Be that as it may, it's a sideshow to the fact that he was clearly beaten by Peterson.
perhaps.. though not on the margin given by the cards imo...... i've normally seen judges leaning to the side of the champion... they by all a/cs were underscoring him... thats amir's fault too as had he threw more punches and stop dancing he would have shaded the decision...
Given that it's boxing, the answer to 'why' anything has to be 'money' unless there's solid evidence otherwise.
Hi Tony,no we have not'hope you and yours are wellNice to see you post handy1, been quite a while since we spoke about boxing
Your man wasn't a judge tho'.
. No he was not a judge,nor was the judge if he was not watching.
Most annoying of all is he refuses to ever contemplate fighting Manny simply because they are good friends and he doesnt want to put Freddy Roach in a difficult position (despite Roach clearly stating he would always be in Manny's corner)
I have grave doubts about how genuine his given reason is...Why? As a boxer you should be aiming to fight the best. Manny is one of the best. How silly for a boxer to be fighting in the same era as one of the best athletes in boxing history and have no desire to get in the same ring as him just because they are good "friends". Yeah, that sounds very sensible.
Like Corax says he would probly get owned by Manny. There are plenty of big name fights out there for Khan, plus I don't think he is the finished article yet. After the Prescott fight, there will always be questions in my mind about his defence and his chin.Why? As a boxer you should be aiming to fight the best. Manny is one of the best. How silly for a boxer to be fighting in the same era as one of the best athletes in boxing history and have no desire to get in the same ring as him just because they are good "friends". Yeah, that sounds very sensible.
Yeah plus he has Roach as his coach now as well. Don't know though. Best of luck to him.
Indeed. Even De La Hoya said there was no problem with the change. The cards are not in dispute, there's this thing that Hat Man was interfering with the cards, he wasn't. He shouldn't have been doing what he was doing with the supervisor, but one thing he wasn't doing was tampering with the cards.
Maybe, but what if mystery man was intimidating, persuading, influencing or coercing the judges? Moreover, how the fuck did he get to be there and no one turf him out?
As stated several times Ed', he wasn't a judge. He was a supervisor who collates the cards at the end of each round, handed to him by the ref after the ref collects them from the 3 judges, then fills in a master card, if there was any dispute about the cards they would be double checked. This is not an issue.
But mate, no one has yet said he was doing this - no one. If he was this dispute wouldn't exist. Why are you insisting he was a supervisor?
Who said he was an official 'supervisor' and what was he supposed to be supervising?
Who are you talking about? the grey haired fella? that's Michael Welsh, the WBA supervisor who's job it is/was, was to collate cards at the end of each round.
