I can see both sides to be honest. I thought that the cut probably did mean it should have been called a NC, but I've seen many fights where similar cuts have carried on. I do think Khan did what he needed to do though. If you look at it from his point of view, he shouldn't have to worry about Barrera, just as Barrera wouldn't if roles were reversed, he just needs to look at his own opinion, and at his age should take the best from it and move on. We can talk about the decision forever (as I'm worrying we might), but the fact is what's done is done. Barrera clearly had a chance to stop the fight, but didn't take it, it seemed clear to me he indicated he wanted to go on, so these things happen.
I don't necessarily agree to the extent of Bilbo's views, but I don't agree with yours either. I also think the British sporting press has been a complete embarassment since with the pointless hype. I think that too many people including those on here, have let their partisanship blind them from the reality. Yes there was some poor officiating, and I think they should have either stopped it before or at least let MAB have another round, but they didn't and that's the way life goes. Dave Parris has a history of 'helping' Warren's fighters, he did the same in the Tszyu fight, letting Ricky basically wrestle him, and I don't remember as many complaints then. The home fighter got the breaks, it happens all the time in boxing, and this in my opinion was the case here, but it was not a robbery. Barrera had his chance to get out, and whilst I admire that he tried to take Khan out, he didn't take it and he knew the consequences. I think people holding it against Khan are being one-eyed, in no other fight do we expect the other fighter to be 'fair' to his opponent, and if the two fighters roles were reversed, no one would be concerned at Khan losing that way.


Thanks:
Likes:
Dislikes: 




Reply With Quote
Bookmarks