BBB of C -Should investigate Hearn and the Referee's conduct during Coyle - Disgrace !!

Great fight but a complete disgrace............

1. Why is the referee giving Coyle valuable seconds to recover..By warning him of low blows twice after both knockdowns........When the first time the Argentine lands low he gets a point taken off ???

2. WTF is Hearn doing screaming and hammering on the canvas in the 11th round after Coyle rightfully gets deducted for a dirty cheap shot ??........If that's not trying to influence an official WHO RELIES ON HIM for work Goodness knows what it ??.

3. HTF did Rawlings and Watt have the 11th round for Coyle........Whenthere was a shared knockdown and a point off ??........Watt after the fight "Well let's be happy one of our own came through " ........Apt words Mate.........Let's be honest that complete wally you work with (Hearn PR man Rawlings) would have been screaming about the stoppage of which number 4..............(Granted the BBBC can't do much about these two useless knobs!!)

4. Coyle wasn't fit to continue the two times he was down and the referee's appraisal seemed to last till he was.........Both times !!

The poor Argentine lad was hardly wobbling about............and got stopped !!........Absolutely disgusting...

As the BBBc are gutless...............After all humiliated by Chisora and Warren..............and backing up Howard Foster (who it was good to see booed) before listening to appeals........I don't expect them to enquire into this mess............As long as they get their money etc !!

But I apologise to the Argentine lad and will try to give him small comfort by telling him... he's not the only one robbed by a Hearn fighter in the last 6 months....

and I promise as soon as any on here moan about Italy and Germany I'll be sure to make them look closer to home...Small relief I'm sure but good luck kid!!....and keep away from Hearn fighters...

Rant over..

Didn't watch the fight (annoyingly as I'd watched the rest of the card) but just watching to evolve over Twitter I couldn't help but feel there was something fishy.

Gonna be interesting to see if he sacrifices Burns next time out...

There was also the accidental butt that caused a cut on the Argentinian..

That wasn't a point off........But the accidental low blow "his first" was.........

Never mind though he'll be on Hearn's next show..

Sure that's all that matters..

*waves papers*

It was a joke really but it's impossible to say he was in no position to continue when you think how well he rallied. I didn't think the counts were THAT bad but the immediate docking of a point for the Argy was very harsh at best. The stoppage looked very soft whilst Coyle was given every chance, welcome to fighting away.

Far from a sparkling refereeing display, but I thought the counts (well, the first seven of them) in general were ok. He did give Coyle an additional couple of seconds that some other refs wouldn't have done, but I seem to remember him doing the same for Brizuela for at least one of his knockdowns as well. Agree that the first-time deduction for Brizuela was a little perplexing considering how many times Coyle had been warned before finally being docked a point.

The actual stoppage just made absolutely no sense, though. Even more confusing when you look at the round before. If you're going to take the compassionate route and err on the side of caution, then do it when the fella rises unsteadily and wobbles back and forth off-balance as you complete the mandatory eight count, as Brizuela did in that round. Not when he is conscious and aware enough to bang the canvas in frustration at getting caught, gets up at five and is clearly signalling to you that he's good to go while standing firm, on sturdy legs and with his gloves up, as you complete the mandatory eight. He didn't even seem to be inspecting Brizuela as he counted. If you're having doubts, then get a step closer to have a proper look at their eyes, or ask them to take a step towards you to check his balance / awarness. He just seemed to have decided that he was going to count to eight and then wave it off when he got there regardless of Brizuela's condition.

Appreciate that Brizuela was tired and had taken some big shots, but come on, had that not also been the case by the eleventh round of the fight?

I missed Hearn's canvas banging, but I have heard stories about he and one or two other members of Coyle's team hugging the referee afterwards? Probably nothing in it and one of those 'carried along by the moment' things, but not a smart move if true!

There have been some shocking refereeing performances in uk rings recently, and it makes you question things whenever you see a poor decision.

The stoppage was too early in the context of the fight. The point off brizuela for the low blow without warnings was wrong.

However, the ref did warn and take a point off coyle for low blows, he did take a point off coyle for hitting on the break, which would often just get a warning... And that gave brizuela recovery time when he was in trouble. Brizuela was down twice in the 11th (he got every chance from the ref then) and looked pretty spent at the time of the stoppage.

I didn't think the ref was a homey, he gave both fighters every chance to recover prior to the stoppage. But he did get some key calls wrong and in the context of the fight the stoppage was early (as coyle himself agreed). The guy was on his feet, lucid and ready to continue.

As a one off fight, it doesn't look dodgy to me, in the context of other refereeing decisions it looks worse.

Annoying that BoxRec hasn't got the cards up.

They're what made the GG-Froch stoppage even more controversial. Be interesting to see if there were any wild discrepancies on Saturday's cards.

Brave move from team Crawford to travel this weekend he really is going to have to knock Burns out to take his title. As others have alluded a terrific fight , but sparked with controversy for the stable fighter when it comes to Hearn , we've had gifts for Rose ,Burns , the Froch stoppage and now this in recent times.

Cheers Rodders

TRUSSMAN66 wrote: 3. HTF  did Rawlings and Watt have the 11th  round for Coyle........Whenthere was a shared knockdown and a point off ??........Watt after the fight "Well let's be happy one of our own came through " ........Apt words Mate.........Let's be honest that complete wally you work with (Hearn PR man Rawlings) would have been screaming about the stoppage of which number 4..............(Granted the BBBC can't do much about these two useless knobs!!)

Sorry Truss...

Round 11.  

Coyle was dropped. (10-8 Brizuela)
Gets up puts Brizuela down. (Back even again)
Brizuela gets up... Coyle drops him again. (10-8 Coyle?)
Brizuela gets up... Coyle goes for the finish and then gets docked a point for hitting on the break. (9-8 Coyle?)

Got a bit confused with how they score when there are knockdowns and points off. 

Can someone score that for me?
A lot going on there!

Hearn started banging the ring when Coyle had the point deducted.

I had round 11 equal........

Sorry Truss...
I just massively edited my post!!

Or is it 9-7 because Brizuela went down twice...
I thought I understood scoring till that round!!

That reminds me, Truss....

With regards to Halling and Watt having the eleventh round in Coyle's favour, despite him being put over and having a point off, I imagine their reasoning would have been this. Coyle controlled more of the 3 minutes than his opponent and did more serious damage (forgetting the KDs and deduction). From the outset, that's a 10-9 round for him. He put Brizuela down twice, so normally this would result in a 3-point swing in the round. Yes, Coyle went down himself and had a point off, but that doesn't change the fact that he had the better of the three minutes. He'd have had an edge on the cards for that round without any of those incidents, and they had two marks against them each. So essentially, the margin of superiority for Coyle in the round doesn't change - only the actual scores for each man.

To be fair, in a fight with three point deductions and eight knockdowns, some of them in the same round as others and sometimes against the run of play, scoring is always going to be a bit of a shaky subject. I think the key aspect to focus on is that Watt had Coyle a point down going in to the final round, regardless of how many points each man had exactly, and to me that was perfectly reasonable. In fact I had Coyle a point behind, too.

'Ten point must' system right? 10-10. I think....

Anyway, no problem here with Hearn banging on the canvas. Supporting his man and caught up in a superb fight.

It doesn't have to be 10-something.

In a clearly won round where the fighter on top has a point deducted you can have a 9-9. 

In this case, Coyle won the round clearly but had a point deducted...
Had the other guy down twice. 

Even though he'd been down that would be a 10-7 with the point off... 
9-7. 

Thing is....
We aren't 100% certain how to score it 2 days later. 
In that atmosphere on Saturday night... 

Good luck judges.

Like the excuses for waterboarding by Bush-Cheney of... well our enemy is doing it blah blah...

The same can be said with scoring and officiating in Britain...........It's nothing Germany, France and Italy haven't been doing......

Just plain wrong however you look at it............Was a time when British boxing was better than this........

Integrity is something to be proud of......Maybe the referees and the judges are making mistakes over here but the cases are becoming widespread....

It's giving people much to think about.........Dark things..

You drop points for being knocked down. So 2 knock downs v 1 knock down and a penalty is 8-8 if you think the round was otherwise even or 8-7 if not. Its obvious you idiots. Hmmm unless you get back the point you lost for a knock down if you knock the other guy down.

It should be called the '10 point must unless there's knock downs for both fighters or point deductions' system.

Maybe hugh mvilvanney can rustle up an article on it for us.

I'm going back to Keele..........I'm that confused.......

That's Uni not Poly !!  

10-8 first knock down
8-8 second knock down
8-6 third knock down
7-6 point off

coyle round 7-6 i make it

Did anybody have Coyle ahead ??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Did anybody have Coyle ahead ??

I thought he (Coyle) was about 4pts down.

Cheers Rodders

I agree Rod.......

Referee probably did too.........Maybe he heard Hearn banging on the canvas and thought I want to work on the Crawford card next week..

I dont think there is any great mystery as to what goes on. I dont believe the standard of judging an officiating could be as poor and biased as it is without some other factors involved.

I thought John simpson was definately ok to continue when he was stopped against Coyle as well for what it's worth.

What a fight!! I watched the entire card except this one, what a HUGE mistake that was!!

I thought the ref did pretty well in all honesty, the one mistake he did make was deducting a point from the challenger for hitting low, it was his first offence.

The stoppage was premature, if you look at it isolated, but he was badly hurt in the 11th and out on his feet, getting dropped twice. He had taken a lot of punches throughout the fight and he was getting stunned with every shot towards the end. I think Coyle would have put him to sleep had he been given the chance, I don't think he had a chance of surviving, even though he was winning. It's not as bad a stoppage as some people are making out.

I would love to see a rematch, definitely a FOTY contender.

milkyboy wrote:You drop points for being knocked down. So 2 knock downs v 1 knock down and a penalty is 8-8 if you think the round was otherwise even or 8-7 if not. Its obvious you idiots. Hmmm unless you get back the point you lost for a knock down if you knock the other guy down.

It should be called the '10 point must unless there's knock downs for both fighters or point deductions' system.

Maybe hugh mvilvanney can rustle up an article on it for us.

Umm, who wins the round in that case??? Surely the person who got the two knockdowns and the better of the knockdowns as well. Its not 8-8.

You get one extra point for winning the round and one extra for a knockdown.

Its 8-7

10-8 to the challenger implies he wins the round, he doesn't

Challenger knockdown: 10 -8
Coyle Knockdown - 9-9
Coyle KnockDown - 9-7
Coyle Deduction - 8-7

BoxingFan88 wrote:What a fight!! I watched the entire card except this one, what a HUGE mistake that was!!

I thought the ref did pretty well in all honesty, the one mistake he did make was deducting a point from the challenger for hitting low, it was his first offence.

The stoppage was premature, if you look at it isolated, but he was badly hurt in the 11th and out on his feet, getting dropped twice. He had taken a lot of punches throughout the fight and he was getting stunned with every shot towards the end. I think Coyle would have put him to sleep had he been given the chance, I don't think he had a chance of surviving, even though he was winning. It's not as bad a stoppage as some people are making out.

I would love to see a rematch, definitely a FOTY contender.

Premature stoppage but the ref did pretty well ??...........How many big decisions does a ref make in a fight ??? Geez...

I thought the ref in the City v Barcelona game did well apart from awarding a penalty... that was for a foul outside the box.. which cost us any chance of getting through to the next round...... 

Are you Coyle's brother or something ?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

BoxingFan88 wrote:What a fight!! I watched the entire card except this one, what a HUGE mistake that was!!

I thought the ref did pretty well in all honesty, the one mistake he did make was deducting a point from the challenger for hitting low, it was his first offence.

The stoppage was premature, if you look at it isolated, but he was badly hurt in the 11th and out on his feet, getting dropped twice. He had taken a lot of punches throughout the fight and he was getting stunned with every shot towards the end. I think Coyle would have put him to sleep had he been given the chance, I don't think he had a chance of surviving, even though he was winning. It's not as bad a stoppage as some people are making out.

I would love to see a rematch, definitely a FOTY contender.

Premature stoppage but the ref did pretty well ??...........How many big decisions does a ref make in a fight ??? Geez...

I thought the ref in the City v Barcelona game did well apart from awarding a penalty... that was for a foul outside the box.. which cost us any chance of getting through to the next round...... 

Are you Coyle's brother or something ?

I already said why it wasn't that bad of a stoppage, take in to account what happened the previous round.

You think the low blow deduction without a previous warning was fair...

Coyle was given plenty .........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You think the low blow deduction without a previous warning was fair...

Coyle was given plenty .........

I thought the ref did pretty well in all honesty, the one mistake he did make was deducting a point from the challenger for hitting low, it was his first offence.

Reading this thread made it sound like Coyle got a gift, that was certainly not the case, the ref rightly deducted two points from him.

So you thought he was premature............

You thought he shouldn't have taken a point off.....

You thought he did pretty well............

Geez.........I'd hate to see what you think average is.........

If that's your marking criteria then let's hope others have higher standards Mate..

Or Boxing is screwed..

BoxingFan88 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:You drop points for being knocked down. So 2 knock downs v 1 knock down and a penalty is 8-8 if you think the round was otherwise even or 8-7 if not. Its obvious you idiots. Hmmm unless you get back the point you lost for a knock down if you knock the other guy down.

It should be called the '10 point must unless there's knock downs for both fighters or point deductions' system.

Maybe hugh mvilvanney can rustle up an article on it for us.

Umm, who wins the round in that case??? Surely the person who got the two knockdowns and the better of the knockdowns as well. Its not 8-8.

You get one extra point for winning the round and one extra for a knockdown.

Its 8-7

10-8 to the challenger implies he wins the round, he doesn't

Challenger knockdown: 10 -8
Coyle Knockdown - 9-9
Coyle KnockDown - 9-7
Coyle Deduction - 8-7

Actually what I said was it depends after the knockdowns and points deductions on how you score the rest of the round. Ordinarily that would be given to the guy with the most knockdowns, but it doesn't have to be hence my two alternative scores.

Don't know why I'm defending it, it was a flippant post made to give another way of potentially scoring it because none of us know for sure.

I actually think in the 10 point must system someone has to score 10 before penalties. So two of the knockdowns cancel each other out.  My best guess in the actual fight we're talking about is that its a 10-8 round to coyle that becomes 9-8 with the deduction.

Whatever the correct way, be interesting to see if all 3 judges scored it the same.

Good to see the judges in the first British title fight of the evening ignore the referee's stupid call of a knockdown in the first.....

Hope It happens more often.........

Looking at the scorecards for the first fight between Williams and Martinez I think you're right Milky, think the first round in which both fighters scored a knockdown it was scored 10-9.

I figured if I came up with enough theories, 1 of them would eventually be right hammy.

Must be someone on here who knows for sure. It is a boxing forum.

Did not score the fight as I already knew the result by the time I got round to viewing it tonight so it seemed a little futile. However I do wholeheartedly agree the stoppage was premature Truss. I make no secret of the fact I think fights are on the whole stopped too soon nowadays, so was actually quite heartened to see the ref give Coyle and Brizuela chances to continue when many a ref would have stopped them.

However given it was the last round and both fighters had arguably been more hurt previously I cannot for the life of me understand why this one was stopped. I personally thought Brizuela was ahead on the cards and as such deserved more of an opportunity to continue. Pity that on the back of Groves Froch we are again talking about a referee and the influence they had on an otherwise cracking fight.

I agree with Chris that it was premeditated. He'd decided before the count to stop him. In short, given the amount of turnarounds in the fight, and that he beat the count and looked ok, it was definitely a premature stoppage.

I can see why he did it, though rowls. Coyle was going down to body shots., brizuela from head shots, and 3 in as many minutes. Given that he had a more obvious opportunity to stop it in the 11th, but ended up giving the guy a rest while deducting a point from coyle, makes me feel that although ill-timed, the actual stoppage was a mistake and nothing sinister.

If froch groves is the mother of dodgy stoppages, this was a comparative runt.

We are getting way way too many of them, though, whatever the reasons.

milkyboy wrote:I agree with Chris that it was premeditated. He'd decided before the count to stop him. In short, given the amount of turnarounds in the fight, and that he beat the count and looked ok, it was definitely a premature stoppage.

I can see why he did it, though rowls. Coyle was going down to body shots., brizuela from head shots, and 3 in as many minutes. Given that he had a more obvious opportunity to stop it in the 11th, but ended up giving the guy a rest while deducting a point from coyle, makes me feel that although ill-timed, the actual stoppage was a mistake and nothing sinister.

If froch groves is the mother of dodgy stoppages, this was a comparative runt.

We are getting way way too many of them, though, whatever the reasons.

Actually thought this was even worse than the Groves stoppage given that:

A. It was the last round.
B. Brizuela was winning the fight.
C. He was clearly not badly hurt [i.e. legs looked steady, looking back directly at ref etc]

Ref def appeared to have made his mind up before completing the count that he was stopping the fight, he may as well of just waved his hands to signal the end when he was knocked down.

Agree on the last para, kc.

Re your other points:
1. Personally I agree that the fight situation needs to be considered, but in theory the timing is irrelevant, as the two Taylor's jermaine and meldrick found out.
2.Not as clearly as groves was
3. True, but he had been down 3 times in a matter of minutes, and looked like he was going to go down to every punch landed. Groves had been wobbled for the first time in the fight.

Froch groves was one of the, if not the, worst stoppages I have ever seen, it stank. The timing of this one was bad, I certainly didn't agree with it, but the performance of the ref prior to that makes it seem like an error rather than anything more sinister to me.

That said, not impossible that he saw eddie's frustration in the 11th and figured he might be doing himself a favour to pull brizuela out if he got a chance.

More likely to me that after the two knockdowns in the 11th he thought he'd give the guy one last chance, and had that fixed in his mind.

But hey, we all see things differently and it's all just supposition.

Milky hasn't seen Weaver - Dokes.....

The problem with the Groves-Froch stoppage is that Foster didn't have a frontal view of Groves when he stopped it..

Being nice.......He guessed........

Although seeing Hearn standing next to him before the Campbell fight on Saturday makes one think they may have a close relationship......

I have seen weaver dokes actually truss, we did get the odd heavy title fight shown in the uk. Poor stoppage given dokes wasn't landing and weaver had his guard up. On the flip-side weaver had been on the floor and hadn't thrown a punch back since the knockdown.

Its in the frame but you'll need a better example fella!

Weaver was covering up with nothing landing......Totally lucid..

Was Groves lucid ??.........Certainly was hurt Milkyboy..

Agree it was a shocker though.