Thread: Toney Rahman decision was terrible

That was a fucking awful decision I've never seen that happen before.

It was unquestionably a headbutt that caused the damage so I can't see how Toney got the decision

I have no doubt it will get overturned and called a no contest within a week but that was a really poor decision.

What do you guys think?

It was shady.

Toney was coming on and beginning to batter Rahman. But, yes, rules are rules and they should be adhered to.

Rahman kept looking at Toney like "Damn your fucking me up"..that headbutt was part his fault too...he kept saying I couldnt see those rights. I think that has more to do with him being slow than the cut.

I had no problem with the descision. The cut wasn't bad enough to warrant a stoppage. Rahman quit before the docotor even asked him anything. He could of fought on. But after that 3rd round it was obvious he was looking for a way out

I've seen worst decisions so to be honest it doesn't surprise me...

This is supposed to be a no contest isn't it? Correct me if i'm wrong.. isn't it if w/in 4 rounds, the rule is to declare no contest if 1 fighter can't continue due to technical reason like this case by accidental headbutt. The only fault i see is that if Rahman himself decides to quit before the doctors decision to stop the fight. If this is the case then the decision should be correct.

Here in the UK if a fighters unable to continue on doctors orders even if the cuts from a headclash it goes down as a defeat and win for his opponent, no no contests here, most stupid rule!!

Was it shady.... yea, But Rahman was on the way out anyway. I would like to see Toney Klitschko

To be honest im beginning to get suprised when a fight stateside comes to a happy ending. Officiating is more often talked about than the fighters which is a crying shame.

I thought it looked ultra dodgy and im a Toney fan, i think he was coming on well but something dont seem right. Weather Rahman verbally quit i dont know it was an online feed.

Originally Posted by saturday_kid

Here in the UK if a fighters unable to continue on doctors orders even if the cuts from a headclash it goes down as a defeat and win for his opponent, no no contests here, most stupid rule!!

Yeah that's correct and I think it's a rule that needs changing.

Did you see Wayne Elcock against Darren McDermott a couple weeks back. McDermott, the challenger easily won the first round and was winning the second when there was a nasty clash of heads. The fight was immediately stopped and Elcock was declared the winner.

That sucked imo, completely unfair to McDermott who was bossing the fight in those early stages.

Nobody likes to see no contests but I belive fighters need to be protected, not just from injury but from unintentional fouls and accidents losing them the fights.

Rahman should have either been told he had to fight on or else forfiet, or if he couldn't carry on, the result should have been a no contest.

I've just investigated this a bit.
The situation was; The cut was ruled to be a result of a clash of heads, however neither the doctor or the referee deemed Rahman unable to continue after the cut was inspected.
Rahman himself ruled himself unable to continue claiming he couldn't see punches coming and said "I'm not fighting with one eye."

Originally Posted by hitmandonny

I've just investigated this a bit.
The situation was; The cut was ruled to be a result of a clash of heads, however neither the doctor or the referee deemed Rahman unable to continue after the cut was inspected.
Rahman himself ruled himself unable to continue claiming he couldn't see punches coming and said "I'm not fighting with one eye."

If that is true then that is a pretty poor show by Rahman, on a show billed as some kind of last chance..

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Originally Posted by saturday_kid

Here in the UK if a fighters unable to continue on doctors orders even if the cuts from a headclash it goes down as a defeat and win for his opponent, no no contests here, most stupid rule!!

Yeah that's correct and I think it's a rule that needs changing.

Did you see Wayne Elcock against Darren McDermott a couple weeks back. McDermott, the challenger easily won the first round and was winning the second when there was a nasty clash of heads. The fight was immediately stopped and Elcock was declared the winner.

That sucked imo, completely unfair to McDermott who was bossing the fight in those early stages.

Nobody likes to see no contests but I belive fighters need to be protected, not just from injury but from unintentional fouls and accidents losing them the fights.

Rahman should have either been told he had to fight on or else forfiet, or if he couldn't carry on, the result should have been a no contest.

Yeah mate was actually at that fight & was gutted (mcdermott is from near me) a young(ish) fighter loses his undefeated record for nothing he has done at all. Certainly needs to be changed imo common sense isn't it.

What sort of shape was Toney in guys? is he done or could you see 1 last move for a title shot?

Originally Posted by gally

What sort of shape was Toney in guys? is he done or could you see 1 last move for a title shot?

Not much happened in the first as I think Toney was kinda feeling him out. Things got a little better in the second but not much. In the Third Toney really started landing some good rights, and from the looks of it stunned the rock atleast once and maybe even twice. I think if the fight would have went on Toney probably would of won by TKO.

Its hard to tell since it only went three rounds but being a big Toney fan I wouldn't mind seeing him get one last shot at title.