only reason why ****m found the plaster was because Margs started sweating which caused the plaster to harden, if ****m was there at the initial wrapping, he may have not caught it. Either way, putting faith in the commission should only go so far, which was my point. I also never said Fury cheated, neither did I say these circumstances were similar. My point is and was from my original post was based on the faith people are putting on the commission's. Pretty simple.

Damn it’s crazy how your schoolin a bunch grown ass men because they are either ignorant on the matter or just have some biased agenda against wilder.

[KnickTillDeaTh]

Damn it’s crazy how your schoolin a bunch grown ass men because they are either ignorant on the matter or just have some biased agenda against wilder.

Forming an opinion based on the facts is a lot different than acting as if "your" opinion is a fact. I just try to discuss the facts, it gets harder and harder to do that in here lol...

[BoxingTrav]

Oh here goes another sad ignorant comment from a Wilder fan girl.

If you're going to respond be an adult. I said the picture is damning. It is.

If you read properly I clearly said I believe Fury figured out Wilder and would've won. Leave some room in conversation for Nuisance.

[ironmike2012]

Just seen the video where Wilder's guy Jay was right there in the dressing room, Fury released it.

[fernandtg]

Did this dude really say that Wilder underwent an autopsy...?

Looks like he's the one who got hit by loaded gloves.

[naranja111]

If you're going to respond be an adult. I said the picture is damning. It is.

If you read properly I clearly said I believe Fury figured out Wilder and would've won. Leave some room in conversation for Nuisance.

It's not damning. It's just Fury's glove scrucnhed up in the crook of Wilders arm

You can literally see AJs knuckles through the glove in the first Ruiz bout

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/andy-ruiz-jr-of-california-and-anthony-joshua-of-england-news-photo/1147547879?adpopup=rue

[MxicoFistology]

****m protested the hands being wrapped before he got to the dressing room, he didnt protest the wraps themselves. The commission had already signed off on Margarittos wraps and at first tried to allow Margs to keep wrapping, but ****m continued to pit pressure on them and the commission caved. It's the commission's job to make sure these things do not happen. The only reason why ****m found the plaster was because Margs started sweating which caused the plaster to harden, if ****m was there at the initial wrapping, he may have not caught it. Either way, putting faith in the commission should only go so far, which was my point. I also never said Fury cheated, neither did I say these circumstances were similar. My point is and was from my original post was based on the faith people are putting on the commission's. Pretty simple.

Im not even gonna read your whole paragraph/composition. Aint got time for that, go write a book. The only thing i know is that wilder wants to use every excuse possible for his loss, not glove controversy here.

[andocom]

You have to show that the statements hurt you in some way, and that they are believable. This is not England, freedom of speech allows people to say whatever they want. If the statement is not proven to show harm Fury will lose the case, whether it's TRUE or false means nothing.

See the decision in Larry flint vs the Revrand, clear case law.

This is a terrible summation of libel law and completely irrelevant in this context, unless your claim is that Marsellos Wilder was engaging in parody or satire, which he obviously wasn't.

The Flint case is cited as a joke isn't subject to libel as no reasonable person should accept it as fact, because it is a joke.

And truth is an absolute defense in libel cases, so always relevant.

As for actual harm, the reputation damage from claiming the HW champion and one of the world's highest paid athletes is a cheat should be so obvious it goes without saying.

Put it this way, if Al Haymon or Eddie Heard said the exact same things do you think there wouldn't be a lawsuit?

Its pretty obvious Marsellos Wilder's statements are libelous by the letter of the law, he just isn't important or wealthy enough to bother seeking redress from, thats it.

[KnickTillDeaTh]

This is a terrible summation of libel law and completely irrelevant in this context, unless your claim is that Marsellos Wilder was engaging in parody or satire, which he obviously wasn't.

The Flint case is cited as a joke isn't subject to libel as no reasonable person should accept it as fact, because it is a joke.

And truth is an absolute defense in libel cases, so always relevant.

As for actual harm, the reputation damage from claiming the HW champion and one of the world's highest paid athletes is a cheat should be so obvious it goes without saying.

Put it this way, if Al Haymon or Eddie Heard said the exact same things do you think there wouldn't be a lawsuit?

Its pretty obvious Marsellos Wilder's statements are libelous by the letter of the law, he just isn't important or wealthy enough to bother seeking redress from, thats it.

Regardless of whether its satire a joke or someone making false accusations, defamation is defamation and the plaintiff is under the same burden to disprove what was said and prove that what was said caused harm. That's pretty simple. The majority of defamation suits get thrown out, because of the right to free speech, and because it is notoriously difficult to prove there was any harm actually done to a person's reputation or standing. Most victories in defamation suits are won by showing evidence that a person's earnings, job status, promotion, things of that nature were unduly affected. In this case Fury would more than likely lose. He will not be less popular, he will not lose money, and his standing as champion and future earnings and bouts will not be affected. This case would be thrown out. Just like the counter suit that Povetkin attempted against Wilder for damages. They were un able to prove that Wilders statements had a negative affect and the ruling was against them on that matter.

And Hearn has spoken many lies, and slandered Wilder quite a few times, he hasn't been sued, theres a reason.

[KnickTillDeaTh]

Im not even gonna read your whole paragraph/composition. Aint got time for that, go write a book. The only thing i know is that wilder wants to use every excuse possible for his loss, not glove controversy here.

Your comment makes no sense. I never said there was a glove controversy and I never said Wilder didnt make an excuse. Stop being an ignorant child and actually gain some knowledge, or post with a disclaimer that the the following is truly false.