Quote Originally Posted by ross View Post
Quote Originally Posted by CFH View Post
Let me start by saying that I was a fan of Hatton and I was hoping he would beat Mayweather.

This will probably be an unpopular opinion on here, but so what...

Ricky Hatton's reputation dictated the way that fight was called. Since he beat Tszyu and burst onto the international boxing scene, he was viewed as a fighter who used an excessive amount of holding and other illegal tactics in his fights. He was able to get away with it when he was the hometown fighter or when he was the up-and-coming fighter being showcased by HBO, but once he met a fighter whose stature was equal (or above) his own, in the United States, he was no longer going to get the benefit of the doubt.

I think the Mayweather team recognized this and exploited it in a very successful way. They were campaigning in the media prior to the fight and were almost certainly in Cortez' ear the moment he was announced as the ref. I also think Cortez probably saw Hatton as someone who bent the rules to his advantage and he probably saw himself (or was convinced to see himself) as doing the right thing for the integrity of the sport by trying to call the fight strictly by the rules.

Do I think Cortez did a bad job? Yes, I do. He allowed no inside fighting whatsoever (not that it mattered, because Hatton was getting owned on the inside when Cortez allowed infighting to take place). But, I think it was Hatton's quite justified reputation that was the primary reason Cortez called the fight the way he did.
Contradiction.

Was it this fight the ref was gushing (like a teenage girl to Justin Beiber) to Floyd about how it was a privelidge to work his fight just as Floyd was waiting to go to the ring and just after hed given him instructions in front of the camera?


Semantics.

Cortez allowed a small amount of inside fighting, but it was a minuscule amount compared to most boxing matches. When they were allowed to fight on the inside, Hatton was taking a beating.