Should we have more sympathy with referees ???

I'm not talking about blatantly biased in your pocket types..............We can argue about Steele all day long............

Just that I noticed Smoger was getting it the other day and he's about the 4th referee in recent weeks to get it...

Can't be easy sometimes to know when a guy is taking too many on the gloves or how long to let infringements go..

Had no problem with Cortez docking Hatton against Floyd though not for the offence he did it.........

I think Mills Lane was the best I ever saw but even he looked a prat at times.....Especially when refereeing Camacho or in the Starling-Breland fight...

It's a tough job and I'd much rather take incompetence than downright blatantly in the pocket officials..

Other sports like soccer show us that refereeing isn't an exact science..

Maybe we are too hard...on them..

Never heard of Smoger getting it. What was that for??

Cortez is a bit of an easy target because he was sort of a celebrity ref with his "firm but fair" line.

The British refs are almost all useless. They go weak at the knees at the sight of a grown man bleeding or getting wobbled.

Bayliss, Smoger and Weeks are the 3 top guys out there for me. Always feel like a fight will be reffed properly when you hear either of them are the 3rd man in the ring.

Id second that too Reeborn.

Especilly weeks and Bayliss. Top Class referees.

How about Ian John Lewis from the UK? He is pretty decent...................no? Ok.

UK refs are cack as you stated.

Although Dave Parry ain't too bad.

Agree it is a difficult job and whilst it is a cliché the argument that it is better to stop a fight too early rather than too soon has some validity I am with Reborn in becoming increasingly frustrated with how soon refs seem willing to step in nowadays. The minute a guy gets wobbled or does not do star jumps when he gets off the canvas refs seem intent to stop the fight.

For me it ruins watching the sport to some extent for me. Watch a full fight card in Britain now and you can pretty much guarantee one fight will be stopped too soon. Some of the best fights ever such as Coralles Castillo or Moore Durelle have come where fighters have rescued seemingly lost causes and so for me fighters need to be given more chance to turn things round.

Also feel it hurts fighters development as finishing fights is a skill that needs learning, if a guy is stopped as soon as they are wobbled prospects are denied the chance to close the show and develop the required skills they will need long term.

What's even more frustrating, Rowley, is that some fights are stopped for hardly any damage. Ie. Brook vs Jones 2, Macarinelli, blah blah blah.

But as soon as a prospect gets dropped, their too quick to try and ignore the fact they are hurt.

Look at Khan vs Prescott when he got knocked down.

NO WAY was he able to continue, but money talks.

Thinking of it, UK refs are Poopie.

Smoger was getting it off Catchweight for Hoppo's latest offering..

Micky Vann did the same for a Katsidis fight over here I recall..

i thought Vann was good.

UK refs in my opinion only stop fights early when the event promoters fighter does some good work.

Take for example the Cleverly v Kovalev fight where Cleverly was literally carried back to the corner by the ref such were the dullness of his senses. Cleverly is then allowed to start the fourth even though he was walking around like a drunk man.

That is clear bias in my view. If Kovalev had a wobble the fight would have been stopped.

Could you imagine if Gatti v Ward was in the UK with IJL as ref. It would have ended in the 1st 15 seconds.

I agree.........But I imagine it's the same everywhere..........

Without bigging up my Country they tend to be hot on bias..........and Steele was called out on it.......as was Alex Wallau for biased commentary on Hearns-Andries......Ko and The ring hammered him for it...

A much more them and us approach to commentary over here........

Remember Big George hammering Lampley during Barrera-Naz and rightly so...

Would Watt do it to Halling ??

Well HBO are probably one of the worst for bias.

They become the "Chavez Jr Channel" when he fights. They lost all credibility when they couldn't even grow a set to mention the DUI he was arrested for just days before his fight. Then the fact he skipped multiple drug tests.

Then we have Pacquiao, Larry Merchant was interviewed by Ring Magazine's youtube channel a few months back and he nearly broke down crying when talking about Manny's loss to Bradley!!! WTF, he was commentating and had no connection with Manny at all. Not only that, every one of the commentators where praising Manny for punches that weren't landing and ignoring almost everything Bradley did.

The video that was put online after the fight that highlighted all of this was great to watch. Just showed their bias.

Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read.

I dont think the refs job in boxing is as demanding as other sports like Football or Rugby in general. A lot of the time a poor performance in boxing is pretty inexcusable. The Burns v Beltran fight for example. That ref allowed Burns to do what he wanted without any warning. The ref in Klitschkos last fight - disgraceful. No excuses for those kinds of performances.

The hardest decision is getting the stoppages correct. I think this is toughest part. There is not a whole lot of consistency in it. It really bugs me when you see a ref step in and stop a close entertaining fight thats in the balance and then a couple of weeks later the same ref will allow a hopelessly outmatched punching bag to take a beating for ages before stopping it. Joshua last fight for example against that fellow that was out of his league. He was absolutely layed out with a huge punch and had no chance of winning but the ref let him go on and take some more punches until they guy basically had to quit to save himself. In a few weeks time there will probably be a close entertaining fight that will be ruined by the same ref jumping in when one big punch is landed without one fighter even hitting the canvas.

But I agree that Showtime are doing a great job at the minute. Paulie and co certainly dont show any bias. They are the best to listen too when a fight is on. the HBO crew seem outdated now.

bit of a cliche from football but the best refs are the ones you dont notice and think its similar in boxing. someone like cortez recently has been shocking for this. i prefer refs to let fighters fight and also agree that british refs especially are very willing to jump in when the home favorite is on top, yet very reluctant when the home favorite is getting beat, khan v prescott was a very obvious example of this, where it would never have been the case the other way round and more recently clevs fights.

Anybody remember Steele trying to get Hagler stopped on cuts on the verge of beating Hearns.....

Anybody remember Steele letting a half dead Hearns continue against Barkley........

Still you guys never saw JOEY CURTIS!!!!

IJL was absolutely fine in the Hopkins/Pascal fight. There's an argument that he should have stopped the Vitali/Briggs fight but as Briggs was still upright no doubt Briggs' camp would have talked about how their man was denied a chance to win given than Shannon won the title a few years back by Ko with about five seconds left on the clock.

All refs are celebs now, yet to me the best ones should hardly be noticed during a fight.

Doesn't Vitali/Wlad get paid better for the more rounds they go??

If so IJL may have been told beforehand to keep the Briggs fight going until he gets put down or KTFO.

He may have performed well at the world title level fights. But the domestic fights he is involved in stink. Maybe he rates the level of chicken dance upon the level of class the fight is at.

Tiny dance at Domestic = Stop

Major dance at World Level = Stop

Thought the ref in the Brook fight did a decent job. Did not look to jump in the minute someone took a decent punch and gave Senchenko every chance once he went over. As I alluded to earlier my main bug bear is how quickly refs seem to want to stop a fight now. Realise you don't want a serious injury on your conscience but going too far the other way spoils the drama for me.

Here here Jeff. If you've paid good money to watch a fight you want to see a bit if claret and someone taking a proper kicking before calling it off.

Seriously, it is a simple job really, but a tough one in terms of the consequences. I agree re the ref in the brook fight.

Would probably pick out Baylis as my favourite of current refs, and Harry Gibbs, from yesteryear. Not sure 'our 'enery' would concurr.

if refs wanna be part of the big earning cards, they need to play ball with the promoters and governing bodies. Its a deceitful business. I have noticed for years the poor quality and ridiculous refereeing on Warren cards. happens everytime ones of his guys fights. the ref and the doctor know exactly which side they are on. I noticed Hearn has adopted this approach too.

the worst example was barrera kahn. the ref and the doctor between them waited til the 5th to end the fight so that it could not be declared a no contest. they knew full well what they were doing. the cut was just as bad in round 3, but they waited it out.

refs the same as judges, want good relationships with the higher earning fighters.

milkyboy wrote:Here here Jeff. If you've paid good money to watch a fight you want to see a bit if claret and someone taking a proper kicking before calling it off.

Seriously, it is a simple job really, but a tough one in terms of the consequences. I agree re the ref in the brook fight.

Would probably pick out Baylis as my favourite of current refs, and Harry Gibbs, from yesteryear. Not sure 'our 'enery' would concurr.

Hear hear  

Since you were being generally nice about my post Milky did not want to pick you up on this. Am not sure Union would have been so kind though.

Agree about Bayliss Milky.

The standout fight for me that he was involved in was Marquez vs Katsidas.

He just let the two of them go at it from start to finish. And then when Marquez was teeing off on Katsidas he bided his time to see if Katsidas would throw back and IMO couldn't have timed the stoppage any better.

That just sticks in my head for some reason.

I'm sure not... and to think I used to be a proof reader. Clearly, not a very good one.

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Agree about Bayliss Milky.

The standout fight for me that he was involved in was Marquez vs Katsidas.

He just let the two of them go at it from start to finish. And then when Marquez was teeing off on Katsidas he bided his time to see if Katsidas would throw back and IMO couldn't have timed the stoppage any better.

That just sticks in my head for some reason.

I don't tend to concentrate on refs much, but usually when I notice its him I feel like the guys are getting a fair crack of the whip and generally agree with the timing of his stoppages. Not the most sophisticated analysis i've ever done, but hey!

I think Richie Davis is a great referee, the way he cut Bellew's antics out in the first round of the Cleverly fight was top class.

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Doesn't Vitali/Wlad get paid better for the more rounds they go??
If so IJL may have been told beforehand to keep the Briggs fight going until he gets put down or KTFO.

He may have performed well at the world title level fights. But the domestic fights he is involved in stink. Maybe he rates the level of chicken dance upon the level of class the fight is at.

Tiny dance at Domestic = Stop

Major dance at World Level = Stop

Cynics would suggest that as they get a flat fee from RTL for their fights, they make up the rest by getting a cut of advertising revenues namely any commercials shown between rounds meaning that the longer the fight goes, the more times people in Germany get to see adverts for Continental tyres and Sprunt Energy drinks and the more money Wlad gets to spend on horrendous beachwear and fancy apartments in Guadamar.

I'm just saying...

DAVE667 wrote:

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Doesn't Vitali/Wlad get paid better for the more rounds they go??
If so IJL may have been told beforehand to keep the Briggs fight going until he gets put down or KTFO.

He may have performed well at the world title level fights. But the domestic fights he is involved in stink. Maybe he rates the level of chicken dance upon the level of class the fight is at.

Tiny dance at Domestic = Stop

Major dance at World Level = Stop

Cynics would suggest that as they get a flat fee from RTL for their fights, they make up the rest by getting a cut of advertising revenues namely any commercials shown between rounds meaning that the longer the fight goes, the more times people in Germany get to see adverts for Continental tyres and Sprunt Energy drinks and the more money Wlad gets to spend on horrendous beachwear and fancy apartments in Guadamar.

I'm just saying...

You've never really forgiven him for showing Haye up have you Dave  

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Doesn't Vitali/Wlad get paid better for the more rounds they go??
If so IJL may have been told beforehand to keep the Briggs fight going until he gets put down or KTFO.

He may have performed well at the world title level fights. But the domestic fights he is involved in stink. Maybe he rates the level of chicken dance upon the level of class the fight is at.

Tiny dance at Domestic = Stop

Major dance at World Level = Stop

Cynics would suggest that as they get a flat fee from RTL for their fights, they make up the rest by getting a cut of advertising revenues namely any commercials shown between rounds meaning that the longer the fight goes, the more times people in Germany get to see adverts for Continental tyres and Sprunt Energy drinks and the more money Wlad gets to spend on horrendous beachwear and fancy apartments in Guadamar.

I'm just saying...

You've never really forgiven him for showing Haye up have you Dave  

Nowt to do with that, Haye let himself down worse than Wlad ever showed him up.

catchweight wrote:Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read.
.

You have got to watch the fight before you go onto a public boxing forum and comment on the fight.

Lance wrote:if refs wanna be part of the big earning cards, they need to play ball with the promoters and governing bodies. Its a deceitful business. I have noticed for years the poor quality and ridiculous refereeing on Warren cards. happens everytime ones of his guys fights. the ref and the doctor know exactly which side they are on. I noticed Hearn has adopted this approach too.

the worst example was barrera kahn. the ref and the doctor between them waited til the 5th to end the fight so that it could not be declared a no contest. they knew full well what they were doing. the cut was just as bad in round 3, but they waited it out.

refs the same as judges, want good relationships with the higher earning fighters.

yeh it was blatent cheating.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

catchweight wrote:Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read.
.

You have got to watch the fight before you go onto a public boxing forum and comment on the fight.

No I dont. Im perfectly happy to go off the written reports of the fight that I have read. I have no interest whatsoever in watching the fight. You on the other hand have got to throw yourself off a high rise building before coming onto a boxing forum and commenting. In fact make it your next thing to do.

catchweight wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

catchweight wrote:Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read.
.

You have got to watch the fight before you go onto a public boxing forum and comment on the fight.

No I dont. Im perfectly happy to go off the written reports of the fight that I have read. I have no interest whatsoever in watching the fight. You on the other hand have got to throw yourself off a high rise building before coming onto a boxing forum and commenting. In fact make it your next thing to do.

But you are arguing about something you never actually saw. You said you read smoger swore at murat, something I never sa and I watched the fight. So perhaps you can tell me the round and the time he swore at murat?

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

catchweight wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

catchweight wrote:Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read.
.

You have got to watch the fight before you go onto a public boxing forum and comment on the fight.

No I dont. Im perfectly happy to go off the written reports of the fight that I have read. I have no interest whatsoever in watching the fight. You on the other hand have got to throw yourself off a high rise building before coming onto a boxing forum and commenting. In fact make it your next thing to do.

But you are arguing about something you never actually saw. You said you read smoger swore at murat, something I never sa and I watched the fight. So perhaps you can tell me the round and the time he swore at murat?

Im happy to take the reports of people who have watched the fight over anything you see from your viewpoint in Klitschkos anal cavity. I logged onto a boxing forum and said I read reports of the fight which said Smoger was poor and biased towards Hopkins.

catchweight wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

catchweight wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

catchweight wrote:Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read.
.

You have got to watch the fight before you go onto a public boxing forum and comment on the fight.

No I dont. Im perfectly happy to go off the written reports of the fight that I have read. I have no interest whatsoever in watching the fight. You on the other hand have got to throw yourself off a high rise building before coming onto a boxing forum and commenting. In fact make it your next thing to do.

But you are arguing about something you never actually saw. You said you read smoger swore at murat, something I never sa and I watched the fight. So perhaps you can tell me the round and the time he swore at murat?

Im happy to take the reports of people who have watched the fight over anything you see from your viewpoint in Klitschkos anal cavity. I logged onto a boxing forum and said I read reports of the fight which said Smoger was poor and biased towards Hopkins.

You said smoger swore at Murat. Please tell me the round and the time that he swore at Murat as I missed it when I watched the fight.

Watch the fight again then because I wont be.

catchweight wrote:Watch the fight again then because I wont be.

catchweight wrote:I logged onto a boxing forum and said I read reports of the fight

 

I suppose if someone on a boxing forum said Smoger spat in Murat's face you would believe it and go onto other boxing forums arguing that Smoger spat in Murat's face even though you never actually saw it and all your evidence is just a person commenting on a forum.

Then really is no need to comment on a fight you've neither watched or plan to watch, you cannot give any substantiated opinion on it.

I can give a substantiated opinion on the reports I read of the fight. Plenty of which indicate Smoger did a poor job. Im quite happy to go off reports of fights and other sporting events that I dont watch either from online, television, radio or newspapers. I suspect everyone that comments on here has not watched every single fight they comment on. Especially when they have boxrec handy.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

catchweight wrote:Watch the fight again then because I wont be.

catchweight wrote:I logged onto a boxing forum and said I read reports of the fight

 

I suppose if someone on a boxing forum said Smoger spat in Murat's face you would believe it and go onto other boxing forums arguing that Smoger spat in Murat's face even though you never actually saw it and all your evidence is just a person commenting on a forum.

If you werent thick, you would probably notice that I neither confirmed or denied the reports I read. I said if what I read was true, then Smoger had acted unprofessionally. From the reports I read, its indicated he did a poor job. However you are thick so we are back here at square one and unlikely to ever get beyond that.

catchweight wrote:I can give a substantiated opinion on the reports I read of the fight. Plenty of which indicate Smoger did a poor job. Im quite happy to go off reports of fights and other sporting events that I dont watch either from online, television, radio or newspapers. I suspect everyone that comments on here has not watched every single fight they comment on. Especially when they have boxrec handy.

catchweight wrote:I logged onto a boxing forum and said I read reports of the fight

What you did was log onto a boxing forum, read a post made by a user of that forum and take that post as the gospel. That is the equivalent of me logging into the football section of this forum, reading a post by a user that a referee spat in the face of a player and hit him and then believing that users comment without doing any other investigation.

What is worse is that not only have you read a comment by a user on a forum and believed it like it was the gospel, but you have logged onto another forum and have started telling everyone that smoger did x and y and you know he did x and y because a user on a different forum said he did.

There's a difference between saying a win over Gus Ruhlin is a good one for Fitzsimmons and commenting on the performance of a fighter or a referee. One is based on intangibles the other is based on visuals.

I might for instance say that Harry Greb has a great record and therefore must have been a great boxer but I won't talk about his performances because i've not seen them.

In fairness to catchweight he does actually write, "Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read" which isn't quite the same as saying "Smoger was really poor"
 
However, in condemnation of catchweight, once criticised, he does like throw the nasty hurtful insults around doesn't he?

I don't think refs need our sympathy. And I don't think they should be above criticism. Smoger didn't seem a bastion of impartiality. He seemed to shove Murat back to his corner after every round. He docked a point for hitting on the break. I don't think Murat was the only fighter responsible for hitting on the break. But then conversely he didn't penalise Murat for persistant head locking or for taking 2 clear shots at Hopkins when he was on the ground.
Really the biggest problem I had with smoger was that after the result was read he was the first person to give Bhop a hug. Hugging a fighter in celebration should be off limits for the ref.

No different to the whichever tool it was going into Mayweather's dressing room and telling him it was going to be an honour to referee the upcoming fight.

I want to say Jay Nady but I wonder if that's because I think he's a plank as well.

Smoger pushed Murat in the face, to break it up. I don't think he spat. But don't take my word for it;) 

DAVE667 wrote:In fairness to catchweight he does actually write, "Smoger was meant to be really poor in Hopkins last fight from the reports I read" which isn't quite the same as saying "Smoger was really poor"
 
However, in condemnation of catchweight, once criticised, he does like throw the nasty hurtful insults around doesn't he?

yeh it is very childish how he resorts to insults the moment anyone disagrees with him.

He should be more like me and behave with grace and dignity ...the pillock!

More like you Dave? If he's already a piollock, is there much lower he can go?

On case anyone was wondering a piollock is part pillock part pollock.

In fairness to catch I was giving Smoger sh!t to, except I watche dthe fight first.

Punish both or punish one. And you just don't push a guy with two cuts by the face FFS. It's the referees who let the fighters be the stars of the show who are the good ones. The ones who aren't in the headlines.