Accepting bad decisions - What else can we do???

Promoter wants his charge to win at home...Promoter is close to the governing bodies and his charge pays good sanctioning fees or will if he wins..Judge goes against Promoter's fighter...Promoter say's he doesn't want that Judge anymore and complains..said judge doesn't work again..

1. Because he wouldn't toe the line.
2. Because he got the sanctioning body an earful from a dissatisfied Promoter..

Where does screwed fighter go...Sanctioning body happy if winning Promoter is!!!! Kicks up too much fuss he doesn't get another shot and anyway who can he complain to????

Judge called what he saw if asked by anyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get the drift...

Let's just forget moaning about decisions...nothing is gonna change!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Let's just forget moaning about decisions...nothing is gonna change!!

Easy to say that in principle, not so easy to say it the next time a Whitaker-Ramirez I kind of travesty happens again, though.

But you're right in so much that there's little we can do. That said, I am a fan of the practice which the late Chuck Minker brought in when he was chairmen of the Nevada State Athletic Commission; he used to make all officials sit down with him and rewatch the fights they were appointed for, so that they could explain in detail how they set about scoring the fight, and why they scored whichever rounds they did to a certain fighter. Once he died, that practice died out, I think. It's a shame, because judges conjuring up poor decisions is bad enough, but the way they often are allowed to disappear in to the background without having to attempt a justification for them really is annoying.

Look at Huck Lebedev, for instance - we were discussing this earlier. I don't count Huck as the man at CW any more - as in my mind he clearly lost by several rounds.

Its different when it happens between 2 fighters on the way up who aren't fighting for a "belt" - see JCCjr - however - when its for a title - I tend to ignore the winner until they prove themselves against the divisional 1/2/3

Greater transperancy and accountability I think.

On many levels boxing has fallen into a state of disrepair today. I have felt for some time that the future (or lack of it) of the sport rests with the larger commissions. In the abscence of a global governing body to look after the welfare and interests of the sport I think that its really the commissions who should be charged with preserving the sport and appear to be asleep at the wheel nowadays.

I would like to see a greater level of unity and cooperation between the commissions, especially the big ones traditionally. In the U.S New York, Nevada, California. In Europe the Britain and Germany. In Asia Japan. If these commissions could form some kind of council with a greater degree of understanding and cooperation I think they would have the power to implement changes and introduce greater decision making. You would have something akin to a global governing body with the power to take on promoters and sanctioning bodies if neccessary.

Instead its all very dysfunctional and disjointed with varying rules and regulations and no apparent interest in the long term future of the sport. Promoters and sanctioning bodies are left unchecked, tv companies call the shots and judging and refereeing is left ambiguos.