Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Unknowndonor
All this fuss about Cortez not letting Hatton hold and hit. The ref could have left, and the outcome would have been the same. In the post fight interview, Hatton aknowledged that Floyd was extremely better on the inside than what he expected, just because Cortez didn't let Hatton tackle Floyd, doesn't mean he did a bad job. People want to bitch about the ref helped Floyd, and at the same time, they say well, Hatton is not a p4p fighter at 147, call the wahmbulance. Which is it? Either Hatton isn't that good, or Cortez helped Floyd? What a bunch of BS. As for the Joe-BHOP fight, both fighters got away with alot of crap. I don't think Joe Cortez is a great Ref, but I didn't see him favor either fighter. If he called a foul on BHOP, he would have had to call a foul on Joe. He probably should have made a point early with BHOP, but when he didn't, he knew he couldn't fault Joe later. As I said, both fighters got away with stuff, and neither got a point deducted, so it worked out good.
The simple fact is that Joe Cortez in the Hopkins fight illustrated that he alters his own judgement in order to facilitate certain boxing personalities.
Let's view the facts.
The very second Hatton attempted to hold Mayweather and rough him up Cortez shouted break and jumped between the fighters.
In the Hopkins fight, Hopkins suceeded in holding onto Calzaghe for long periods of time, uninterrupted by the referee, where he used the head frequently and forced Joe to bend below the waist, for twelve rounds!
The referee is there for a reason, to ensure that there is fair play and to ensure the safety of the fighters.
How can fighters place their trust in a referee who uses completely different rules for certain fighters??
I think the mistake you're making is portraying Hatton's and Hopkins' tactics as one and the same. They're not.
Hopkins was employing defensive holding for the most part, tying up Calzaghe to prevent Calzaghe from throwing flurries along the ropes.
Hatton doesn't defensively hold, he's more of an offensive wrestler. He tries to barrel into his opponent and wrestle them into the ropes.
As has been said here many times, Hatton fans really need to get over the Cortez thing. Hatton lost to Floyd because Floyd is about 10x the fighter that Hatton is.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Unknowndonor
All this fuss about Cortez not letting Hatton hold and hit. The ref could have left, and the outcome would have been the same. In the post fight interview, Hatton aknowledged that Floyd was extremely better on the inside than what he expected, just because Cortez didn't let Hatton tackle Floyd, doesn't mean he did a bad job. People want to bitch about the ref helped Floyd, and at the same time, they say well, Hatton is not a p4p fighter at 147, call the wahmbulance. Which is it? Either Hatton isn't that good, or Cortez helped Floyd? What a bunch of BS. As for the Joe-BHOP fight, both fighters got away with alot of crap. I don't think Joe Cortez is a great Ref, but I didn't see him favor either fighter. If he called a foul on BHOP, he would have had to call a foul on Joe. He probably should have made a point early with BHOP, but when he didn't, he knew he couldn't fault Joe later. As I said, both fighters got away with stuff, and neither got a point deducted, so it worked out good.
The simple fact is that Joe Cortez in the Hopkins fight illustrated that he alters his own judgement in order to facilitate certain boxing personalities.
Let's view the facts.
The very second Hatton attempted to hold Mayweather and rough him up Cortez shouted break and jumped between the fighters.
In the Hopkins fight, Hopkins suceeded in holding onto Calzaghe for long periods of time, uninterrupted by the referee, where he used the head frequently and forced Joe to bend below the waist, for twelve rounds!
The referee is there for a reason, to ensure that there is fair play and to ensure the safety of the fighters.
How can fighters place their trust in a referee who uses completely different rules for certain fighters??
I think the mistake you're making is portraying Hatton's and Hopkins' tactics as one and the same. They're not.
Hopkins was employing defensive holding for the most part, tying up Calzaghe to prevent Calzaghe from throwing flurries along the ropes.
Hatton doesn't defensively hold, he's more of an offensive wrestler. He tries to barrel into his opponent and wrestle them into the ropes.
As has been said here many times, Hatton fans really need to get over the Cortez thing. Hatton lost to Floyd because Floyd is about 10x the fighter that Hatton is.
Hatton attempts to take away his opponent ability to move and then throws combinations.
Hopkins uses clinches to foul, headbutt and maim his opponents
Which would you allow@?
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
The simple fact is that Joe Cortez in the Hopkins fight illustrated that he alters his own judgement in order to facilitate certain boxing personalities.
Let's view the facts.
The very second Hatton attempted to hold Mayweather and rough him up Cortez shouted break and jumped between the fighters.
In the Hopkins fight, Hopkins suceeded in holding onto Calzaghe for long periods of time, uninterrupted by the referee, where he used the head frequently and forced Joe to bend below the waist, for twelve rounds!
The referee is there for a reason, to ensure that there is fair play and to ensure the safety of the fighters.
How can fighters place their trust in a referee who uses completely different rules for certain fighters??
I think the mistake you're making is portraying Hatton's and Hopkins' tactics as one and the same. They're not.
Hopkins was employing defensive holding for the most part, tying up Calzaghe to prevent Calzaghe from throwing flurries along the ropes.
Hatton doesn't defensively hold, he's more of an offensive wrestler. He tries to barrel into his opponent and wrestle them into the ropes.
As has been said here many times, Hatton fans really need to get over the Cortez thing. Hatton lost to Floyd because Floyd is about 10x the fighter that Hatton is.
Hatton attempts to take away his opponent ability to move and then throws combinations.
Hopkins uses clinches to foul, headbutt and maim his opponents
Which would you allow@?
I didn't see any bad headbutts on Saturday night. And exactly what type of maiming was he attempting?
As I said before and I will say again, the fixation that Hatton fans currently have with Cortez is a symptom of denial. Hatton lost because he wasn't good enough to win. The ref didn't knock him out.
