Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GAME
Didnt see the fight but sounds like the Barrera fight. Khan headbutts his way to a stoppage and a hometwon decision.
Lets hope Bradley gives him a taste of his own medicine in his next fight.
Sounds like the opposite to me, the first sign of a cut and they stop it. Barrera was cut to the skull and they wouldn't stop until it would go to points.
Still, it was hometown bias and the result of a butt.
Once again you have to question the matchmaking and officiating that the Brits gets. All the big fights overseas and then chump change and homecooking at home.
Nobody can be satisfied with that.
Except this time it was a different ref, doctor and promotional outfit running the show.
First they were wrong for giving the fighter a chance to fight on, now they were wrong for immediately stopping it.
You are such a child. Fact.
Poppycock and humbug.
In both cases it was hometown bias completely favouring the domestic fighter. Different individuals involved, but the same old motivations.
Are you telling me Barrera should have been allowed to go on beyond the second round?
Are you telling me that this fight should have been stopped?
I'm sure if you are unbiased then you will agree with me and say 'no' on both counts.
I don't think McKloskey would have done anything particularly upsetting if allowed to continue. He was never expected to, but at least allow an undefeated fighter to go on. He wasn't taking massive punishment and the cut in this instance was minor. It was an extremely poor stoppage and these things are beginning to be a regular occurence when it comes to Khan fights in the UK.
It is a farce that makes British boxing look comical.
I thought the stoppage was an utter joke. Especially considering I had money riding on McCLoskey to win by KO, and FULLY expected his chance to come in the second half of the fight. I actually thought his plan was working great, apart from the fact he was losing 6-0 (;D).
However, you are still a child (well, immature moany old fart). Barrera gets given a chance to win the fight. It's a conspiracy. The fight should have been instantly stopped. McCLoskey gets instantly stopped. It's a conspiracy. He should have been allowed to continue.
You're a shameless hypocrite. Fact.
I am not being a hypocrite in the slightest.
They are two seperate and distinct incidents with equally dubious officiating.
You admit yourself that the stoppage was a joke. So, we agree on that one. But you don't think Barrera with blood spurting out of his head from a gash to the skull should have been protected?
As I say, they are completely distinct events, but with extremely dodgy decision making behind both of them. There is no paradox in pointing out that it is the decision making that shows little consistency and both times is extreme.
You are the one being immature with taunts about being childish and other insults etc. I am simply pointing out the facts.
It suits you for Barrera to have been saved from the Khan humiliation. It doesn't suit you for McCloskey to have been prevented from possibly beating a man you childishly hold a grudge against.
Therefore it's a conspiracy unless it suits miles.
Now grow up. Cretin. Fact.
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GAME
Didnt see the fight but sounds like the Barrera fight. Khan headbutts his way to a stoppage and a hometwon decision.
Lets hope Bradley gives him a taste of his own medicine in his next fight.
Sounds like the opposite to me, the first sign of a cut and they stop it. Barrera was cut to the skull and they wouldn't stop until it would go to points.
Still, it was hometown bias and the result of a butt.
Once again you have to question the matchmaking and officiating that the Brits gets. All the big fights overseas and then chump change and homecooking at home.
Nobody can be satisfied with that.
Except this time it was a different ref, doctor and promotional outfit running the show.
First they were wrong for giving the fighter a chance to fight on, now they were wrong for immediately stopping it.
You are such a child. Fact.
Poppycock and humbug.
In both cases it was hometown bias completely favouring the domestic fighter. Different individuals involved, but the same old motivations.
Are you telling me Barrera should have been allowed to go on beyond the second round?
Are you telling me that this fight should have been stopped?
I'm sure if you are unbiased then you will agree with me and say 'no' on both counts.
I don't think McKloskey would have done anything particularly upsetting if allowed to continue. He was never expected to, but at least allow an undefeated fighter to go on. He wasn't taking massive punishment and the cut in this instance was minor. It was an extremely poor stoppage and these things are beginning to be a regular occurence when it comes to Khan fights in the UK.
It is a farce that makes British boxing look comical.
I thought the stoppage was an utter joke. Especially considering I had money riding on McCLoskey to win by KO, and FULLY expected his chance to come in the second half of the fight. I actually thought his plan was working great, apart from the fact he was losing 6-0 (;D).
However, you are still a child (well, immature moany old fart). Barrera gets given a chance to win the fight. It's a conspiracy. The fight should have been instantly stopped. McCLoskey gets instantly stopped. It's a conspiracy. He should have been allowed to continue.
You're a shameless hypocrite. Fact.
I am not being a hypocrite in the slightest.
They are two seperate and distinct incidents with equally dubious officiating.
You admit yourself that the stoppage was a joke. So, we agree on that one. But you don't think Barrera with blood spurting out of his head from a gash to the skull should have been protected?
As I say, they are completely distinct events, but with extremely dodgy decision making behind both of them. There is no paradox in pointing out that it is the decision making that shows little consistency and both times is extreme.
You are the one being immature with taunts about being childish and other insults etc. I am simply pointing out the facts.
It suits you for Barrera to have been saved from the Khan humiliation. It doesn't suit you for McCloskey to have been prevented from possibly beating a man you childishly hold a grudge against.
Therefore it's a conspiracy unless it suits miles.
Now grow up. Cretin. Fact.
Cretins, mongs, twats. Lots of name calling flying around today.
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GAME
Didnt see the fight but sounds like the Barrera fight. Khan headbutts his way to a stoppage and a hometwon decision.
Lets hope Bradley gives him a taste of his own medicine in his next fight.
Sounds like the opposite to me, the first sign of a cut and they stop it. Barrera was cut to the skull and they wouldn't stop until it would go to points.
Still, it was hometown bias and the result of a butt.
Once again you have to question the matchmaking and officiating that the Brits gets. All the big fights overseas and then chump change and homecooking at home.
Nobody can be satisfied with that.
Except this time it was a different ref, doctor and promotional outfit running the show.
First they were wrong for giving the fighter a chance to fight on, now they were wrong for immediately stopping it.
You are such a child. Fact.
Poppycock and humbug.
In both cases it was hometown bias completely favouring the domestic fighter. Different individuals involved, but the same old motivations.
Are you telling me Barrera should have been allowed to go on beyond the second round?
Are you telling me that this fight should have been stopped?
I'm sure if you are unbiased then you will agree with me and say 'no' on both counts.
I don't think McKloskey would have done anything particularly upsetting if allowed to continue. He was never expected to, but at least allow an undefeated fighter to go on. He wasn't taking massive punishment and the cut in this instance was minor. It was an extremely poor stoppage and these things are beginning to be a regular occurence when it comes to Khan fights in the UK.
It is a farce that makes British boxing look comical.
I thought the stoppage was an utter joke. Especially considering I had money riding on McCLoskey to win by KO, and FULLY expected his chance to come in the second half of the fight. I actually thought his plan was working great, apart from the fact he was losing 6-0 (;D).
However, you are still a child (well, immature moany old fart). Barrera gets given a chance to win the fight. It's a conspiracy. The fight should have been instantly stopped. McCLoskey gets instantly stopped. It's a conspiracy. He should have been allowed to continue.
You're a shameless hypocrite. Fact.
I am not being a hypocrite in the slightest.
They are two seperate and distinct incidents with equally dubious officiating.
You admit yourself that the stoppage was a joke. So, we agree on that one. But you don't think Barrera with blood spurting out of his head from a gash to the skull should have been protected?
As I say, they are completely distinct events, but with extremely dodgy decision making behind both of them. There is no paradox in pointing out that it is the decision making that shows little consistency and both times is extreme.
You are the one being immature with taunts about being childish and other insults etc. I am simply pointing out the facts.
It suits you for Barrera to have been saved from the Khan humiliation. It doesn't suit you for McCloskey to have been prevented from possibly beating a man you childishly hold a grudge against.
Therefore it's a conspiracy unless it suits miles.
Now grow up. Cretin. Fact.
Cretins, mongs, twats. Lots of name calling flying around today.
Miles will appreciate my choice of linguistics though. If I was serious i'd call him a cunt. Well actually I liberally and sometimes affectionately use that word so probably call him a pathetic cunt.
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Miles will appreciate my choice of linguistics though. If I was serious i'd call him a cunt. Well actually I liberally and sometimes affectionately use that word so probably call him a pathetic cunt.
haha that made me lol. Miles is so refined and gentlemanly on here that that word would just leave him speechless.
There would be another leaving thread and a fall off the wagon for sure ;D
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Not at all, I am quite okay with it. Fenster tends to be abrasive and somewhat more Khan defensive than is usually the case when non-intoxicated. He is extremely biased and loves to defend the hometown boys and that is quite understandable.
Anyone in their right mind knows that Barrera was stopped too late and McKloskey to early. Those are simple arguments and stand on their own merits without the need for bias and rudeness.
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Not at all, I am quite okay with it. Fenster tends to be abrasive and somewhat more Khan defensive than is usually the case when non-intoxicated. He is extremely biased and loves to defend the hometown boys and that is quite understandable.
Anyone in their right mind knows that Barrera was stopped too late and McKloskey to early. Those are simple arguments and stand on their own merits without the need for bias and rudeness.
;D
You hold an irrational hatred for a 24-year-old boxing man yet are accusing me of bias? Funny.
I have no emotional ties to any fighter. I view all of them the exact same way - as men trying to make money. I neither hate nor love any man.
You can call me lots of things but biased is not one of them. I have stated the McCloskey stoppage was premature. I believe Barrera would have greatly appreciated the chance to win the fight had he KO'd Khan. AS it was he didn't. No harm done unless you hold an irrational hatred for the winner.
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Have you finished you cunts ?;D
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Not at all, I am quite okay with it. Fenster tends to be abrasive and somewhat more Khan defensive than is usually the case when non-intoxicated. He is extremely biased and loves to defend the hometown boys and that is quite understandable.
Anyone in their right mind knows that Barrera was stopped too late and McKloskey to early. Those are simple arguments and stand on their own merits without the need for bias and rudeness.
;D
You hold an irrational hatred for a 24-year-old boxing man yet are accusing me of bias? Funny.
I have no emotional ties to any fighter. I view all of them the exact same way - as men trying to make money. I neither hate nor love any man.
You can call me lots of things but biased is not one of them. I have stated the McCloskey stoppage was premature. I believe Barrera would have greatly appreciated the chance to win the fight had he KO'd Khan. AS it was he didn't. No harm done unless you hold an irrational hatred for the winner.
I dislike Amir Khan, I don't hate him. And that dislike is not irrational. I dislike him in much the same way as I dislike people such as David Cameron and Alan Dershowitz. There are character traits that leave me cold and what they do in their professional lives is not to my liking. It's hard to warm to fighters who have become millionaires without fighting anybody of note, it isn't justified. I didn't like Ortiz very much prior to this weekend, but have warmed to him nicely enough. I am a fight fan that can be won over, fighting McKloskey was never going to win over anyone and for the fight to be brought to an end like that? All too easy really. :rolleyes:
I have said little that is particularly hateful about Amir Khan on a personal level previously in this thread or in any other recent threads, but what I have done is complain about a premature stoppage (which you agree with) and how dodgy stoppages in Khan fights seem to be happening with increasing regularity.
Now I have been critical of the officiating, but you like to keep going beyond that basic argument and just dish out insults while harping on about 'irrational hate'. Just maybe it is you being a little bit irrational and hateful.
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
DLA and Jimbo have said it best. ;D
Re: Khan vs McCloskey moved from Sky PPV to Sky Sports 3
***walks into thread with merkin and bigH either side looking all menacing***
NOW WHAT THE F**K HAS HAPPENED HERE THEN??:mad:
