shocking! !

First topic message reminder :

Last night I was so angry and disappointed but thought after the dust had settled and a sleep I might see things differently ! Wel after watching the whole thing over and over again I dont . I can't remember the last time I saw such a masterclass in boxing in a high profile fight than George groves last night . there is no way it should have been stopped . Hes hands were up and was walking forward it is a disgrace and a rematch should be ordered .
I have lost all respect for froch and sick of hes bs . He said groves was turning hes back on him and not defending himself? Is the guy for real! And he gave everyone a great nights entertainment ! No groves was the star of the show until the ref decided to steel it!

The corruption in boxing hides in plain sight. Its as clear as night and day what was going on in the fight. The issue is not that people dont know how to score fights or justifying bad cards and officiating. It was a clear cut case of conscious, blatant favouritism towards the money making fighter. Froch is the guy that brings the crowds and money, he was the house fighter and the popular favourite. Froch just needed to win 3 rounds in that fight and he would have got a decision. Even just making rounds close was enough for Froch to get them. Howard Foster was laughable in how obvious his agenda was. Cant believe anyone thinks he was just making mistakes. He clearly knew from the start what his agenda and job was. Protect the house fighter.

catchweight wrote:The corruption in boxing hides in plain sight. Its as clear as night and day what was going on in the fight. The issue is not that people dont know how to score fights or justifying bad cards and officiating. It was a clear cut case of conscious, blatant favouritism towards the money making fighter. Froch is the guy that brings the crowds and money, he was the house fighter and the popular favourite. Froch just needed to win 3 rounds in that fight and he would have got a decision. Even just making rounds close was enough for Froch to get them. Howard Foster was laughable in how obvious his agenda was. Cant believe anyone thinks he was just making mistakes. He clearly knew from the start what his agenda and job was. Protect the house fighter.

If that was the case, wouldn't he have called the KD a slip or docked points from Groves for being mean to Froch?

Just don't buy into the ridiculous conspiracy theories. Groves may well have been stopped legitimately during that 9th and then again he may very well have muddled through and cleared his head to win enough of the three remaining rounds to take the title on the scorecards. The fighters should have been given the chance to box on.

The fact remains is that whilst Foster thinks he was doing the right thing by stopping the fight, the vast majority at ringside and watching at home feel he was wrong.

Froch dodged a bullet and whilst he doesn't "owe" anybody anything, if he feels that he can make a better argument of things by fighting Andre Ward in Nottingham then the least he should be prepared to do is offer George Groves a shot at redemption

The biggest conspiracy theory is that there is no corruption in boxing and that the whole world cant score fights and the officials just all have these off nights simaltaneously on a regular basis. There is no steroid abuse in boxing either. Every boxer is clean which is the reason there is no need for drug testing. When a fighter signs up with a new "strength and conditioning" coach and refuses drug testing its because his pride has been hurt by the allegations, not that he doesnt want to be tested.

Why does this mean that a referee is "bent" rather than just incompetent?

Because that level of incompetence is unfathomable and all directed in favour of one fighter. He gave Froch the benefit doubt in the first round when Froch was clearly hurt and shaken. He continually allowed Froch to hit Groves on the break. And he dives in with a ridiculous stoppage first chance he gets when Groves was winning the fight. Add to that two judges who were blatantly scoring a fight with Froch goggles on and a third judge who wasnt even being particular generous to Groves in scoring the fight a little wider. Its not hard to work out what was going on. Then this same Foster guy who was so desperate to protect Groves in a fight he might have won was happy to send a journeyman fighter out to get slaughtered by Joshua only a few weeks previously.

catchweight wrote:Because that level of incompetence is unfathomable and all directed in favour of one fighter. He gave Froch the benefit doubt in the first round when Froch was clearly hurt and shaken. He continually allowed Froch to hit Groves on the break. And he dives in with a ridiculous stoppage first chance he gets when Groves was winning the fight. Add to that two judges who were blatantly scoring a fight with Froch goggles on and a third judge who wasnt even being particular generous to Groves in scoring the fight a little wider. Its not hard to work out what was going on. Then this same Foster guy who was so desperate to protect Groves in a fight he might have won was happy to send a journeyman fighter out to get slaughtered by Joshua only a few weeks previously.

Wouldn't he have done it in the sixth when Groves dropped hs hands and backed up against the ropes?

He could have. But I suppose that he didnt is a sign he was all on the level then.

catchweight wrote:He could have. But I suppose that he didnt is a sign he was all on the level then.

No more than the fact he did call a poor stoppage is a sign that he's on the take as opposed to being rubbish at his job.

No if he made one big error in the fight, and the judges had been scoring the fight sensibly. You could argue he just got a big call wrong. But it was onbvious from the outset that the judges and the ref were favouring Froch and that this kind of thing happens all the time in boxing. Lets not pretend this fight is unique. If you want to say all these officials are just collectively incompetent good luck. Until the next fight when it happens again and Hearn needs some insurance.

Must say - what a fight!!! Thoroughly enjoyed it the entire night. I couldn't score it on Saturday as I watched it and the Pac fight with friends, and by the time this one had started I was probably not mentally fit enough to judge a 100m race between Bolt and Rosie O' Donnell. Stoppage looked fair enough to me. Gotta think that as a ref, the Abdusalamov fight is probably still fresh, and you'd hate to be the guy who allows another fighter to get into that position. With three more rounds to go, and a fighter who looked like he was fading. I think it was a fair decision.

Got to remember that in boxing fighters quitting is still looked down upon, so the ref ultimately has to make a decision for a guy he has to assume would rather die in the ring, than quit. Just don't understand why some people think a fighter needs to go into epileptic shock before a ref should consider stopping a fight.

Conspiarcy theory - Froch won because he's the guy who brings in the money and we can't afford to lose our cash cow.

Froch has two fight left at the most. How much cash is he likely to generate?

If Groves wins that fight you have a fighter who has proven himself worthy of being at World level. He's 25 years old and, having disposed of the old master, likely be the one to take on the mantle of crowd puller with a view to being around for several years.

If Eddie Hearn was such an astute businessman, why would he favour a guy with not long left in the sport over a young fit hungry fighter who's just proven himself every bit as capable as the guy he's just dethroned of pulling in the crowds and the big money?

Doesn't appear to make sound financial sense to me.

Because Froch is his best mate and favourite fighter. Or so Eddie always tells us.

I do give Hearn credit though for admitting the stoppage was too early.

So Eddie is likely to risk ridicule and a downturn in finaces when people realise he's bent all because Froch is his favourite fighter.

There isn't a successful businessman around who wouldn't walk over his best friend's broken body to get an advantage.

I just don't see it.

The worst thing about Saturday night was Jim Watt. Someone needs to remind him he has a microphone and doesn't need to scream down it constantly, we can hear him just fine. Plus he laboured the same points over and over again.

Groves is not signed with Hearn long term. Once he does, then you will probably see him on the favourable side of the draw. Going into the fight Groves was an unpopular underdog and Froch was Hearns pay per view crown jewel. Hearn wants to control British boxing. There is a lot of money a stake and a small cliquey collection of "world class" British refs. Its not hard to imagine the influence he can exert and its there for all to see in the performance of the officials. Its perfectly set now for Groves to take over from Froch. Hes won over a lot of the fans, hes showed hes capable of beating Froch and a rematch will sell out and do even more pay per view buys. If he is willing to sign to Hearn long term then dont be surprised if its Groves who benefits next time. If he knocks Froch down like he did last time then its probably Foch who gets stopped.

catchweight wrote:Groves is not signed with Hearn long term. Once he does, then you will probably see him on the favourable side of the draw. Going into the fight Groves was an unpopular underdog and Froch was Hearns pay per view crown jewel. Hearn wants to control British boxing. There is a lot of money a stake and a small cliquey collection of "world class" British refs. Its not hard to imagine the influence he can exert and its there for all to see in the performance of the officials. Its perfectly set now for Groves to take over from Froch. Hes won over a lot of the fans, hes showed hes capable of beating Froch and a rematch will sell out and do even more pay per view buys. If he is willing to sign to Hearn long term then dont be surprised if its Groves who benefits next time. If he knocks Froch down like he did last time then its probably Foch who gets stopped.

Not when you take as many conspiracy pills as you clearly do.

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Because Froch is his best mate and favourite fighter. Or so Eddie always tells us.

I do give Hearn credit though for admitting the stoppage was too early.

Hearn is well schooled by his team as to what the public want to hear before he does an interview.

I guess that means your loaded up on the old incompetence pills then. Figures.

catchweight wrote:I guess that means your loaded up on the old incompetence pills then. Figures.

No, wife's pregnant so I clearly don't need them!

kingraf wrote:Must say - what a fight!!! Thoroughly enjoyed it the entire night. I couldn't score it on Saturday as I watched it and the Pac fight with friends, and by the time this one had started I was probably not mentally fit enough to judge a 100m race between Bolt and Rosie O' Donnell. Stoppage looked fair enough to me. Gotta think that as a ref, the Abdusalamov fight is probably still fresh, and you'd hate to be the guy who allows another fighter to get into that position. With three more rounds to go, and a fighter who looked like he was fading. I think it was a fair decision.

Got to remember that in boxing fighters quitting is still looked down upon, so the ref ultimately has to make a decision for a guy he has to assume would rather die in the ring, than quit. Just don't understand why some people think a fighter needs to go into epileptic shock before a ref should consider stopping a fight.

You can't stop the fight because it appears the fighter is fading Raf, and he can't let what happened in America come in to his decision to stop the fight either. Groves wasn't getting hit half as much as Absudalamov was. It was an awful stoppage, Froch may have knocked him down later in the round who knows. Either way Groves, Froch and the fans have been robbed of a definitive answer.

Froch is Matchroom's marquee fighter by a country mile. If people think the stoppage wasn't too bad name one other top level stoppage that was worse? If this had happened in Germany we'd all be ridiculing them for the next 10 years. Howard Foster makes Roger Tillerman (the ref in Ottke vs Reid) look like Mahatma Gandhi. I'm just hoping the rest of the boxing world weren't tuned in on Saturday night as who in their right mind would send their fighter over here to get screwed over like that.

It was no worse than Molina getting disqualified against Kirkland, these things happen all over the world and will be forgotten in no time. Marquez getting robbed blind in america didn't stop him going back for more against Pacquiao nor did it stop Castillo rematching Mayweather, what about the Pacquiao/Bradley decision or countless other examples.

None of those were stoppages. The officials were so crooked last weekend we didn't even get too see the robbery of a decision that they were cooking up. Pac/Marquez 1-3 were all close fights (wasn't one scored a draw), there was no robbery there. If Pac had a ref in his pocket like Froch did you think Marquez would have been allowed to continue after 3 knockdowns in the 1st round? Robbery is an overused term in Boxing, a poor decision is not necessarily a robbery, a decision that is so poor that it can only be explained through dishonesty and corruption - that's a robbery.

This will not be forgotten about. For as long as Froch is talked about so will his beating at the hands of George Groves.

Who'd have though we'd see the day when British boxing became more corrupt than German boxing.

The 3rd fight was a blatant robbery and I think you like others are being deliberately over the top to try and emphasise a point.

It wont be forgotten about but at the same time nobody forgets the robberies in America, Germany, Thailand, Japan or anywhere else. You're making out as if it's a huge problem within british boxing when it simply isn't and is no worse than other countries. How quickly have people forgotten how poor the ref was for Wlad against Povetkin?

It really won't be forgotten about because it was the single worst, most corrupt, refereeing decision in top level boxing. I again challenge you to find a worse stoppage.

It's not just about stoppages, Molina getting disqualified, Reid against Ottke, Steele stopping Taylor, it's all about opinion and I simply don't think it's as bad as you're making out. Going deliberately over the top won't emphasise your point any further.

I'll take that as you can't find anything comparable which really does emphasise my view.

I've mentioned fights that are comparable already.

Give me one example of a worse stoppage?

I don't why you're fixated by the stoppage part, incompetent reffing doesn't start and finish with stoppages.

It was just a rank bad performance from Foster from start to finish,if Fosters supposedly one our best then god help us,wouldn't allow him anywhere near a world title fight ever again.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Give me one example of a worse stoppage?

The Juan Manuel Marquez-Julian Wheeler farce, for starters. Five seconds left in the fight, too, in which Wheeler would have claimed a split decision victory apparently (having seen the fight myself, I'm not so sure it would have been a totally deserved points win, but either way the 'stoppage' was horrendous).

Michael Dokes against Mike Weaver was a shocker, too, and I'm not sure if Foster's stoppage on Saturday, despite it being a really, really poor one, was any worse than a couple of recent Ian John Lewis specials (Corley-McCloskey, McKenzie-Maccarinelli etc).

Foster dropped a clanger, but the single worse and most corrupt piece of officiating of them all? Going a bit far, methinks.

I'm fixated by the stoppage because it was the method the corrupt officials used to rob Groves of the fight. Other than the stoppage what happened? Froch got a pasting.....

The fact that there isn't a comparable, let alone worse, stoppage in recentish boxing history must have alarm bells ringing in your head, yes?

The last top level openly derided stoppage in British boxing was probably Calzaghe vs Mitchell. Go and check that out and compare it to the Groves stoppage to see just how bad last weekends 'decision' was.

For a fight to be stopped like that either the fighter has to be completely out on their feet, or shipping big punishment after being knocked down at least once. Groves was a million miles away from either. Could you honestly imagine Andre Ward's people looking at that officiating and then seriously considering sending him over here for a Froch rematch? Let's hope the BBBoC make sure Howard Foster is never in a position to drag down British boxing again.

88Chris05 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Give me one example of a worse stoppage?

The Juan Manuel Marquez-Julian Wheeler farce, for starters. Five seconds left in the fight, too, in which Wheeler would have claimed a split decision victory apparently (having seen the fight myself, I'm not so sure it would have been a totally deserved points win, but either way the 'stoppage' was horrendous).

Michael Dokes against Mike Weaver was a shocker, too, and I'm not sure if Foster's stoppage on Saturday, despite it being a really, really poor one, was any worse than a couple of recent Ian John Lewis specials (Corley-McCloskey, McKenzie-Maccarinelli etc).

Foster dropped a clanger, but the single worse and most corrupt piece of officiating of them all? Going a bit far, methinks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7UHMErRzNg

really? Only thing controversial there was Marquez getting a TKO victory when the ref clearly stopped the fight because of Wheeler's constant holding. It really does highlight how bad last weekends reffing was when we have to trawl back through 20 years of minor fights to still not come close.

Yeah, if you say so Mayweathers Cellmate. Fact is Wheeler had not received a single warning for holding throughout, nor a point deduction. He understandably looked to buy time when hurt in the last round. Not legal, but any fighter would do the same. For the referee, having not warned or penalised him once in the entire ten rounds, to then suddenly rule a TKO bends the mind far more than the stoppage on Saturday, and came way further out of leftfield.

But carry on.

The referee also missed two clear knockdowns in that fight, just so you know. One for each man. I'm sure it still doesn't even get within a million miles of Foster's performance the other night for you, though.

Calzaghe-Manfredo didn't bear close scrutiny.

"..........Wheeler was winning on 2 of 3 judges scorecards during the last round when suddenly, the refereee ended the fight due to wheeler holding. The ref had warned Wheeler of this before in the fight but he controversially ended it after wheeler was winning. In addition, the ref strangely awarded the win to marquez by way of TKO although Wheeler was not knocked out and lost on a technicality. "

captain carrantuohil wrote:Calzaghe-Manfredo didn't bear close scrutiny.

Good call. That was a poor stoppage, but nowhere near Froch/Groves.

Again, I've watched the fight and I don't remember any warning being given to Wheeler. If there was, it may well have been between rounds. Certainly the referee never gave him a talking to in any sense, and the fight itself, albeit a bit scrappy from a technical point of view, didn't have much holding at all for the most part. The 'stoppage' was a joke and, as far as I'm concerned, worse than Saturday's.

It was a poor stoppage but there really is no need for the exaggeration, some claiming it has now ruined Frochs whole reputation, think the whole run of 11 title fights will be remembered more than that stoppage.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It was a poor stoppage but there really is no need for the exaggeration, some claiming it has now ruined Frochs whole reputation, think the whole run of 11 title fights will be remembered more than that stoppage.

It hasn't ruined his reputation, but it has definitely damaged it.

I don't see how the stoppage impacts his reputation at all, it's something out of his control.

88Chris05 wrote:Again, I've watched the fight and I don't remember any warning being given to Wheeler. If there was, it may well have been between rounds. Certainly the referee never gave him a talking to in any sense, and the fight itself, albeit a bit scrappy from a technical point of view, didn't have much holding at all for the most part. The 'stoppage' was a joke and, as far as I'm concerned, worse than Saturday's.

A quick look at the link shows Wheeler was badly hurt in the last round and could only try to hold on for a good 90 seconds. The ref got tired of separating them and DQ'd Wheeler. Groves wasn't badly hurt and wasn't holding on. I see no case to say it was as bad, let alone worse. It is more comparable to the Lewis Akinwande DQ.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I don't see how the stoppage impacts his reputation at all, it's something out of his control.

Did Pacquiao's reputation not suffer in your eyes when he was 'gifted' those decisions vs Marquez. People still talk about Mayweather's lucky win over Castillo. Froch Groves was far worse in that Groves wasn't just robbed of the decision, he was robbed of the opportunity of 3 more rounds and going to a decision (which no doubt he'd have been robbed of anyway)

You asked for a worse stoppage. That fight was ruled as a stoppage despite the fact that, at the time, Wheeler wasn't even under any fire from punches. To go from no point deductions or warnings for holding throughout nine previous rounds (that's going off my memory, not a report of the fight that someone else has written) straight to disqualification would be highly unusual. But from that to a TKO ruling? Don't see how Foster's call was any worse, really. You mention Akinwande, but at least Mills Lane went about the the proper way, docking him a point and warning him several times over (just as he did in the Hearns-Kinchen fight). In contrast, the referee in the Marquez-Wheeler fight, besides missing two knockdowns, resorted straight to a stoppage, never mind a DQ.

But I guess you're not for shifting on this point.

I asked for a worse stoppage in a top level fight. Marquez Wheeler was not a worse stoppage and not a top level fight. Wheeler was obviously hurt to the body why else was he so desperately hanging on for half of the round and throwing nothing back. It is plain to see why the ref stopped it, you can visibly see him getting annoyed at Wheelers constant holding, was it poor refereeing - debatable; was it corrupt - no.

Was Groves hanging on - no; was he throwing back - yes. There is no innocent explanation for Howard Fosters decision last weekend.

 

You know as well as me Chris, as soon as somebody says it's the worst case of corruption in the history of the sport they'll find a way to ignore any other examples.

Are you guys seriously trying to claim this rivals Froch/Groves?..... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7UHMErRzNg

To quote Reg Guteridge ....."Wheeler was bang in trouble"

Was Groves 'bang in trouble'? was he holding on and not throwing back?

I never claimed it was the worst bit of corruption in Boxing history, but you guys simply can't find me anything worse.

To quote Halling, 'Groves is in serious trouble here'.

We've given our opinions on what is worse but you make up excuses why they don't apply.